The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Minutes - 10-16-1974CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California Telephone: 25 2 --4505 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING CO u1I SIO%N HELD ON OCTOBER 16, 1974 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, BERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by Chairman. fy;.eefe. ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Adams, Cooper, Woodward (6:10), Chairman O'Keefe Commissioner absent: Gatto Staff present: Director of Planning and Development Sisk. Associate Planner Cowan Chairman O'Keefe stated this was a continuation of the October 14 1974 meeting which had adjcurned at 12:10 a.m. The mode of discussionin future meetin,s_ r tiardint cuts. off tir.Ie. was introduced by Chairman O'Keefe. itwasdecided to wait until all members were present for this discussion. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE: Recommendation for Negative Declaration 12. Application. 56--EA-74 Applicant: Anthony Muselin*:. Project Name: Creeksine Villas Locat:ton: Miller Ave. at. Calabazas Creek Acreage: .334 acres Discretionary Action Requested: Rezoning from R3-2,2. (Resider ti_al, mu:.tiple, 2,200 sq. ft. per dwelling unit to P (Planned. Development: with residential, cluster. intent); Use Permit tc construct six s:i agle-family units. The Planning Director referred to work sheet and plan of project.. The question before the colninittee was whether the development o -t six units in this area would have effect on environment. It was decided an SIR should not be required. PC -169 Page 1 PC- 169 Pc! ge 2 5ti—°A-74 z -- tion filed Dec'"ara- i cri file c9 --EA 74 .-., ,Y -_g. Dec..ara- tion filed MINUTES OF THE ADS. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 16, 1974 The Planning Director answered Comm. Adams chat the 49? recreation/ open space was all the open space in project except driveways. Mr. Sisk noted the driveway access to *Miller A.,%enue_ would need close attention. Comm. Adams moved to direct staff to file Negative Declaration on 50--EA-74. Seconded by Comm. Cooper. Motion carried, 3-0-i. Abstain: Woodward 13. Application 58-EA-�74 Applicant: City of Cupertino Project Name: Stelling Road Storm Drain Location: Stelling Road Discretionary Action Requested: Construction of scorn sewer in a public street. The Planning Director located placement of this Public Works pro- f pct The maximum` size of pipe is 48 inches: varying in size. thi t foi nai l Park, it was ascertained there is no othe_r rtcriii drab i] in tnl.s area. COumm. Cooper moved to direct the Planning i rectos to file I Negative Declaration on 58--EA-74. Seconded by Comm. Woodward. Motion carried, 4--0 14. Application 59 -EA -74 Applicant: City of Cupertino Project Name: Saratoga -Sunnyvale Road Storm Drain Location: Saratoga -Sunnyvale. Road, Stevens Creek Blvd. to Freeway Ft. 280 Discretionary Action Requested: Construction of storm sewer in a public street. The Planning Director noted this was another Public Works project and located route of proposed drainage system. Comm. Adams moved to direct Planning Director to file Negative Declaration an 59 -EA -74. Seconded by Comm. Woodward. motion carried, 4-0 MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 16, 1974 15. Application 60 -EA -74 Applicant: Mate Sabic Project Name: Subdivision of lands of Mate Sabic Location: McClellan Rd. and Rae Lane Acreage: 1.11+ acres Discretionary Action Requested: Rezoning from Santa Clara County Al (1 ac.) to R1--7.5 (Residential, single-family, 7,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) and Tentative Map to subdivide parcel into five lots. The Planning Director said the property is on east side of Rae Lane The committee has reviewed the proposal to subdivide property into five single family lots and it is consistent with the General Plan for this area. Chairman O'Keefe was answered that one house will be removed and one house will remain pn property. Comm. Adams moved to direct Planning Director to file Negative Declaration on 60--EA-74. Seconded by Comm. Cooper. Motion carried, 4-0 REPORT OP' PLANNING CONPAISSION 16. Discussion relative to possible P.P.C.-sponsored Planning Commission workshop. Correspondence from P.P.C. was discussed. It was agreed by all four commissioners that one 8 -hour meeting on weekend was preferred. The extensive course sponsored by P.P.C. at UC Santa Cruz was noted. All four commissioners expressed interest and staff was instructed to inform P.P.C. they would prefer the Thursday night dinner/lecture for. the. 10 -week series. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR 17. Discussion of Planning Commission representation at City Council meetings. PC- 169 Page 3 60 -EA -74 Neg. Declara- tion filed The Planning Director asked if this commission. felt there was a problem in the way things were being presented to the City Council. C -1f,9 MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 16, 1974 Comm. Cooper said she did, noting it was very difficult to give the feeling for what kind of discussions went on. She felt if there was a representative of each body at the other's meeting there could be better communication on kinds of concerns, feelings and reasonings for coming to a decision. She would like to see a pilot program to this effect tried. Chairman O'Keefe felt the communication was good. He felt confi- dent Mr. Sisk was representing them and their presence was not necessary, but if this is what is wanted, he would be happy to cooperate. He felt the logistics would be difficult. IIe noted he calls individual Councilmen to get information: He also noted anyone representing this commission might be giving their opinion and not that of the entire body. The Planning Director said staff reports to City Council would attempt to capture essence of what was done. He would prefer to have recording secretary be told what they want included in minutes than have representative. Sometimes there could be cr_:it. J_` ct between representative and staff and this should be + Comm. .'.dams . felt in the. majority of cases the communication was very good. There might be two items out of 50 that were con- testable testable and it was certainly not necessary to have representa- tion for this small percentage. - Comma Woodyard said he felt it important to have a representative come from City Council when some issue has been turned back to the Planning Commission. When something is to be contested, a commissioner should be present at the City Council meeting. Sometimes the -rationale and underlying thoughts don't get communicated in minutes. He referred to Jack -in -the -BOX, noting he has gone to several Council meetings. Although he doesn't usually speak, he did speak on that issue to put Planning Commission I ! position on record. On denials that will be appealed, the rationale for findings should clearly appear as part of records. 1 F Comm. Adams suggested staff could call chairman if denial is to be appealed so representative could be present. Comm. Woodward said both times he spoke he stressed that he was speaking to point of information as Planning Commissioner, not, as a private citizen. The Planning Director suggested findings should be very clearly enunciated and stated in resolutions. It was decided to have a representative present on denials. MINUTES OF THE ADJ. PLANNING COiAIISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 16, 1974 The Planning Director felt a joint meeting between City Council. and Planning Commission several times a year to discuss general concepts and what is wanted for the City would be helpful. The meetings would be open. The members of. the Commission agreed. The Planning Director then summarized that to provide better communication between the Planning Commission and City Council, a better job would be done on resolutions and on written and oral reports, and the chairman would be advised of any appeals: Comm. Adams noted the Council should be asked to look at denials just from an appeals standpoint. Mr. Sisk said this could be a good subject for a joint meeting. Conference scheduling and arrangements were discussed. It was agreed the commissioners would try to cover as many presentations as possible between them and then report back on. those attended. Mr. Sisk said the -procedural ordinance would 'be opened again. The affected property owners would be notified and it is up to the local jurisdiction to decide who would be affected. With -regard to implementation of General Plan, will be notifying people that zoning will be changed. Comm. Cooper reported she would be giving a 5 --minute presentation on :crank case oil recycling at the conference. Comm. Woodward. questioned since EIRs are not public hearings, If notices went out to the applicants. The Planning Director said they did. Provisions for appeals were discussed. Mr. Sisk noted there is a provision in law that says there must be a ten day waiting period before any action can be taken. Comm. Cooper noted the last EIR was excellent. Comm. Woodward commended the format in particular. ADJOURNMENT At 7:15 p.m. the meeting was unanimously adjourned to October 29, 1974 at 7:30 p.m. APPROV EDD : /s/ Daniel P. O'Keefe Chairman ATTEST: ` /s/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk PC -169 Page 5