HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrogrande 79-7 Annexation ANNEXATION OROGRANDE 79-7
1980
.. � �
J
6643317 Ucal A"=7 ftmottat ConnWital a
County Adminl:tratlo' West bledding Street.n 8undin
®��iltlOs
�® / San Jose. California Otto
unty of Santa Ciao Area Code 408
California
ZC)CPo
. Y
-
C7 co:
ry-'
t"I.,
C.
r Z •
�c a
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
I, Paul E. Sagers, the Assistant Executive Officer of the Santa
Clara County Local Agency Formation Commission, issue this Certificate
of Completion pursuant to Section /35351 of the Government
Code.
I hereby certify that I have examined the resolution for a change
in organization i®a attached hereto and have found this
document to be in compliance with the resolution adopted on
December 12, 1979 by the Santa Clara County Local Agency
Formation Commission approving said change in organization or reorganization.
The name of the /City is: Cupertino
The entire /city is located in Santa Clara County.
A --ggam
C 3
The change of organization completed is an annexation . �
A map and description of the boundaries of the change of organization As
appended hereto.
The title of this proceeding is: OROGRANDE 79-7N�M '
The change of organization was ordered subject to the following terms
and conditions: ( Y
None All
The date of adoption of the resolution ordering the change of organization/
is January 21, 1180
Dated February 5, 1980
Assistant Execut,O f•e Ofcer
Santa Clara County
Local Agency Formation Commission
10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 408)252-4505
On ��
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER�_.�3 - AGENDA DATE September 7. 932
SUBJECT ARID ISSUE - Request to Modify Applications 24-U-80 (Revised) and 17-TM-80 (Revised)-
Wayne Sargent - To alter means of access to one parcel and to delete
bike path and a Planning Commission request to modify Architectural
and Site Approval Application HC-51,502.1 leading to the deletion
4
of a bike path requirement on Tract 6845 adjoining the Sargent site.
Background
- In 1979, City Council approved a Planned Unit Development comprised of property owned
or controlled by Mr. Sargent and Messrs. Whaley and Scott. The PUD was conditioned
to orient front yards and vehicular access and pedestrian and bicycle access next to
Regnart Creek. The City Council added a condition requiring the placement of a
statement in the CC&R's of future projects notifying future purchasers of public
access next to the Creek.
- In 1.980, the owners abandoned the joint development effort and filed separate use
permits and tentative maps. Separate use permits and tentative maps were approved
in a mariner which assured that mutual vehicular access and pedestrian access would
continue to meet the intent of the original Planned Development zoning.
- In 1980 Messrs. Whaley and Scott received approval to modify their map to allow
temporary access across the 85 Freeway corridor. After the map was recorded, it
was determined that the 85 Corridor easement permitted access to the Whaley development
buc riot to the adjoining Sargent development.
- The subject request by Sargent would allow temporary access off Orogrande until such
time as a permanent access is approved for Sargent to gain access to Festival Drive
(refer to map and use permit exhibit) . Mr. Sargent also requested deletion of the
bike path requirement claiming the bike path and associated public access diminishes
property values and construction of said facilities adds excessive costs to the
development.
- Mr. Sargent also claimed that the City had deleted the bike path requirement on the
adjoining Whaley development. Upon review of the records associated with the adjoining
Whaley development, it was determined that the Architectural and Site Approval Committee,
based upon staff's input, recommended deletion of the bike path in conjunction with
the Architectural and Site Approval application for the Whaley development. City
Council approved the Architectural. and Site Approval Committee recommendation as a
consent item. The recommendation for deletion of the bike path was riot specifically
discussed.
- The architectural and site approval related action to delete the path is inconsistent
with the ..coning and use permit conditions requiring a hike patli.
September 7, 1982
Applications 24-U-80 (Revised) and 17-TA1-80 (Revised) - Wayne Sargent
Application HC-51,502.1 - Regnart Creek Estates (Warren Whaley)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- The Planning Commission jG approving the temporary access provision for Sargent
and is also recommending that the bike path be retained. It is specifically
recommended that the Architectural. and Site Ppproval application be formally
modified to require the bike path. Mr. Whaley is not opposed to the location
of a bike path/pedestrian easement on the private driveway as long as the City
maintains responsibility for maintenance of the bike path portion and the
liability.
Recommendation
- The Planning Commission recommends approval of modification of the Sargent
application to modify vehicular access, the retention of the bike path on the
Sargent property and the modification of the Architectural and Site Approval
application for the Whaley development which reaffirms the bike oath. The
bike path will be located on the private driveway serving the Creek frontage
lots on the Whaley subdivision and the City will maintain the public access
and assume liability.
Enclosures:
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 2337 and 2338
Staff Reports dated August 6, 1982 and August 23, 1982
Planning Commission Minutes dated August 9, 1982
Exhibit A of Application 24-U-80 (Revised)
Exhibit A of Application 17-TM-80 (Revised)
Exhibit showing relationship between Sargent and Regnart Creek Estates Property
-2- 3%3 �"
24-U-80 (Revised)
17-TM-80 (Revised)
RESOLUTION NO. 2337
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING MODIFICATION OF TENTATIVE MAP
APPLICATION 17-TM-80 AND USE PERMIT APPLICATION
24-U-80 TO PERMIT AN ALTERNATE MEANS OF ACCESS TO
PARCEL THREE AS ILLUSTRATED ON EXHIBIT A OF
_'LICATION 17-TM-80 (REVISED) DATED JULY 9, 1982.
PPLI 'ANT: Wayne Sargent
ADDRE. 14: P.O. Box 1535, Cupertino, California 95015
SJBMI'-_'°:7: July 9, 1982
LO'AT7.}l North side of Orogrande Place approximately 450 ft. westerly
of Stelling Road
CONDITIONS:
i. Sail alternate means of access shall not modify the Santa Clara Valley Water
easement as delineated on Exhibit A of Application 17-TM-80 dated
August 1, 1980.
2. The site plan approval, labeled Exhibit A of Application 24-U-80 dated
August 1, 1980, shall remain in effect with respect to the orientation of
the home, garage and driveway, on Lot No. Two, in a northerly direction
toward Regnart Creek. The alternate easement access to Parcel Three may
be used jointly for driveway access to both Lots Two and Three and may be
established as a permanent easement or a temporary easement to be deleted
with the concurrence of both property owners of Parcels Two and Three and
the City of Cupertino at such time in the future as legal access to a
public street or easement beyond the private driveway on Tract No. 6845
can be assured to the satisfaction of the City. The driveway and roadway
connection with the private drive on the subdivision shall also remain
per Exhibit A of Application 24-U-80.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of August, 1982, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the '
following roll call vote:
AYES: Cammissioners Adams, Binneweg, Blaine, Koe;iitzer, Chairman Claudy
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVED:
/s/ John Claudy
John Claudy, Chairman
ATTEST: Planning Commission
1� -
Robert Cowan
:assistant Planning Director
RESOLUTION NO. 2338
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY INITIATE
PROCEEDINGS TO RECONSIDER ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE
APPROVAL COMMITTEE APPLICATION HC-51,502.1 WHICH
INVOLVES THE DELETION OF THE BIKE PATH ON OROGRANDE
PLACE, TRP.CT NO. 6845.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of August, 1982, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of. the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the
following roll call vole-
AYES: Commissioners Aeams, Binneweg, Blaine, Koenitzer, Chairman Claudy
NAYS: None
.ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVED:
/sl John Claudy
John Claudy, Chairman
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
- up,+- "
Robert Cowan
Assistant Planning Director
3 13
Q
� CUM of Cuper""o
City at Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 (408) 252-4505
To: The Honorable Chairman and Members
of the Planning Commission
From: Steve Piasecki, Associate Planner Date: August 6, 1982
Subject: Item No. 6 - Applications 24-U-80 (Revised) & 17-7:1-80 (Revised) - Wayne Sargent
Applic_ant's Request:
previously -
three-lot subdivision_ and use a el•�r'�" �=" `'t
Site plan modification of a
approved t _
°
+permit to accomplish the following: 49 ��.. . .
1. Alter the means of "legal" access _ 406
to the rear parcel number three Olt o JOLLY-
to cor.4,is t of a 15 f t. wide ease- ~6N
ment over parcel two in additionEi
at°
to the access previously aOnr ' �° 24-U-8C
^`_
over the adjoining 5:,odivision �u ' • 17-ni-80
to the east. '�.ii M ,
2. Eliminate requirements to install `;
a raved pedestrian and bicycle : ]
path along Regnart Creek. �•
o
- Location o 6 '
a ' v
0
Th-e site equal; approximately one
e acre located on the north side of ion L.TZ .; -
Orogrande Place approximately
450 ft. westerly of Stelling Road.
- Zoning - 5
- Property is zoned P (Planned Develop- )
ment with single-family intent) .
Discussion • ��
- The applicant's request for alternate means of access to parcel three emanates from the
lack of certainty regarding his right of access over an easement across the State
Highway 85 right of way which serves the adjoining subdivision to the east.
- It seems reasonable to provide a secondary means of legal access to parcel three as
requested in this proposal.
- However, the original purpose of permitting a planned development on the subject
property viLh gill of the benefits of small lot sizes and greater yield was that
there be a substantial public benefit. Otherwise, the applicant should be required
to comply with all standard lot sizes and setbacks of the R1 Zoning Districts
3013 —�
r «.ucis 24-U-8U k Rev ised 11.1-8t1 i{e,;ised 1 - ..a nr sargen, D, bi 82
------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the alternate access should not alter the public benefit from the subject
site, specifically the bike/pedestrian pathway along Regnart Creek and orientation
of the home in a northerly direction toward the creek to be consistent with the
adjoining project.
The applicant appears to be agreeable to the orientation of the home and connection
of his house driveway with the adjoining private driveway on the property to the
east, but still opposes mandatory installation of the bike/pedestrian path along
the creek because of its impact upon the ability to sell his home on parcel number one.
Recommendation
- Staff recommends that modification of the Condition of Approval to permit an alternate
access to parcel three with no change in the pedestrian/bicycle path easement
requirement.
- The project was previously assessed, hence, no environmental action is required.
Et.c)---fires:
Recommended Resolution
Planning Commission Resolution 2189 of Applications 24-U-80 & 17-TM-86
Planning Commission Resolution 2142 of Application 24-U-80
Planning Commission Resolution 2143 of Application 17-TM-80
Exhibit A of Application 24-U-80
Exhibit A of Application 17-TM-80
E -
Citm ®f Cuperti"O
City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 (408) 252-4505
To: The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
From: Robert Cowan, Assistant Planning Director Date:
August 23, 1982
Subject: Applications 24-U-80 (Revised) and 17-T:1-80 (Revised) - Wayne Sargent
The hearings were continued to enable staff to research the disposition of a joint
ped/bike path on the Whaley/Scott property adjoining the Sargent property.
The Whaley/Scott development was approved based upon map exhibits which denoted a
6 ft. wide bike path paralleling Regnart Creek. Santa Clara Valley Water District
found the bike path location to be satisfactory as long as a removable fence was
constructed between the cop of the bank and bike path and that the District would
not be responsible for maintaining the bike path if damaged during periodic maintance
of the creek channel.
The Architectural and Site Approval Committee reviewed the bike path and based upon
staff input, suggested that the bike path be deleted. The City Council reviewed the
Architectural and Site Approval Committee recommendation as a consent calendar item.
Neither the project nor bike path was specifically addressed.
None of the participants involved in the staff review of the application can recall
why Architectural and Site Approval. Committee was advised to delete the bike path,
particularly since the Architectural and Site Control Committee does not have juris-
diction to delete a condition of approval approving in conjunction with a tentative map
and use permit.
®Apparently, some staff members felt that the bike easement would be shifted onto the
private driveway and that pedestrians could informally walk along the open space
linkage between the driveway and the top of the bank.
Although the development agreement for Orogrande Place does not contain a requirement
for a bike path and although there is no recorded easement on the driveway, technically,
the decision to remove the bike path under the auspicious of Architectural hearing is
incorrect. Therefore, there is still a requirement for a bike path on the Orogrande
Place site.
In staff's judgment, the Planning Commission should either reaffirm its earlier commitment
to build a trail or path adjacent to the creek, or determine that a bike path and
pedestrian path is not required and thereby honor Mr. Sargent's request for deletion
of the pedestrian access.
If the Planning Commission agrees that the bike path should remain, staff will take
ministerial steps to ensure that a bike path is provided for on the adjoining Whaley
property. The least expensive solution and therefore most practical solution, is to
grant a bicycle/pedestrian easement along the private driveway which parallels the
creek.
Apjlh cations 24-U-80 (Revised) and 17-Ul-80 (Revised) - Wayne Sargent 8/23/82
-------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
The site plan and use permit exhibits and suggested conditions of approv'l for the
Sargent request are attached. A map of the precise location of the bike trail on
the Sargent site will be available at the meeting.
Enclosures:
Recommended Resolution
Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2142, 2143 and 2189
Exhibit A of Application 24-U-80 (Revised)
Exhibit A of Application 17-TM-80 (Revised)
r
2 - 30/3 -0
'C-393
'age 4 MINUTES 0: THE AUGUST 9, 1.982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
5. Application 10-Z-82 of Gary and Sally / -iner: Prezoning approxi-
mately .15 gross a-,re from Santa Clar _ County RI-8 (Residential
Single-family, 8,0)0 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone to City of
Cupertino RI-7.5 (Kq sident�al Single-family, 7,500 sq. ft. minimum
lot size) zone or whatever-zone may be deemed appropriate by the
Planning Commission and Environmental Review: The Environmen':al
Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration.
The subject property is located on the east side of Byrne Avenue
approximately 66 ft. north of\Lomita'Avenue and 156 ft. south
of Hermosa Avenue (10168 Byrne Avenue) . First Hearing. Tentative
City Council hearing date - September 7, 1982.
'
Assistant Planning Director Cowan rF ewed the application with the
Commission.
'ublic hearing It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Cc.m. Blaine and passed
losed unanimously (3-0) to close the�ublic tearing.
i
:egative Dec. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer', seconded, by Com. Blaine and passed
or 10-Z-82 unanimously (3-0) to recommegd the granting; of a Negative Declaration
for Application 10-Z-82. /
0-Z-82 recom- It was moved by Co* . Koenitzer, seconded b� Com. Blaine ane pasted
ended for unanimously (3-0) to recg=end approval of 'Application 10-1.--82 per
pproval { Planning Commission Resolution No. 2335, an�staff report dated
i August 4, 1982. /
6. Applications -U-80 (Reviied) and 17-TM-80 (Revised) of Wayne
Sargent: odification of a previously approved use permit for
a three lot subdivision to modify the means of ac:-.ess including
emergency access to Parcel Three and eliminate a bicycle/pede,;tr.ia.i
easement located along Regnart Creek. Access to Parcel Three is
proposed over an easement on Parcel Two which fronts on Orogrande
Place. Environmental Review: The project was previously assessed,
1 hence, no action is required. The subject property is located
on the north side of Orogrande Place aporoxir�ately 450 ft. westerly
b of Stelling Road in a P (Planned Development with Residential
I Single-family intent) zoning district. First Hearing. Tentative
City Counci.l nearing date - August 16, 1982.
i
Assistant Planning Director Cowan rEviewed the history of the applica-
tion with the Planning Commission.
Mr. Wayne Sargent, applicant, requested that the bike path require-.
ment be removed as a condition of approval. He also stated that the
garage would be on the other side of Parcel 2 rather than as shown
to the Commission in the exhibit. He stated that if the City wished
a bike path, they could provide one.
MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 9, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING • PC-393
Page 5
Maurice LaBrie representing the realtor involved in the sale of a {
parcel stated that the bike path would create an attractive nuisance
and would be a security problem. He felt that the grade at the back
of the lot would be a safety hazard for bicycle riders. He stated
that parties presently interested in purchasing the property will not
buyunless the bike i pata is eliminated.
Mr. Sargent stated that the bike path was only required on his property
and not on adjacent property. He requested that his conditions be the ti
Sam e as these of the adjacent property owners. 1
Mr. Barry Scott, general partner, Regnart Creek Estates, spoke re- d
garding the easement and sated that it has been deeded to the flood
control district.
City Attorney Kilian stated that if the bike path would not be per-
mitted by the flood control district and it were a condition of approvaL
it could not be fulfilled.
Mr. Sargent stated that he would like the bike path removed from his
map as he does not want to be required to build it.
It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed 24-U-80 (Rev.)
unanimously (3-0) to continue this matter to the meeting of August and 17-TM-80
23, 1982 at which time it will be the first item on t':e agenda. (Rev.) con-
tinued
The Commission requested clarification of the bike lane/pedestrian
access on adjacent property and information regarding whether or not
the flood control district would grant an easement for the path-
Staff was requested to bring bark information regarding Council intent
on the Whaley/Scott bike path.
7. Application 10-U2 of George Lopez and xilliam Whitney: Modifica-
tion of a previou y approved use perm
0to operate a 2,500 sq.
ft. electronic gamed center and Enviro mental Revvew: The Environ-
mental Review Committee recommends a granting of a Negative
Declaration. The sub'ect propert is located on the northwest
corner of Stevens Creek Bouleva and Blaney Avenue in a P
(Planned Development wi' h co rcial intent) zoning district.
First Hearing. Tentative Ci Council hearing date - August 16,
1982.
Associate Planner Piasec4/rev ewed the application and stated that
the applicants were prevent.
Mr. George Lopez and Ni. Willif.m tney presented Commission and thosei
present with a vide tape regarding lectronic games. y
RECESS: 9:25-9: p.m.
is
r
t
i
y rl rya.... ,..e. ,n' 'R F•—�j _r:' \�`� f•M pV,IP !•,jn:1 J,.IL Ac
RL64W MIX
DIUICATILN p11N ;PUCE• IG NC St '
e �` ,rat.♦ f.q ,r• •..`` 1� � ,
• � ,.� STRtLT DCUiC1.{IWJ• 4•S12 :F. 12.L'(
0a.(A E f'GAC£ / fc:: �y BWCDINL GWC�AGC' 4,400 5.f. Ig.bY
� _lCV � DRrvtvJrrS ' 1,739 S.E
r,!y, 11\: —P rNxLw
DPCa SPPCL .._l0�wi S.f_•
.,r "�' ~�1` �: r���~ ` �•:! CDDU s.f.
g' Ft510ENCE' 2,4D0 S.F.
,,..• / _
di
C
101
p
Are,
1
S_a_L,I /•-1G �, 1, �70 �� J��•" ?-Sl:r ,Fa.YI
^\• 1 G"pc
A t
,,. �;,`'y/ ;�=rNr`4 P p ,wk•`•t �,,,►v 1 I-a,.:_. y .(V� .— ` 1`
Sb
/ ! _
—DROG/'AIJfjC— PLACE b, w--
s ••••• KI Hor a Jissocutres.J%c_
1 �' 4Y t Ialtl•IYI�
�/V � „ /tG' --t--"_ steal:4�; i u' ..1�,•t.; •}r / /" ��-� �
91TC LStRN FGK_
` LA�US Oc SRK Gth1 _ •r•
C 1p;RTINO L•Uc, Z14'2
,
ts# p4,p�Ch SEG2E
/ /" ••`�`�-•,. FrJR• 6t.ttON Of�t1E N.E,e{N•
BEwG W, µ�ALiFOR►dtA
{5 H 0.T1K0
CtV1 of GUPf
1 �•r
of
SfedCi�y�ca71I a9T,a+•" yy,, ®� .
SE�rtpN �
CA
RGEati
n "` Y �/ \ t ` 1 u0—If :1 ►m w 4.5`Rollo
/ `q// AVNf
1 \ a7 arW J \ A+' 'o, pEVE1.AREQ'�`PEQ(iwO(CA4i3Soi4
v // f
b �
e. ,�� a � ,��• ._._,,, _--- -- ---...�` P \r� �` ;�.�• �SjtGINEER' 1i4AV o5E 95t24
J 0)Z5 t 106"
n /�: L. �T•1 �y ira• \ \ ..• ..=r^� PHoNE::�•10 �PNEHT
aa•rb•-+' SA Q Y�� a[J �.�'y E '+'S' \ +y ST,NG ZDN'uG•�T PZNGLEFW' VNR�1T)
~' NtuG: Rj`1IUENT,4t-
jlC1NtTY yAG / �� / i. -'. ��'3 q0 \ �.ts QQoPoSED DPPOPO.)Eb R
S(ANDARDS
p tt TIUO
EyiSTf"c IMPRA�EME 4�Pf4TtNo STAPi?ACDS
E7 ZCFES!,CUDEGTtµo Spu.D ST•
uisvo=►� �..
�a A ^✓��� ;� 1 I g.faAN�b \ 5 LTCtC.1 P. .0 P. T
T.Lt V!W
y�Ale u uGu E 9�aZ 11'Ik
5 5 R sSPA•R�i.N Of CUBIT f NC
c�"aor,ai yrpRr+Day NA �,rr
�•� , E} ,°DEN N) Y � c�5ta) ! \ .r
12
�j "ALE r» 1� (// 1d�� ro P�GPdDR S��'y ��' ^+•'i 1 ��•n►'�'
C,pfr O•! _�-- j
t pd'p` / ; l\ e,1, _ _�- t9D t gzrs »YCF yyA�tR gs yi--•."��� A�SG�IAf A`+,t^�•
K1k' :9 a
;4 /� •ate � �� � � .. '•.. - `.,--•-�'"�-��'... r •.,., •,.•"•••,;•. o•",w e•
lam- .,/ 54"' SS r P L A G t .rw+w,� (.i�
f ` -•ORo GRANDE _�-�"",� --' ac»�c 1"' t&Z • M� G� ALiF�Nif•
f CUP N of gP•RuE
,� � / � � � ----""`— `�_—•-'...--- 1.A N o 5
,
e'.A
f ^
rrny {
All
�4W11
1210,
I
`` f �
to
9. b
f
}} .
`r�
s o pe
f J 7
f /
r1cD
SHUTT9 AI•D"C"Wimmem
QD ARCMfTECT6/PLANNEAS A.I.A.
.:.d. . ...... .... ........... i S
f .
sa:je:jsH xaazo :11euBag pus
3ua2leg uaam-lag dTysuOT:1eTag
f!1 Y.V!
1 CA
p 7J00
cr
co
_�, PR®POSEO AIVNEXArION r® rHE
.4 .
•f r
arY ®lam CUPERRNO
t • w QU •ty
•• MOO
' — t�iiwl S ��,DIAt \•• (e Aug ��►
it
•� ��` it tuD De *•w A ;'' Wf ULJ u
O
00 \
LlllIM6 �j,' �
�� ••'t4ID1 r. Y tt C..
\ O
s��•.�1�. Gee � � \ � v
93.7.?. �9
N 70&,?6 : \ v1. �V
si853s' 5/.3 JL'J \ �
I \ �
!! 362-17-4 2 ~•
G/52�" . 362-IZ-6 rn
COvnty O/'SOnfv Cam
C%ty of Cvp�rt/it0 M06,) WIAN Al. Co��G•
COUNTY ASS'E'SYORI BOOK, PAGE¢t PARI^EL
800K 333 OF MAP-f PAGE
•- DOUNOARY L/NE OF PROPOSEO AMVeXAT/DA/
COUNTY Orr 01417S LINE } sZ'.� �•�-,•..,., �• ; ,
� �Ouftlyr AOnNnbtfrmtlon 8uli�mp
•• 'A 30 1Nam�l9a0ainB Sfroet,
Cppppp� bon Joss, Caa�:amfa 95f f0
o Santa
County of Clara � w M AM" Goss 606
Calfomia
to: Clerk, City of Cupertino
FRAM: Focal Agency Formation Commission
DATE: February 5, 1980
SUBJECT: OROGRANDE 79-7
This is to advise that documents associated with the above change of
organization have been found to be in order and the necessary filings
have been made with the County Recorder, State Board of Equalisation
and County Assessor, as required 'jy law.
Enclosed is an endorsed copy of the Certificate of Completion which
was recorded with the County Recorder on .
If the above change of organization included detachment from a fire
strict, it is required by law that detachme t must be effected within
ne yeart however, completion of the detachm nt by January 1®t will
revent the property from being taxed by b the City and the fire
istrict. ou are, therefore, enc complete the detachment by
his date.
A ter e t ritory has been dAeaed from
pl comple d..ntus&-Oie form below. (Fire District)
Thank you,
Zzl-
-A�
Paul E. Sager: ✓�
Assistant Executive officer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local Agency Formation Commission
70 West Residing Street, at Wing, 10 Floor
San Jose, California 95110
Detachment of from
(Annexation (Fire District)
has been com ted by the City of
on
date)
Signature
An &Wd Oppww* Imoapr ZAFC-50
ICX
Anne's C°nsent
THE E�EGVy1dE®f 7G 100°lQ
f�EPORj OF
O Ggg�i13D� 7g Not 100%Consent
pion 11 rande Place
Designs• No.
Agenda Nearing la lZ '19 nortl, side °f Or°g
LAfC
LAPGO Nearing®ate PpsAL; lus or mi� ell�g Road
W p� PRO at
A.
REV IE Acreage and location.
la) munity services
"Aces
(b) Ettect°n com urlic.pall o rQeided as follows
� otallm
Provisio erv►ces n
,oniciPavoistrict s
--"`' bm :
None
...�- Detacent fromt Aep°�
t1f Scnpol District Impact
— t 'Transit Impact Report a transfer'
N/R county Jos
CuFert�no_San
Boundaries:
tC) and
Certain °Gated mtitbin the
petinite a and uncertain
Indetinite ACea. area-
,
ban serviceArea.
Cor►ty a�torm to Urban
5e�'ce
Do notCorridor of strip.
` t create island,rridor or strip.
X _ G°ea e island.co
-- ' road PO"cY olic"
ContOrms t° road P
-- Dpes not conform t° essment.
S 10 lines of ass t as tollovrs'.
X Conform t P►9r1
assessmen cUlt\l
gptits lines °
_-- ential
present land use. R es id EomPtion- -�ne
{d) Proposed land use p� PROPOSAL ions of CEOA.Class environmentaattachw Wnjcn
(e) MENSAL REVIEW exernptfirom PrOvias Agen�tarationl t (cOncef
ENV IRON oricallY Lead ►oval cO aced the
�. is Gate9 , and, Negative O {eg
Lion and LAFC' staff nas Prep
xa terr►tar�
ress
Anne City nas Pre ZmP d titan In.Ala ju adeQuatelY add annexation and
eted of tnis
-�`-annexation'taffy op►n1On does! mental review and adoption.
nviron review
CO s e e for Your
in LAF 's the Lead Dees{�°o /Dratt EIR
�/,MENSS
LAG
Negative SNER eo stered Vote
rsl
attacned N OF than la r g
Cor4ID%;to
3. gUG�unlitr ab it edless
n considered and
SS.
eclaratice Or hearing•
A. PRnSEs NpAT10N city s ceat vaitbo%, not
5 Fkecot E tt►at thecity to Proceed
D®c. 3# lg1 9
certify Ze t`ne
pate
a>ath 1p91 ro xiings.
/ Paul E•Sag tecutiva Offt no/p nrt le•®• °x
Assistant E f rV11? gargen
isrr'burion: .Land rrtinos De %ng"'
D gaTte h uF
p tell•=e �
p g
Local Agency Formation CanndsoWn
County Administration Building
70 West Medding Street,ga8 ing
County of Santa Mara 299 3191 �A►erco s t8
California
EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S CERTIFICATION OF SIGNATURES TO
PETITION OF LANDOWNERS AND CERTIFICATE OF FILING
The undersigned certifies as follows:
I am the duly selected and acting Executive Officer of the Santa Clara
County Local Agency Formation Commission.
A petition entitled "Petition for Annexation of
Territory to the City of Cupertino
and designated OROGRANDE 79-7
was filed with me on October 31 19 79 .
Said petition is signed by lando--.Vm ers and, pursuant to Sections 35110 to
35124 � inclusive, Government Code, I have examined the
petition.
The results of my examination are as follows:
1. All signatures on the petition were secured within six months of
the date on which the first signature on the petition was affixed, and the
petition was submitted for filing within 60 days after last signature was
affixed.
2. Said petition was signed by all of the landowners owning land
within the territory proposed to be annexed/ who also
own all of the assessed value of land within such territory.
3 . The petition and supplemental application filed on this proposal
contain all of the information and data required by Section 35110/34+49 of
the Government Code, and all the information and data requested by the
Santa Clara County Local Agency Formation Commission.
Based upon such examination, it is HEREBY DETERMINED AND CERTIFIED that
the petition is a sufficient petition and was signed by all of the owners
of land within the territory proposed to be annexed
and said petition is hereby being certified for filing on the date shown
below.
This petition will be considered at the December 12 1979 meeting
of the Local Agency Formation Commission.
Dated:
LOCAL AGENCY FOR4ATION COMMI SS ION
WILLIAM M. SIEGEL, Executive Officer
by��
Paul E. gagers
Assistant Executive Officer
78-7a