HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes - 06-27-1974CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10300 Torre. Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: 252-4505
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMIS-
SION HELD ON JUNE 27, 1.974 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY :HALL,
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
The meeting was opened at 7:37 p.m. by Chairman O'Keefe leading
the Salute to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
Comm, present: Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
Comm. absent: Cooper
Staff present: Director of Planning and Development Sisk
Assistant City Engineer Whitten
Deputy Assistant City Attorney Wenzel
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of Regular Adjourned Meeting of
May 29, 1974
The motion on page 13 should read "Motion carried, 3-1".
Comm. Gatto moved, seconded by Comm. Woodward, to approve the
Minutes of 29, 1974 as amended.
Motion carried, 3-0-1
Abstain: Adams
T'TRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
T"he Planning Director distributed material relative to items on
the agenda. He referred to a letter from Mr. D. Bandiccy, repre-
senting Cupertino Realty, Inc., involving a project which is
pending at Stelling Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard. This is
something which will need to be discussed since it would require
amending the general plan.
Chairman O'Keefe had received a letter from Dale Cattrell b ringir
to the attention of the commissioners a June 18, 1974 San Jose
Mercury article concerning hillside development.
PC -•160
I'ati 2
Cont. to
7-8-74
].9-Z-74
and
1.5-U- 74
David E.
idarper &
Assoc.
15 -TM -74
B`."unswick
Corporation
MINUTES OF ADJOURNED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1976
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Robert Wenzel was introduced. He will be the counsel for the
City at Planning Commission meetings.
NOTE: In order to decrease the length of the meeting, no
public hearing will be initiated after 12:00 a.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. City of Cupertino: Public Hearing to consider 1973
Comprehensive General Plan.
a. Hillsides
At the suggestion of the Planning Director, Comm. Woodward moved,
seconded by Comm. Adams, to continue until the next regular meeting
on July 8.
Motion carried, 4-•C
2. £pplicetions 19-Z-74 and 15-L'-74 of DAVID E. HARPER &
ASSOCIATES: REZONING 5.1 acres from CG (General
Commercial) to P (Planned Development with recreational/
entertainment and related commercial intent) zone or
whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning
Commission; USE PERMIT to allow construction of a bowling
center and related entertainment/recreational facilities
located at the southeast corner of the intersection of
Homestead and Stelling Roads. First Hearing continued.
3. Application 15 -TM -74 of BRUNSWICK DIVISION, BRUNSWICK
CORPORATION: TENTATIVE MAP to divide 3.869 acres into
three lots. Said property is within a CG (General
Commercial) zone and is "Located at the southeast corner
of Homestead and Stelling Roads. First Hearing continued.
The Planning Director noted the results of discussion at last meeting
involved definition of land uses in regard to this particular applica-
tion. Commercial uses had been listed by staff for discussional pur-
poses.
The architect was instructed to come back with revised or additional
plans reflecting concerns that had been expre,3sed. Main concern was
{ compatibility to adjacent properties.
3 v
Mr. Sisk, pointed out there re two points being considered: land use
and ano:,lication for bowline alley
Ii
MINUTES OF ADJ. PLANNING COL1ISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Mr. David Harper, architect representing development, exhibited
the revised plans. The new plan shows building on east side of
property with access drive and 25' of landscaping. The results
of the change meant decreasing total building area of site to
25% use and increasing landscaping area to 18%.of total land area
on site. The orientation of this plan is more in keeping with
the discussion about shielding neighbors from noise, sight and
light.
In answer to Comm. Adams as to why parking spaces were per.pendicu-1
l.ar instead of angular, Mr: Harper said one of the values of
slant parking was directional driveways and space conservation.
The vertical stalls have to be compensated for with extra wide
stalls. These are 9' 6". They consider them to be more
efficient and it gives a two-way traffic pattern.
In response to a request from Comm. Gatto, Mr. Harper described
the property line walls. He said they have eliminated parking
from property lines. There is a 20' buffer of berm and planting.
The buildings themselves buffer any problem to adjacent property.
He pointed out berming was now carried around. He also said the
periphery was heavily landscaped with extensive interior land-
scaping.
The first phase of building would be to plant periphery landscap-
ing, major access drive for bowling center and service lane.
Comm. Gatto asked about entrances to bowling alley. Mr. Harper
said there would only be one major entrance.
In answer to Comm. Gatto, Mr. Harper said they did not want to
abut buildings because of need for fire break. Mr. Harper then
described the materials and architecture planned for bowling
alley.
The possibility of making a pedestrian link between the buildings
was discussed. Mr. Harper pointed out what would happen with
regard to the other buildings would depend on type cf tenant.
In answer to Chairman O'Keefe, Mr.. Harper pointed out the varying
width of landscaped areas around entire site.
Chairman O'Keefe ascertained the building pads would be left
until future development time. He asked Mr. Harper given the
concerns about impact of sound and lights on residential areas
to east, why the bowling alley wasn't moved to intersection
corner. lie also questioned if having alcoholic beverages was
necessary since they are so close to the school. Mr. Karper
PC -16O
Page 3
P C-160
Page 4
MINUTES OF ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
said the customers insisted on the cocktail lounge. He said it is not
an advertised bar. The bowling alley per se is very quiet and having
it in that corner makes it a quiet place. He pointed out the deliveries
are very infrequent.
Chairman O'Keefe said he was concerned about effect on people who live
in the apartments, its proximity to the school and bar in connection
with the bowling alley. He would favor moving it from buildings and
from school. He noted the berms were hidden by massiveness of
principle building. Mr. Harper said there is green plants between
existing road and apartments. This plan has more flexibility giving
Town & Country effect. It does reflect the shielding requested by
neighbors.
Chairman O'Keefe said the impact of building and landscaping was
cancelled by asphalt parking lot. He is concerned about position
of building, apartments, church and the ground remaining fallow.
If the pads are left in barren state, building in rear and berming
hidden in rear, there is an unfinished appearance.
Mr. Harper said there was no function to the rear and side with
this plan. It would leave the better identification to the smaller
businesses. In answer to Chairman O'Keefe, Mr. Harper said he
realized it would be a restrictive use for adjacent businesses.
That is another reason for leaving front area for them.
Comas. Gatto said Chairman O'Keefe had raised several points that
needed to be answered. Timing on project was one. Related uses
may be few and far between. Once the bowling alley is built the
land is committed. He suggested putting building along Homestead
and softening it with landscaping on both sides. Then the rest of
the site could go residential or recreational. Mr. Harper gave
his reasoning for not having this placement. The little shops
would be left to the. rear and he was afraid it would have to go
into apartments. Then the whole concept of a recreational develop-
ment for this large a parcel would have been an exercise in futility.
The hearing was then opened to comments from the audience.
Mr. John Riutala, 10101 Scenic Blvd., Cupertino, said the reason
for not building other buildings was because they didn't know what
type of tenants they would have. The land will not remain fallow.
Everything will he developed except pads, which as they relate to
site are not that big. lie thought the building should be there to
protect residential to the east, in particular. He pointed out
,iiiere carports abut their property. They need time to get a lead
tenant and they can't get a lead tenant until they know what uses
will be approved for the land.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Comm. Gatto questioned who would maintain landscaping on site.
Mr. Rintala said the owners would be responsible for maintaining
landscaping. Comm. Gatto asked if they would be willing to put
some native seeds, like rye grass, and keeping it mowed until it
is developed. Mr. Rintala agreed.
Mr. Robert Feuchter, president of American Recreation Center,
4800 Madison Avenue, Sacramento, said they were tenants of the
Homestead Square Lanes which were scheduled to be constructed in
Homestead Square shopping center. As potential competitors of
Brunswick, he wanted to make a few points. (1) The present Home-
stead Shopping Center is not complete. (2) Major access into .
general neighborhood region comes off freeway, so all traffic that
comes into this center will be going by their center. Their loca-
tion would keep traffic from Stalling and has no conflict with
residential. uses.
Comm. Gatto asked about possibility of two bowling alleys succeeding
at this proximity. Mr. Feuchter said it would be difficult being
that close, both in terms of time and geography.
Comm. Gatto asked if Brunswick were built, would they build. Mr.
Feuchter said they were committed.
Ms. Ann Anger, Monta Vista, said, she was still concerned about berm;
if berms are put in between residences on both sides, it may start
a precedent for future commercial. She would like berms on street
sides so they don't see a. "sea of asphalt". There should be a 5'
masonry wall to separate residences and maybe 10' of landscaping
on project side. Putting buildings together like this gives an
alleyway in back and undesirable things can happen in alleyways;.
She would like to see some type of mini-Pruneyard.
Mr. Phil Van Arnum, Los Gatos, said he understood the City of Sunny-
vale had voted 100% not to allow a bowling alley across from this
center. It should be good neighbor policy to consider why they
rejected it. Also Los Altos had rejected one, thinking it would
be a good neighbor policy toward Cupertino. Ile felt the American
Recreation Center has better site because it will exit onto major
street.
In answer to Comm. Adams, Mr. Van Arnum said he did not know why
each councilman had rejected it. Mr. Sisk noted it was approved
by the Planning Commission of Sunnyvale.
PC --160
Page 5
Mr. Rintala. noted Mr. Van Arnum is representative for the ARC.
Public hearin
C .used
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1.974
Comm. Gatto asked how staff felt about two left hand turn curb cuts on
Stalling. The Assistant City Engineer said if it is a problem when
the center goes in, they will close them off. He said the problem now
is the City doesn't know where the traffic will be coming from.
Mr. Harry Gamble, representing owner and tenants of Grove Apartments,
said the owner had told him this project "has to go". There are 22
apartments with bedroom windows facing that area. It is already noisy.
If the center was approved, he and the other tenants would prefer to
_blank that entire side with buildings. A berm does not do much good.
He pointed out onthe plans where he was proposing the buildings to go.
Comm. Gatto noted they might be making problem with recreation zoning.
There are only two pieces with this potential zone. Perhaps -rather
than develop specific ordinances and procedures for recreational use,
they should examine on straight use basis, assign uses, include in use
permit and that would be the zoning for that piece of land.
In answer to Comm. Adams, Mr. Sisk said this would be consistent with
the general plan. It was ascertained from the counsel that there
would be no conflict.
Comm. Gattb then moved to close Public Hearing. Seconded by Comm.
Woodward.
Motion carried, 4-0
In answer to Comm. Adams, Comm. Gatto explained that if bowling
center were to be an acceptable use, then the other two sites would
have to chose from specific list of uses. Comm. Adams then suggested
more dialogue among the commissioners with regard to acceptable uses.
The list of uses in the Planning Director's memo of June 27, 1.974 were
discussed. These uses were all acceptable with the stipulation that
all be indoor facilities. Under related commercial, music and
restaurant were added. The stipulation with regard to restaurants
was that it be a sit-down type. Mr. Sisk noted this should be stipulated
as part of zoning.
It was agreed that Planning Commission would have first right of refusal
for use on site, but these uses would give some guidelines for the
developer tc follow in seeking future tenants.
With regard to having two bowling centers in such close proximity,
Comm.. Gatto said he did not think it was in the purview of this
commission to detezmi.n.e whether it would be financially viable.
Competition might be of bb.onefit to the community From use standpoint,
he would he willing to allow bowling alley -co exist in competition with
another bowli;ig alley somewhere else.
a.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
The site plan has some problems; these have been mitigated to some
degree. Comm. Gatto said he would prefer to see buildings as
suggested by Mr. Gamble, keeping cars to intersection and screenings
with landscaping. He noted the buildings might not be built. In
the interim something was necessary to insure a pleasing appearance!
to the community. He suggested two things. (1) A wall on top of
berm area, wall and berm to total a minimum height of 6'. Perhaps
owners on east might consider landscaping 10' on the east side and
with 10' on west side, there could be 20' of landscaping that would
service both sides. (2) Where the buildings are to be developed;
native rye grass could be planted and if these are not developed,
the community gets open space.
Comm. Woodward agreed with Comm. Gatto. He spoke to sight impact
of wall; because of zig-zag, it doesn't present "castle" type
appearance.Regardless of what the use is, the site must be
developed. This use is perhaps as unobstrusive as any. The place-
ment of buildings, berm and wall will mitigate problem of noise
and lights. He would also insist entire site be..deve1oped.
Comm. Adams said he would go along with majority of comments. He
asked if perimeter is to be put in and maintained until the site
is developed at the time the bowling center is built. Mr. Sisk
said this could be a condition of approval. Comm. Adams said lie
felt sites A, B and even C should be planted in native grass and
maintained until site developed.
The Planning Director pointed out the applicant will have to come
back, before Planning Commission regarding the tentative map which
was the next item on agenda. The applicant could redo site plan
and address these things at that time.
Comm. Gatto moved to re -open Public Hearing. Seconded by Comm.
Adams.
Motion carried, 4-0
Comm. Gatto moved to continue applications 19-Z-74, 15-U-74 and
15 -TM -74 for the purpose of expanding information as directed by
the Planning Commission to the next meeting. Seconded by Comm.
Woodward.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
PC -16O
Page Page 7
Public Hear-
ing reopened
19-Z-74,
15-U-74 and
15 -TM --74
continued to
next meeting
on 7/8/74
Motion carried, 4-0
PC -160
Page' 8
iI-U-7µ
approved w/
condition
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
4. Application 17-U-74 of VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS FOR VALLEY
CHURCH OF CUPERTINO: USE PERMIT to allow the use of an
existing structure as a day school. Said property consists
of 5 acres in a BQ (Quasi -Public) zone and is located at
1088.5 North Stelling Road. .First Hearing Continued.
The Planning Director referred to staff report of June 21, 1974. The
applicants request is to utilize existing buildings on the Valley Church
property on Stealing Road. The buildings were designed for educational
purposes and are unused at the present time. The maximum number of
children would be 300.
Mr. Paul Chalmers, 1633 Honfleur Drive, Sunnyvale, answered Comm. Gatto's
question that no new facilities will be constructed at this time. The
youth center building has been constructed and the road has been removed.
There is perimeter parking with buildings in center. The school will use
three buildings indicated, including the youth center site.
Mr. Chalmers answered Comm. Gatto that there is an area in center of
buildings and a parking lot to the. rear which is suitable for outside
play activities. The hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. with either
bussing or parent pick-up.
The hearing was opened for public comment.
Mr. Tom Paterson, Jr., business administrator for the Valley Christian
School, read a prepared statement.
Comm. Woodward moved, seccnded by Comm. Gatto, to close Public Hearings.
Motion carried, 4-0
Comm. Gatto moved for approval of Application 17--U-74, subject to 14
standard conditions, and
(15) That the school facility should be limited to a maximum
of 300 st,idents . The applicant shall have the ability
to appear before the Planning Commnissiori to consider an
expansion of the use beyond that enrollment level.
Seconded by Comm. Woodward.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COrtMIssIOi 21TG. OF JUNE 27, 1974
5. Applications 20 -TM -73 and 7-V-74 of F. E. ROBLES
(Juanita Williams): TENTATIVE MAP to legalize an
existing .305 -acre parcel in accordance with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 568; VARIANCE from
Section 10.4 of Ordinance No. 220(n) to reduce the
minimum rear setback to ten feet for Parcel B. Said
property is within a Rl-10 (Residential, single-family,
10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) zone and is located
adjacent to Mount Crest Drive approximately 100 feet
from the intersection of Linda -Vista Drive and Mount
Crest Drive. First Hearing continued.
The Planning Director said this is not a new application; three
properties have been under consideration for the past three years.
The owner of Parcel A is wanting to finalize property on tentative
map, which will legalize an illegal division and subdivision which
is no fault of the present owner. In addition to tentative map,
the applicant is requesting a variance to assure he does have the
ability to come within 10 feet of property line when building.
Mr. Sisk referred to letters from the owner. Present Ordinance
does provide a person can build within 10' of property line. A
certain amount of open space must be provided on site. Due t6
constraints, he would like to have total flexibility on rear
property line.
The Planning Director went into the background of this property.
Mr. Sisk referred to question of access to property on the west.
A driveway exists and it would take massive reconstruction to
move driveway. In answer to Comm. Gatto, Mr. Sisk said the
driveway would become a recorded easement for ingress and egress
to the property on the west.
Chairman O'Keefe read aloud condition 15: That the improved
driveway over Parcel A of Exhibit A, 20-TlS-73 should become a
recorded easement for ingress and egress to the property
located immediately westerly and contiguous to the subject
property. The Planning Director explained condition in detail,
pointing it out on the map.
Mr. Sam Marchese, 10572.Randy Lane, Cupertino, said he was the
owner of flag lot to the west. If this were so, then he would
have no objections.
Mr. Ernest Robles, 748 Bucher Avenue, Santa Clara, said he under-
stood conditions for approval.. He said they have already tenta-
tively agreed and he doesn't know what complications are of
condition 15. He would like to talk with his attorney. He would
PC -•160
Page 9
20--TM--73 and
7-V-74
F. E. Robles
PC -160
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
i age 10
not grant this for no compensation. He had agreed with Mr. Marchese
on a price and condition 1.5 could complicate.
The. Deputy Assistant City Attorney said he could see no problem from
the standpoint of the City. If they have gone through counsel and
come upon commercial transaction solving the problem this may have
been covered. Mr. Robles agreed the easement will he as it is; it
will not protrude any further into the property.
Mr. Marchese said the easement line would have to be clarified so that
whatever line was moved to the south wouldn't leave some ground exposed
that actually belonged to Mr. Robles. He was concerned about maintenance.
He said everything to the north of the driveway should be his and every-
thing to the south should be Mr. Robles. The Planning Director pointed
out that the property lines would remain the same. All that is being
said is that Mr. Marchese will have the right to traverse roadway.
Mr. Sisk then clearly defined the property lines.
The hearing was opened for comments from the audience. There were
none.
P'ublirc.Hear
It was rnc-ed byComm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward, to close
ing closed
Public Hearing.
Motion carried, 4-0
20 -TM -73
Comm. Gatto moved to recommend approval of Application 20-T i-73
approved
subject to 1.4 standard conditions and condition 15 as enumerated
w/cond-i.tion
therein. Seconded by Comm. Woodward.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
ttt
NAYS: None
Motion. carried, 4-0
7-'�1--74
Comm. Catto moved to recommend approval of 7-V-74 subject to 1.4
approved
standard conditions and the further finding that the granting of
w/ further
the variance would not be detrimental to the surrounding properties
findings ₹
as granted on the basis of the irregular shape and unique characteris-
tics typical to this particular lot. Seconded by Comm. -Woodward.
{
AYES: Coma. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
At 9:35 p.m. a recess was announced, with the meeting reconvening
at 9:55 p.m.
6. Application 12 -TM-74 of FIRST UNITED REALTY CORPORATION:
TENTATIVE MAP to convert existing apartment building to
condominium development in a R3-2.7 (Residential,
multiple, 2,700 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) zone. Said
property consists of 7 acres and is located adjacent to
and easterly of Miller Avenue approximately 200 feet
southerly of the intersection of Miller Avenue and
Vicksburg Drive. First Hearing continued.
The Planning Director distributed communications concerning applica-
tion from residences of project. He noted the apartment is now
known as the Fountainbleu Apartments. There are 123 units.
The Planning Director asked the City Attorney to give a brief
dissertation on the scope of the City's review of these matters.
Mr. Wenzel pointed out that technically the application is for
tentative map proposal which leaves very little discretion con-
cerning approval of it.. He referred to section of Ordinance which
gives justifications for rejecting TM, none of which apply in this
instance. He said there is an over-riding new law developing
regarding constitutional grounds which says municipalities have
a duty to provide housing for all income levels and also for mobil
residents who do not want to buy. Over a long period of time it
would not cost more to buy than to rent so this would not serve a
different level of income by rejecting it. As to mobile citizens,
if the commission had an inclination to deny on this ground could
do so only after having gone into issue at some length, after public
hearing, and after finding there is an emergency situation in the
City that demands no rental units be removed.
The Planning Director apprised the commissioners that the Director
of Social Planning Council and the Council for Aging had expressed
their concerns to him verbally about ramifications of this action.
Mr. Wenzel added that the emergency would have to exist on a city-
wide basis. After further discussion, Mr. Wenzel answered Comm.
Adams that degree of hardship would be determined by other alter-
natives.
In answer to Comm. Woodward, the Planning Director said about a
year ago they did a substantial study into cost, availability and
vacancy but it has not been updated since then.. The first thing
to do would be to get into Public Hearing and see if this is a
concern.
PC -16O
Page I1.
12 -TN -74
First United
Realty Corp.
PC—lei0 i MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Page 12
The Deputy Assistant City Attorney said many new cases that are coming
are in response to situations where there really has been a concentrated
effort to maintain very high economic standards and expensive homes. In
the case of Cupertino, he would not think too much emphasis should be
placed on this.
Mr. Joseph Noble, First United Realty Company representative, noted he
had become aware very recently of tenant opposition. He had made an
effort to meet with representative group of tenants and had talked
with 35 people who represented about 22 resident families. They had
discussed what plans were, what their individual objections might be.
He felt there was great interest in what was being planned. He had
letters signed by 13 who would possibly be interested in purchasing
and continuing to live there. He said discussion had related to con-
cern of what would be done to property to cure deferred maintenance
defects in property. He explained their position. They are not
currently owners of the property. One of the conditions of existing
owner was prohibiting them from approaching or contacting existing
residents. Once the objections were known, they ha.d arranged for a
meeting with the residents.
Mr. Noble explained existing situation at the Fountainbleu Apartments,
their expected vacancies and their proposal for handling sales of the
condominiums. He also gave his qualifications. He pointed out that
air space division of* existing apartment house i.s nothing more than
change of ownership. They cannot make meaningful representations as
to price or terms because they are precluded by law until they have
obtained a public report. Before they can obtain this report, they
must have favorable action on tentative map from the Planning Commission
of the City of Cupertino. He assured the commissioners they would make
every effort to avoid disruption, displacement and hardship.
The hearing was then opened to the public for comment.
Ms. Elinor Purdy, 10200 Miller Avenue, Cupertino, said she had attended
the meeting and naturally Mr. Noble was speaking from the point of
their making a profit. From the renters ° point of view $25/$50 a
month more means a great deal to some of them. Mostly retired people
and widows live there. There are no comparable units in that area.
They are either run down or rent is out of reach. A good many of
them have lived there a long time. She is not appealing for charity
but this should be considered. She has heard it said the City of
Cupertino is not doing much for its senior citizens. She likes it
where she is, likes the price and does not like the idea of being
displaced. She answered Comm. Adams that many who live there are
older people like herself who do not want to have the responsibility
of owning.
MINUTES OF HE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Mr. Robles referred to an anonymous communication passed to most 't
of the residents. If they had talked to him, many fears could have
been allayed. The 16-18 months sales period would not constitute a
sudden displacement. He pointed out they have always gone to great
length t:o assist residents in either financing to purchase, or to f
locate houses in area that is desirable to them. - 1.
Chairman O'Keefe asked about condition of apartments. Mr. Sisk said!
if the commission desired to go ahead with this plan, staff had
suggested it go to ASAC, primarily to review landscaping areas,
vehicular travel areas, existing fencing that was in bad repair,
but ;?othing would be considered with regard to structure. The
chairman then asked Mr. Robles what condition they intended the
structures to be in. Mr. Robles said there would be a one year
warranty on all mechanical. and structural components; mechanical
components are carefully examined by the particular engineer in 1
that field and whatever needs to be replaced, cleaned or adjusted is
The structure will be painted inside and out. ' Rer_arpeting and
new drapes or an offset is offered. As to architecture and
landscaping, this is great concern in meeting marketing demands,
The more attractive the easier a marketing vehicle they have.
Chairman O'Keefe asked who would do the inspection, the City or
themselves. Mr.Robles said they did this themselves. Under most
jurisdictions it is not within the province of the City to be
involved. The. actual parameter of the City is whether or not it
conforms with existing ordinances. They have projected $275,000.00
for improvement of property per se, which comes to more than $2,000
per unit.
Mr. Wilson Wendt, attorney, 2150 Valdez Street, Oakland, said
Mr. Wenzel's comments were very complete. He defined the Subdivi-
sion Map Act which limits the scope of review.
At Comm. Adams' suggestion, a copy of conditions were distributed
to the applicants.
Comm. Gatto said there are two courses open: they can close public
hearing and approve or proceed with further evaluation of housing
market in town and determine whether or not there is a need for
this type of housing and make judgment accordingly. Information
they have this evening is insufficient to make that type of decisioi
The owners of the property have certain rights within ownership.
The commission can either look at whole housing market spectrum
or he saw no other course than to approve.
PC- 160
Page 13
pC-160 i aNUTES OF THE AD.J. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Page 14
Comm. Woodward asked Mr. Robles about the possibility of extending
period of transition in order to mitigate problem. He felt legally
their duty was to treat this as straight tentative map application.
Comm. Adams said he basically agreed with other two commissioners.
He appreciated the financial problem of citizens who live there but
cannot use financial issue as a reason for denying application.
Mr. Robles noted that when there is a problem, if the tenant will
meet with them and discuss it frankly, they will make every effort
to aid and assist, Comm. Adams referred to government subsidies.
Mr. Robles said he knew of none being used at Founta.inbleu now.
He said their average price will"be $24,000.00 A unit can be
purchased with as little as $1,200.00 down and a monthly expenditure
of about 1% of purchase price.
Comm. Gatto questioned the possibility of the parent company retaining
ownership of a certain portion of units and renting them. Mr. Robles
said their aim was profit and one does not realize profit until last
units are sold. If sale is unsuccessful, the condominium plan wculd
be abandoned and they would continue as rental units. A certain per-
centage has to be sold before it can be a condominium, under Cal. law.
In answer to Comm. Gatto, N"r. Robles said they. maintained the common
area until that certain percentage is reached. The builder must post
cash or bonds for maintenance of common areas, including both sold
and unsold.
Mr. Robles answered Chairman O'Keefe that they can fleal with people
le
only after obtaining public report which will be 4 or 5 weeks after
favorable action by this board, according to law.
Ms. Louise Bollo said she had been a tenant at Fountainbleu for about
3 years. She wanted to make point that they choose not to buy. They
will have to make a great many improvements to bring the property up
to a standard they would be willing to buy. She listed many of the
items that are substandard. She said they stayed there because it
was convenient to stores, doctors, etc. She said the commission
should consider what was best for the greatest number of people and
also should consider the proportion of rentals to sales available
in Cupertino.
Mr. Dar. Apker, 206 Echo, Campbell, said suppose there were 10 apart-
ments in Cupertino that have decided on this course. Somewhere
along the line Cupertino will have to say this is enough. There
should be some -rental or ownership ratio.
The implementation and the ability of the City to say there would
be so many rental units and so many for ownership were discussed.
Counsel said if it was decided this was in best City interest .and
then had special. zoning requirements that something could not b£"
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
built unless it would be rental, there would not he anything
unconstitutional against this.
After further discussion, Comm. Woodward moved to close Public
Hearing, seconded by Comm. Gatto.
Motion carried, 4-0
Y
Chairman O'Keefe noted this was a dilemma and he wondered if they
had sufficient information.
In answer to Comm. Adams, Mr. Sisk said information on rentals
and ownership comparison was readily available. Also could get
price range information.
The concept of legislating certain social development patterns
was discussed. Comm. Woodward said he felt this was something
the open market place must decide. Plight of individual renters
in this particular case might better be served by improvements
made in this project.
Comm. Gatto referred to inherent problem of City getting in housing
business. The free enterprise system in this country has a habit
of responding to needs of the public. He would like to leave to
open market and developer to adjust things.
Chairman O'Keefe said free enterprise is best method. He noted
other communities have wrestled with this and he would like to
profit from their experiences. He would like more research and
input from staff. He recognized restraints of time, but he could
not make a decision given information available and the impact
this would have on community.
Comm. Adams moved, seconded by Chairman O'Keefe, to re -open Public,
Hearing.
Motion carried, 4--0
Mr. Wendt pointed out that his clients have property tied up for
a period of time, option period is running, financing commitments
to submit and they need action on this property. He pointed out
there are no ordinances governing conversions. Under the Sub-
division Map Act, the City must act on tentative map within a
prescribed period of time - 50 days. They had filed on the 14th
of May so will have to have action shortly after the first of July.
PC -16O
Page 15
Public Hear-
ing closed
Public Hear-
ing reopened
PC -160
Page 16
Public Hear
ing closed I
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Ms. Frances Carlson, 19400 Sorenson Avenue, Cupertino, said they had
been residents of the apartment for 10 years. Her husband was totally
disabled and it would be a hardship on them to move. They could not
afford to buy. She asked if they could take an 11 year old building
and sell it like it was a new building-. Chairman O'Keefe said this
was not within the responsibility of the City. Ms. Carlson then asked
what about old pipes, leaky roofs, doors that don't close, etc. Doesn't
the City of Cupertino have inspectors? The Planning Director said on
existing structures, the only way the City would be involved was if
a hazardous condition existed. Unless complaints are received, the
City assumes property is in good shape, or hazards pointed out.
Comm. Adams moved, seconded by Comm. Gatto, to close Public Hearings.
Motion carried, 4-0
The City Counsel agreed that buyer will have the same opportunity to
examine warranty and condition. The Planning Director pointed cut
there is a National City Report that can be obtained for $25.00.
The City kill inspect the property and ..rite a report on the condition
of the property.
Comm. Adams suggested condition 16 be e-xpanded to consider r correction
of hazards along creek area. The Planning Director said the City has
talked with Flood Control District and school district with regard to
Calahazas Creek.
Comm. Gar -to ;roved to recommend approval of. Application 12--'1`N-74, sub-
ject to 14 standard conditions, and
(15) All buildings, streets and other roadways, parking areas
and other facilities or features shall be located substan-
tially as shown on Exhibits A, pages I• -lb.
(16) The applicant shall submit plans to the Architectural. and
Site Approval Committee providing for the upgrading of
landscaped area, fencing and paved areas for vehicular
use, and correction of hazards along creek area. This
to be done prior to recordation of final map.
(17) City Ordinance No. 276 regulating parking of trailers,
repairing vehicles, etc. shall ayply to the private street
and 'to all parking along said street. The parking of
recreational vehicles such as boats,. trailers, etc.
shall be prohibited throughout the entire development
unless said parking is within an enclosed area. Vehicular
curb perking along the private street shall be prohibited
except 'in designated -areas. Appropriate "No Parking" signs
shall be installed by the applicant.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
(18) Any improvements in the common areas shall be complete.d
by the developer and shall be subject to bonding and
other procedures in the same manner as required for
street improvements by the Subdivision. Ordinance. The
common areas shall be deeded to an association of the
homeowners for whose benefit the common area is set
aside; development rights to the common area, as
defined in Section 16.13 of Ordinance No. 220(e), shall
in this case be dedicated to the City.
(19) Maintenance of the common areas shall be the responsi-
bility of the homeowners association to which the common
areas are deeded. In the event the private road, drive-
ways, parking areas, walkways, landscaping or buildings
are not maintained to applicable City standards, the
City may, after notice and public hearing as set forth
in Ordinance 002(a) Section 5.3, effect the necessary
maintenance, with the cost therefor to be a lien on
the property in the same manner as set forth in the Weed
Abatement Ordinance of the City of Cupertino.
(20) Prior to recordation of the Declaration of Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions by the developer, said
declaration shall be reviewed by the City Attorney to
determine its compatibility with the intent and condi-
tions as set forth herin. Any changes in said declara-
tion shall be subject to the approval of the City
Council.
(21) The articles of incorporation of the Homeowners Associa-
tion and any other instrument related to said association
shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney.
Seconded by Comm. Woodward.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward
NAYS: Chairman O'Keefe
Motion carried 3-1
The Planning Director noted the Tentative Map application would be
submitted to City Council at its July 15 meeting.
PC -16O
Page 17
12 -TN -74
approved <a
conditions;
PC -160
Page 18
8-V-74
Richard &
Jill Conway
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 27, 1..974
7. Application 8-V-74 of RICHARD & JILL CONWAY: VARIANCE from
Section 86.2 of the Agricultural -Residential Ordinance No.
220(1) to reduce the acreage requirement for use of an on-•
site sewage disposal system from 4.9 acres to 4.3 acres.
Said property is in an Al -43 (Agricultural -Residential,
single-family, one -acre lots) zone and is located adjacent
to and westerly of Regnart Road. First Hearing continued.
The Planning Director said the property involved is at south terminus
of Regnart Road. He indicated the Conway property onthe map. The
property illegally exists as two lots. The applicant intends to
reconstitute the lots as they originally existed, and build a home.
Although the property is zoned for one acre, in order to utilize
property without public sewer system, 5 acres are required. Variances
have been granted in this area assuming the Health Department can be
satisfied relative to septic tank installation.
The Planning Director gave the background of property ownership,
noting that legally it is one piece of land.
In answer to Comm. Woodward, Mr. Sisk said the Health Department does
require documentation that the land will drain properly. He noted the
Health Department does go through whole process, determining where it
will go, etc.
Mr. Dick Conway, 11140 South. Teresa, Cupertino, questioned condition
16. lie would like to know where the agreement might be, ,when it
might be and who would pay him for the land. The City is asking
for 60' x 300' strip of his land.
The Planning Director said the intent is the City doesn't know what
will happen to Regnart Road in the future, and they want the ability
to discuss with him in the future if it is necessary regarding the
acquisition of property for public right-of-way. Acquisition is by
deed :and is not an abnormal procedure.
Chairman O'Keefe clarified that the land is dedicated, and paving
and surfacing is also the responsibility of the property owner.
The Assistant City Engineer noted since the alignment of the street
is undecided, the whole roadway could be on this property. There
have been rulings before from the. City Attorney that they have the
right to obtain half street dedication from owner. Anything over
half street would have to be purchased at fair market value. The
normal half street would be 30'.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNTG COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
The Deputy Assistant City Attorney said each street, where it is
going, who is getting benefit and function of street would have
to be studied. If one owner benefiting, it is fair and reasonable
to expect him to assume responsibility. If equally shared, then
both owners should pay improvement costs. Each street has to be
looked at individually.
Mr. Conway wanted some assurance the
through his house, and then have to
how he felt about condition 18, Mr.
felt about condition 17. He doesn't
Crete plans for that area. This is
happen or where it might happen. At
foot of his property.
road wouldn't be going right
pay for the road. When asked k
Conway said the same way he
think the City has any con -
not telling him when this might
present time the road ends at
Chairman O'Keefe ascertained the situation could not be detailed
at this time. He noted this is standard procedure for difficult
piece. of land. He asked Mr. Conway if he would like a continuation
Mr. Conway said he would like approval if he had some assurance the
road wouldn't be going through his house.
The Planning Director said if the City allowed him to build, a
road would not be put through his house. But the City could not
at this time guarantee division of property. The City is trying
to let people build in this area by keeping access open.
Comm. Woodward asked if the City could be conditioned, i.e. having
Public Works Department look at contour maps where it is possible
road might go and saying roads shall not pass within so many feet
of house. This was discussed. Comm. Gatto said there is no plan
line at all for Regnart Road and it will take some time to decide.
He didn't know how City could commit themselves to any kind of
alignment right now.
Mr. Conway said if they could give him the tentative area it might
go on, he would be willing to accept that. It is unfair and unjust
for the City to say he must give them land and build road and then
not even say where the road will. go.
After further discussion, the Deputy Assistant City Attorney
suggested added to condition 16, "such alignment would be. made
so as not to unduly injure the property". This would riot guaran-
tee the City wouldn't cut across property, but would require a
rule of reason. Mr. Conway agreed to this.
PC -160
Page 19
PC- -160 MINUTES OF THE ADd. PLANNING CC,1M? SSi0N MEETING OF .3UNE 27, 1974
Page 20
Mr. Cor?ia_•.y asked if there was any way the 60' could be lowered.
The Assistant City Engineer explained hillside standards are 60'
right-of-way to keep from obtaining so many slope easements due
to topography. A 24' roadway with no sidewalks would be made.
The 60' would be grant deeded to the City, the taxes would be
cancelled and it would be in the City's name. Chairman O'Keefe
pointed out this is standard procedure for all subdivisions, parcel
maps and unimproved street property owners.
Comm. Gatto noted payment for development of street would normally
come under assessment district. The amount of land could be
credited toward assessment fees.
It was clarified to the applicant that even if he didn't need the
variance, be would be subject to the same condition on building
permit.
Fubl.ic Hear- Comm. Gatto moved, seconded by Comm. Woodward, to close Public
ing closed Hearing.
Motion carried, 4-0
Comm. Gatto said he understood applicant's desire to cake issue
with condition and felt best procedure would be to approve variance
based on conditions. The appl'ic:?n t could then appeal conditions or
make decisici? not to build.
Comm. Gatto moved to recommend approval of 8-V-74 with 14 standard
conditions, and
(15) The approval is based upon the site plan labeled Exhibit
A of 8-V-74, as may he modified by additional conditions
contained herein.
(16) Prior to issuance
owner shall enter
future dedication
exceed sixty (60)
to be made at the
alignment, such a
unduly injure the
of a building permit, the property
into an agreement with. the City for.
on Regnart Road up to but not to
feet in width. This dedication is
time the City sets the precise
ligi.aent to be made so as not to
property.
(17) The applicant shall connect with a sanitary sewer system
at such time said sewer system is available to the subject
property.. The applicant shall participate in a local
improvement district relative to costs involved :.n the
provision of a sanitary swcr system at su^h tae as said
district is formed.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
(18) The property owner shall agree to participate in any
future assessment district formed for the improvement
of Regnart Road.
(19) The removal of any mature native trees on the site
shall be subject to the review and approval of the
- Architectural and Site Approval Committee.
This based on findings that this property is of unusual nature and
needs variance to utilize land. Seconded by Chairman O'Keefe.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
At 12:00, the Commission agreed to continue hearing agenda items.
B. Application 6 -TM -74 of DANFORTH E. APKER: TENTATIVE
MAP to divide 11.5 acres into two parcels. Said
property is within an Al -43 (AEricultural/Residential
1 acre lots) zone and is located on upper Regnart
Road. First Hearing continued.
The Planning Director noted this application was for the approval
of a tentative map dividing 11.5 acres into two parcels. He
located property on map. The same conditions as applied to
previous application, 8-V-74, should apply to this application.
Mr. Dan Apker, 206 Echo, Campbell, a civil engineer, said he was
representing the owners who were willing to dedicate 60'. The
topography is such that the drainage channel is the only place
to put road. He referred tc a map by McKay and Somps who had made
a study of where to put extension of Regnart Road. It does go
into property of Mr. Conway, but is in an area where he probably
would not choose to build.
Mr. Apker questioned condition 20. They would like to change the
18 feet of improved area to 14'. He said staff had said this was
in response to request by Fire Department who like wide roads to
turn around on. However, 900' of 18' width is $6,000 - $7,000
of driveway improvement to serve two sites. He would accept other
conditions. The Planning Director said this was a request from the
Central Fire District primarily to provide ease of access for large:
type emergency vehicles.
Comm. Gatto suggested adding the words, "...eighteen (18) feet or
design suitable to the Central Fire District....".
The hearing was opened to comments from the audience. There were
none.
PC -160
Page 21
8-V-74
approved w/
conditions
6 -TM -74
Danforth E.
Apker
PC -1.6O ' MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNIN?G'COMiISSICN NEETINC OF. JUNE 27, 1974
Page 22
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward, to close Public Hearings.
Public Idea
ing closed
Motion carried, 4-0
Comm.. Gatto moved to recommend approval of Application 6 -TM -74 subject
to 14 standard conditions, and
(15) Approval is based upon Exhibit A of 6 -TM -74, as may be
modified by additional conditions contained herein.
(16) Prior to the recordation of the final ;nap, a reciprocal
driveway easement between Parcel A and Parcel B running
with the land shall be recorded.
(17) The removal of any mature native trees on the site shall
be subject to the review and approval of the Architectural
and Site Approval Committee.
(18) The applicant/owner shall agree to participate in a local
improvement district both for sewer and roadway purposes
and enter into an agreement with the City to insure
participation, the degree of participation to be determined
at a latter date.
(19) The applicant shall connect with a sanitary sewer system
at such time said sewer system :s available to he subject
property. The applicant shall participate in a local
improvement district relative to costs involved in the
provision of a sanitary sewer system at such time as said
district is formed.
(20) That the forty (40) foot right of way ingress/egress from
Regnart Road shall be improved to a minimum width of
eighteen (18) feet or design suitable to the Central
'ire District with an all-weather surface plus three
(3) foot shoulders on each side, The grade of said
driveway shall not exceed an. average 1..5%; inside radius
turn shall be forty-two (42) feet or more.
(21) That 'he thirty (30) foot right of way driveway as shown
on Exhibit A of 6--TM--74 shall be improved to a: width of
twelve (12) feet with a minimum trade not to exceed an
average of. 15%. In addition, at such time as a residential
structure is to be built, provision shall be made for the
parking and turn -around of four vehicles excluding garage
spaces.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
(22) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the property
owner shall enter into an agreement with the City for
future dedication on Regnart Road up to but not to
exceed sixty (60) feet in width. This dedication is
to be made at the time the City sets the precise
align-ment, such, alignment to be made so as not to unduly
injure the property.
Seconded by Comm. Adams.
AYES: Gomm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
9. Applications 18-Z-74, 10 -TM -74 and 6-V-74 of CARL E.
FRANKLIN: REZONING 1.04 acres from R1-10 (Residential,
single --family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) zone
to Ri-7.5 (Residential, single-family, 7,500 sq. ft.
per dwelling unit) zone or whatever zone may be deemed
appropriate by the Planning Commis5ion;.TENTATIVE MAP
to divide 1.04 acres into five parcels; VARIANCE to
reduce the required lot width to 66 feet for three "Lots.
Said property is located on the north side of Bollinger
ri i Trion anri Marti -minnrl Way - First Hearinc
continued.
The Planning Director referred to copy of tentative map and pointed
out three actions contained in application. Fie indicated location
of lots on the map. He said the land use is consistent with every-
thing in the area, The main question would be the reduction of
lot widths.
Comm. Gatto ascertained the existing homes would be. removed.
The Planning Director read the two conditions suggested by staff.
Comm. Adams noted variance could be justified by hardship. Comm.
Gatto said the unusual depth of land makes it difficult to treat
in the normal manner and agreed not granting variance would cause
undue hardship. Comm. Woodward ascertained the neighborhood would
not suffer by the narrowing of the lot widths.
Mr. Carl E. Franklin 1124 Fremont Avenue, Los Altos, answered
Chairman O'Keefe that he was aware of condition 16 and they would
want to save, all trees possible, especially two willows. Gilleck
would be improved and dedications given to City.
PC -16O
Page 23
6 -TM -74
approved w/
conditions
18--Z-74,
10 -TM -74
6-V-74
Carl E.
Franklin
F
PC -16O
Page 24
Public Heart
in_g closed
MINUTES OF. THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Catto, to close Public
Hearing.
Motion carried, 4-0
13-Z-74
Comm.
Woodward moved to recommend approval of Application 1.8-Z-74.
approved
Seconded by Comm. Gatto.
AYES:
Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS:
None
Motion carried, 4-0
10--TM--74 I
Comm.
Woodward moved to recommend approval of Application 1O-TH-74,
approved
subject to standard conditions 1-14, and
w/condition?
(15) Approval is based upon Exhibit A of 10--TM-74, as may
•
be modified by additional conditions contained herein.
(161 The remo�al- of any mature native. trees on the site
shall be subject to the rc.viewr and approval of
Architectural and Site Approval Coumittee.
Seconded. by Comm. Gatto.
AYES:
Comm. Adams, Catto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS:
None
6-°V-74
approved
w/condition:
Motion carried, 4-0
Comm. Woodward moved to recommend approval of Anpli.cation G --V-•74,
subject to standard conditions 1-14, and
(15) Approval is haed upon Exhibit A of 6-V--74, as may
be modified by additional conditions contained herein.
(lb) The removal of any mature native trees on the site
shall be subject to the review and approval of
Architectural and. Site Approval Coismi.ttee.
Due to unusual configuration of land. Seconded by Chairman O':eefe.
.AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, We_od.?ard, Cha:ir,Tsan O'eefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4f-0
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
10.
Applications 4-•Z-74 and 20-U-74 of BRUCE EDWARDS: REZON-
ING 4.80 acres from Rl-10 (Residential, single-family
10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) zone to P (Planned
Development with a quasi-public/mini-storage use intended)
zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the
Planning Commission; USE PERMIT to allow construction
of a mini -storage facility on said 4.80 acres. Said
property is located on the southwest corner of Mary
Avenue and Freeway Route 280. First Hearing continued.
" s
The Planning Director said this was consistent with discussions on
general plan on to City Council on July 16. He referred to sub-
mitted conditions which might be subject to discussion. The
application was reviewed preliminarily by ASAC and their concern
was having appropriate perimeter landscaping provided around the
site.
The Planning Director discussed conditions, pointing out areas
involved, on the map. It appears there may be a possibility of
pedestrian -bicycle access on Mary Avenue overcrossing with this
being extended to vehicles if it is warranted in the future.
This application is a little different than previous one in that
it provides for inside sto:a.ge in structure and also outside.
vehicular storage.
Mr. Phil Burke, 116 Hillbrook Dr., Los Gatos, questioned condition
16, relative to street improvements. He wanted to know how far
they would extend. The Assistant City Engineer spoke to over -
crossing at Mary Avenue which is still a possibility. They are
providing for pedestrian and bicycle access. There may be some
funding available for project of this type soon. The City has
to make provisions for future overpass at this time. Mr. Whitten
indicated on the map where the developer will be responsible for
street improvements.
Mr. Burke said he would like something nailed down as to when they
will know on street improvements. Mr. Whitten said the street
would be installed now, with first portion improved as far as
they can without getting into vertical curve of overcrossing.
In answer to Mr. Burke, the Planning Director said purpose is to
provide landscape screening and if it can't be done on State
property it will have to be done on their property. Condition 18
was discussed and the Commission agreed if screening could be put
on State right-of-way it a manner acceptable to ASAC, this would
be agreeable.
PC -160
Page 25
4-Z-74 and
20-U-74
Bruce Edwards
1 C-160 MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COK�fISSICN MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Page 26 ^�
In answer to Comm. Gatto., Mr. Burke said the back wail of the building
would serve as a screening wall and the front 40' would be in land-
scaping.
Comm. Adams questioned storage of hazardous materials. Mr. Burke said
this was controlled by the insurance company. He said rentals were on
a month to month agreement.
the hearing was opened to the public for comments.
}
Ms. Ann ganger, Monta Vista, noted there have been many mini --storage
applications lately. Maybe Cupertino (;fill be known as the mini -storage
area. There have been 3 applications in 3 meetings, and she was getting
concerned.
{ The Planning Director answered Comm. Gatto that- action on this particular plan
would not preclude the Architectural and Site Approval Committee from
becoming involved in any other concerns of screening on freeway and
requiring walls._
Comm.Adams) seconded i oHearings.
Public ' t Moved by dam, seconded by Comm.CoralWoodward, to close Public i'earxztrs.
Hearings
closed I Notion carried, 4-0
Cumin. .dams moved to recommend approval of 4-Z-74. Seconded by Coin..
Gatto.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Catto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
approved ' NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
Comm. Adams moved to recommend approval of 20-U-74, subject to 14
standard conditions, and
(15) A. proval is based upon site plan labeler: Exhibit A of
20-0-74, as may be modified by additional_ conditions
contained herein.
(16) Permanent street improvements shall be installed from
the southerly property line in a northerly direction to
a point on the fut'ire Mary Avenue overc.rossing to be
determined by the City.
Any areas w' thin tic public right of way not imp-rcved
for street purposes shall be devoted to landscaping in
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
a manner that is coordinated with the frontage land-
scaping of the project and approved by the Architectural
and Site Approval Committee.
Developer shall post bonds with the City for the
remainder of the Mary Avenue street improvements along
the frontage and enter into a deferred agreement to
install the same.
(17) A minimum setback shall be established from the back of
future sidewalk on Mary Avenue of forty (40) feet. This
area shall be devoted to landscape screening in a manner
as approved by the Architectural and Site Approval
Committee.
(18) Adjacentto the southerly property line andthe property
line adjacent to Freeway Route 280 and the Flood Control
channel, a minimum 1.0 ft. setback shall be provided to
be utilized for landscape screening in a manner to be
approved by the Architectural and Site Approval Committe
If agreed to with State, can be placed on State right -of
way.
(19) That no structure on the site shall exceed one story in.
height or a maximum of twelve (12) ft. except for
architectural facilities as approved by the Architectura
and Site Approval Committee.
(20) That the entrance driveway to the facility on Mary Av
shall be moved southerly in a manner that aligns with
intersection of Meteor Drive and Mary Avenue.
(21) That the applicant shall submit a revised site plan
prior to review of the application by the City Council
reflecting the above conditions stated herein.
(22) That the use permit is granted for the utilization of
the subject site for storage purposes only with the
exception of the administrative office and that no work
shall.. be performed on the site such as motor vehicle
repair, washing, or boat repair or construction, et
cetera.
(23) The removal of any mature native trees on the site
shall be subject to the review and approval of Archi-
tectural and Site Approval Committee.
Seconded by Comm. Woodward.
PC -160
Page 27
PC -160
Page 23
MINUTES OF THE ADJ.. PLANNING COI, 1ISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
20 -L? -74 i AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
approved w/; NAYS: None
conditions
21-Z•-74 &
16 -TM-74
Kaiser
Aetna
I
Motion carried, 4-0
11. Applications 21-Z-74 and 16 -TM --74 of KAISER AETNA (PONDEROSA
HOMES DIVISION): REZONING 4.96 acres fr_o-in Rl-lOAG (Residen-
tial, single-family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) zone
to R1-7.5 (Residential, single-family, 7,500 sq. ft. per
dwelling unit) zcne or whatever zone may be deemed appro-
pri.ate by the Planning Commission; TENTATIVE MAP to sub --
divide 4.96 acres into twenty single-family residential
lots. Said property is located at the northeast corner of
Orange Avenue and McClellan Road. First Hearing continued.
The P:Lanning Director 'Located property involved on map. The proposal
is td zone- prope v ra--I'I775 ant Vi into 20 si=ng e -family lots
He pointed out the .56' cul-de-sac off Orange, noting usually for this
length cul-de-sac 60would be required. However,, the staff tends to
favor this configuration because changing width would require putting
cul-de-sac on McClellan.. This was not advisable because of traffic
conditions on McClellan.
Mr. Stephen II. Hawley, 4 Palm Ct., , Menlo Park, represented Ponderosa
Homes. He said the price of homes will be in the area of $67,000 to
t0,000 plus. Ha said these would be 1800 sq. ft. to 2300 sq. ft.
homes, He exhibited renderings, noting they felt they were of a
unique design.
Comm. Gatto questioned having residents of lots 17 through 20 have
to back up to get out of driveways on McClellan. Mr. Hawley said
this had been considered, but if changed would lose lots. Comm.
Gatto asked for driveway configuration that would allow residents
to turn around and head out on McClellan.
The hearing was opened to comments from the audience.
Ms. :garara Trubell, 10354 Imperial Ave., Cupertino, said her son
went to Lincoln school and she would like to speak to problem regarding
school crossing. She explained situat:icn and requested either a signal
at intersection or a crossing guard there. The Assistant City Engineer
said a signal was not warranted now but a crossing guard would be
appropriate. A letter should be written to the Public Works Department
regarding this, with a cony to Chairman O'Keefe and the school. • istrict.
Comm. Adams ascertained the two houses on the site would be removed.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Comm. Gatto moved, seconded by Comm. Adams, to close Public Hearing.
Motion carried, 4-0
Comm. Gatto moved to recommend approval of Application 16 -TM -74
subject to 14 standard conditions, and
(15) Approval is based upon Exhibit A of 16 -TM -74, as may
be modified by additional conditions contained herein.
(16) The removal of any mature native trees with the excep-
tion of orchard trees on the site shall be subject to
the review and approval of Architectural and Site
Approval Committee.
Seconded by -Comm, Adams.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried; 4-0
Comm. Gatto moved to recommend approval of Application 21-Z-74.
Seconded by Comm. Adams.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion_ carried, 4-0
Comm. Gatto said he• felt this was a very good addition to the Monta
Vista area. Ms. McLaren thanked the commission for all their time
noting this had been in escrow since 1972.
Comm. Gatto also noted for the record that this land use for this
property was in fact 4.4 to 12 units per acre and this is the first
application that has come in at minimum.
12. Application 18-U-74 of MY HOUSE ( SOJOURN): USE PERNIT
to allow use of an existing structure for tavern and
restaurant. Said property is within a CG (General
Commercial) zone and is located at 10041 Pasadena
Avenue in Monta Vista. First Hearing continued.
The Planning Director said the property involved in on Pasadena
Avenue south of Stevens Creek Boulevard. The application is a
request to allow the conversion of an existing older home to a
PC -160
Page 29
Public Hear-
ing closed
16 -TM -74
approved WI
conditions
21-Z•-74
app roved
18 -UT -74
My House
PC -1.60 MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Page 30
commercial structure. The action of the Planning Commission is a final
action other than for ASAC review; it does not go on to City Council.
The City has in the past been in involved in a number of conversions.
Comm. Woodward ascertained the entire block is zoned commercial, but
Mr. Sisk did not know if it is presently in commercial.
Mr. Bruce Norling, 450 N. Mathilda Ave., Sunnyvale, explained their
plans for converting the 61 -year old house to a unique restaurant.
They would be open from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. They hoped to
draw their customers from students at De Anza and from the industrial
park. Entertainment would be recorded tape music kept to. a background.
volume.
Mr. Ncriing answered Chairman O'Keefe that they were using as their
model a restaurant in Phoenix, Arizona. Mr. Norling also stated
I they agreed to conditions.
Renderings were displayed and the architecture and landscape intent
described. 'They.were trying to entertain as in a private home.
Will have volleyball court, croquet, etc. In the indu.ustrial park,
only Measurex has cafeteria.
The hearing was opened to corimants from the audience.
Ms. Ann Anger, Mcnta Vista, referred to literature distributed by the
applicants. She .said she did nut like what she was reading. There
would be music outside. She would like to know more about it especially
since it is coming into Morita Vista. Being so close to the college she
hoped this wouldn't be another Berkeley. This looks and sounds more
like a hang-out. She doesn't want it in Monta Vista.
Ms. Judy La Fontaine, 10353 Imperial Avenue, Cupertino, said she had
the impression this would be mainly a clientele of singles. She
suggested opening the menu up a little more.
Ms. Barbara Trubeli, 10354 Imperial Ave., Cupertino, said she appre-
ciated originality of proposal_- and over the past several hours had
given consideration to it. She wonders about patronage. It might
become a "hippie haven" and encourage hippie types moving into the
Monta Vista area. She noted it is discouraging to see what some
of the college age group is doing to property ;they are buying or
renting. Grave consideration should be given this application in
so far as it is a precedent setting development of commercial along
Monta Vista, and Stevens ireek Ioulevard. She also spoke to traffic
situation and the impact of this application until improvements can
be made along Stevens Creek Boulevard. She referred to previous
application for homes starting at close to $70,000.00 just a few
blocks down from this proposed development.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
She respectfully requested that Planning Commission continue this
hearing so that more deliberate consideration could he given to
it and more people involved will have opportunity to express their
opinions.
Mr. Ronald Genenbacher, 1625 New Brunswick, Cupertino, said with
regard to, compatibility, Monta Vista is an old area. The building
will be restored. This blends in with existing neighborhood and
it has been zoned commercial. As to worry of becoming hang out
for De Anza students, the average age will be about 25-30 years.
The music will not be outside per se. They have spent much time
planning this unique restaurant and Monta Vista will not regret
it. The City will he setting a precedent but it is a good one.
In answer to Comm. Gatto, Mr. Genenbacher gave background of
Phoenix restaurant. He described the interior of their planned
establishment. They will seat 50 people and the average lunch
crowd will be 50-60 people.
In answer to Comm. Gatto regarding parking spaces, Mr. Genenbacher
said most people will be coming from industrial park two blocks
away. There will also be provision for bicycles. The Planning
Director said the ratio is one space for every four seats,
Comm. Adams asked if they anticipated patio areas would be occupied
during the evening. Mr. Genenbacher said they might during the
summer weekends.
Comm. Adams asked about ordinance controlling music outside
restaurants, etc. Mr. Sisk said there are no ordinances per se
in commercial zones requiring certain noise levels. The action
before the Commission tonight was whether or not to allow conver-
sion of residential structure to commercial use.
Ms. Ann Anger, Monta Vista, said these people are talking about
lunch from industrial park. What about evenings? People don't go
out to eat sandwiches, for dinner. She is really concerned about
having this type of establishment so close to the college. Monta
Vista is already loaded with hippies.
Ms. Myrtle Hering spoke to the rejuvination of the house. She
said it is a work of art. It was designed and built by the
architect of Palace of Legion of Honor. In answer to Comm. Gatto
she said it ha.d been documented in Monta Vista journals many years
ago.
Ms. Carol. Mitchell said she was the owner of the house. Just after
they had purchased it, there had been a fire and immediately it was
condemned. Her husband had to board it up and it has since been
devastated. She was happy somebody was coming along to redo it
instead of tearing it down.
PC -1.60
Page 31
PC -•16O
Pare 32
Public_
Hearing
closed
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING CCi'4ISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
In answer to Con. Adams, the surrounding property was described.
Mr. Genenbacher said there would be no liquor license since only
beer and wine would be sold. They *.sere not going into competition
with typical hippie establishment. There would not be any loud
bands.
Comm. Gatto questioned what recourse the City would have if a
commercial establishment becomes a public nuisance. The Deputy
Assistant City Attorney said they could send police or cut down,
on services. As to revoking business license, this _night not be
very effective unless there was a violation of criminal ordinance,
misdemeanor or disturbing of peace.
Comm. Adams noted this was a -request for converting residence to
tavern. Looking at plans presented, and with due respect to comments
heard from the audience, these young people are attempting to take
old residence an(i maintain it in a unique restaurant conception.
Fie suggested putting condition on use permit to satisfy concerns
of possible negatives. He complimented the applicants on their
endeavor. He would like to see conditions to insure it does not
become a source of noise or disturbance to the neighborhood.
Mr. Wenzel referred to Section 3.4, procedural guide for granting
Use permit. He said if they wanted to specifically Yondition
granting of use permit on negating these concerns, this could
be done and use permit revoked if conditions not adhered to.
Comm. Adams questioned if they could be conditioned for renewal
ona year to year basis. The Planning Director pointed out the
use permit is two -fold: allowing the conversion and on restaurant
utilizing outdoor areas. Mr. Genenbacher said noise seemed to be
main concern. They had talked to all the neighbors and nobody had
objected. This is expensive ordeal and the one-year renewal could
be very costly. There would be no outdoor activities after sundown,
but they would not like to go on year-to-year use permit.
Comm. Woodward noted it is not adjacent to zoned residential. lie
does understand concern of the citizens and it should be conditioned
to protect the City.
After further discussion, Comm. Gatto moved tc cicse Public Hearings.
Seconded by Comm. Woodward.
motion carried, 4-0
The Deputy Assistant City Attorney suggested adding an 18Th condition.
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Comm. Woodward said he was in the area and had looked at this block.
The house is a blight in itself. This represents a major break-
through in the reconstituting of the core area of Monta Vista with
a use compatible to commercial zoning. He hoped this would set a
tenor for revitalizing center part of Monta Vista which needs some
beautification and some reconstructing without replacing with
ultra modern buildings.
Comm. Adams moved to approve Application 18-U-74, subject to :14
standard conditions, and
(15) Approval is based upon Exhibit Z and B of 18-U-74,
as may be modifiedby additional conditions contained
herein.
(16) The proposed conversion of the residential structure
shall be submitted to the Architectural and Site
Approval Committee for review and upgrading of the
entire site.
(17) That the requirements of the newly adopted Uniform Fire
Code and the 1973 Uniform Building Code shall be
applicable to this conversion.
(18) That the permittee shall control all noise emitting from
the premises so as not to adversely affect adjoining
property or persons residing or traveling in that area,
and further, that activities conducted thereon shall not
in any manner constitute a nuisance.
Seconded by Comm. Gatto.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE: Recommendation for Negative
Declaration:
13, Application 44 -EA -74
Applicant: Louis Romano
Location: E. side of Stevens Creek Blvd. between
McClellan Road and St. Andrews Road
Present Zoning:CC (General Commercial)
Discretionary Action Requested: Application for rezon-
ing to R2--4.25 (Residential, duplex,
4,250 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) zone
and tentative map to divide .806 acres
into four lots.
PC -160
Page. 33
18-'J-74
approved WI
conditions
PC -1610
Page 34
44 -EA -74
Negative
Declaration
Filed !,
43 -EA --74
Negative
Declarattlon
- - Filed - --- I
46-.F.A-74
Negative
Declaration!.
Filed
MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1974
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward, to direct the
Planning Director to file a Negative Declaration on 44 -EA -74.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
14. Application 45 -EA -74
Applicant: Alice Siegrist (Jim D. Morelan)
Location: 10215 S. Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road
Present Zoning:CG (General Commercial)
Discretionary Action Requested: No application filed
as yet.
The Planning Director said this was for the U -Save Liquor shopping
center, an application will be requesting a change of zone to allow
1,100 sq. ft. of structure and complete upgrading of entire center.
Committee is recommending a Negative Declaration be filed.
Comm. Woodward moved, seconded by Comm. Adams, to direct the Planning
Director to file a Negative D ec_lar-ation on Application. 45--EA-74.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried, 4-0
15. Application 46 -EA -71t
Applicant: City of Cupertino
Project Name: De Anza Off-street Parking and Traffic
Facilities Assessment District
Location: Southeast corner of Stevens Creek Blvd.
and proposed West Valley Freeway
Present Zoning: BA (Public Building)
Discretionary Action Requested: The formation of asses; -
rent district to construct additional off-
street parking facilities and landscaping.
Comm. Adams moved, seconded by Chairman O'Keefe, to direct the
Planning Director to file a Negative Declaration on Application
46--EA-74.
AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
Motion carried. 4-0
MINUTES OF ADS. PLANNING COiI)SSON hEETTNC OF JUNE 27, 1974
RE2ORT OF THE [' NNING CC SfSSI0G
Comm. GatLo suggested the Bandley letter 5a carried. over to next
meeting.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR: None
ADJOUPjNNENT z
It was unanimously agreed to adjourn the meeting at 2:05 a.m. to
the next regular meeting on July 8, 1974.
■
APPROVE):
/s/ Daniel PO'Keefe
Daniel P. O'Keefe, Chairman
ATTEST:
/s/ Wm. E.Ryder
Ub E. Ryder, City Clerk
PC -160
Page 35
Adjour meat