Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes - 11-25-1974CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR Ik ET [NG OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON O1'EXiER 25, 1974 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL CUPS RTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Chairman O'Keefe called the meeting to order at 7:42 p.m. with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Comm. present: Adams, Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe Comm. absent: None Staff present: City Attorney Adams Director of Planning and Development Sisk Director of Public Works Viskovich Associate Planner Cowan APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 28, 1974: Page 3, second paragraph after the first motion, second line: Delete the first word "that" and replace with "but". Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to approve the Minutes of October 28, 1974 as amended. Motion carried, 5-0 Minutes of Adjourned Regular Meeting of November 6, 1974. Page 4, paragraph 7, first line: Delete "wide house range avail- ability" and replace with "availability of a wide range of housing' Page 5, paragraph 7, delete last two lines and replace with: "the wide range curve was used below the 20% slope point. He suggested fairing out to Gatto-Woodward curve at this point." Page 5, paragraph 8, first line, after the word "slope" insert "on the wide range curve". PC -174 Page 1. Oct. 28th Minutes approve as corrected Pc -174 Page 2 Nov. 6th Minutes approved as corrected 7-Z-74 and 8-Z-74 dropped from calendar 13-Z-74 cont'd lo Dec. 9th 9-Z-:74 cont'd to Dec. 9th MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING CO11t1ISSION MEETING Page 6, first paragraph, second line, delete "ferreting" and replace with "fairing'.'.. First word in third line should be "in" rather than "on". Page 6, second paragraph, delete the word "are" and replace with "shall be". Page 6, strike entire last paragraph. Page 6, next to the last paragraph, lines 3 and 5, change "creek" to "creep". Replace the word "transfer" on second line with "calculations". Page 7, paragraph.4, add "outside the urban service boundary" to the end of the sentence. Moved by Comm. Gat -to, seconded by Comm. Woodward to approve the Minutes of November 6, 1974. POSTPONEMENTS: Motion carried, 5-0 Items 1, 2, 3 & 4 (Applications 7-Z.-74, 8-Z-74, 74,.i3Z-74) The Planning Director said that, due to recent work, a different approach should be considered for. items L and 2. Item 3 is presently commercial property and is located in the Regnart Canyon area. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to drop applications 7-Z-74 and 8-Z-74 from the calendar and to instruct the staff to readvertise them at a later date. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Cooper, seconded by Comm. Gatto to continue application 13-Z-74 to the next regular meeting and instruct the staff to notify all property owners of the December 9, 1974 public hearing on this matter. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to continue application 9-Z-74 to the next regular. meeting. Motion carried, 5-0 WRITTEN COMMLTNICAT IONS -- None. COMMUNICATIONS -- None. MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 19.74 PLANNING COMMISSION U ETING PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application 7-Z-74 -- DROPPED FROM CALENDAR. 2, Application 8-Z-74 -- DROPPED FROM CALENDAR. 3. Application 9-Z-74 -- CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 9, 1974, 4. Application 13-Z-74 - CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 9, 1974. 5. Applications 30-Z-74 and 28-U-74 of ANTHONY MUSOLINO: REZONING .384 acre from R3-2.2 (Residential, multiple, 2,200 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) to P (Planned Development with residential, cluster intent) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; USE PERMIT to allow construction of six single-family units. Said property is located adjacent to and westerly of Miller. Avenue at the southwest intersection of Miller Avenue and Calabazas Creek approximately 120 feet northerly of Greenwood Court. First Hearing continued. The Associate Planner said the original public hearing on this application was continued to allow the applicant to make some changes in the plan, per the direction of the Commission. There was concern about the ingress/egress at Miller Avenue at peak hours, There was also concern about noise intensityin the courtyard within the development. The Associate Planner then reviewed the updated plans showing four two-story units and a parking ratio of 3.25 to 1. The present plan also allows the cars to maneuver so they do not back out onto Miller Avenue. At such time as the Flood Control District completes its study, it may ask for additional dedication from this property. There followed a review of the staff's suggested conditions of approval of this application. Comm. Cooper wanted the applicant to speak to the special storage provisions for unit 4. Mr. Roger Griffin, of Dick Finnegan's Office, said it would be possible to provide some storage over the single -level element to allow for what would normally be stored in a garage. He said they are in agreement with the conditions recommended by the staff except for Condition 20, although they feel they could live with it. PC -174 Page 3 Chairman O'Keefe asked for comments from the audience. There were none. PC -174 Page 4 MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5--0 Comm. Woodward commented that unit 1 faces the street, and this cuts unit 1 off from the other three units. Chairman O'Keefe felt this made it look more like a single-family residence. Comm. Gatto said this was a much superior plan to the original one. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to recommend to the City Council approval of application 30-Z-74, subject to the 14 standard conditions and conditions as enumerated in the November 22, 1974 staff report with the exception that condition 18 shall be deleted and "private streets" be changed to read "private driveways". AYES: Comm. Adams, Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe NOES: None o iot n CarrieO Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to approve application 28-U-74, subject to the same conditions as recommended for the zoning. AYES: Comm. Adams, Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe NOES: None Motion carried, 5•-0 The Planning Director noted that these items will be set for public hearing before the City Council, and the applicant will be duly notified. 6. CITY OF CUPERTINO: Public Hearing for annual review of five-year capital improvement program. The Director of.Public Works summarized the -Five Year Capital Improvements Program. It was presented to the City Council who subsequently referred it to the Planning Commission and citizens committee for input. He felt the'Community Development Act could be dovetailed with the Five Year Capital Improvements Program work. Comm. Adams asked the staff to prioritize the items, taking those projects that have a natural need first. Comm. Woodward was answered by the Planning Director that by the week of December 2nd a written survey questionnaire will be sent out to all MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING On December 17th there will be one public hearing before the City Council and another on January 13th there will be one public hear- ing held jointly with the Planning Commission, hopefully to solidify our approach to implementation of the Housing and Communit Development Act. It is hoped this will be finalized at the February 3rd City Council meeting. About a half -million dollars are involved here, over a 3 -year period. There can be some amend- ments to the the City's decisions in the second and third years. The money is distributed on a population basis. There will be no. outlay of City money other than staff time. Comm. Woodward was in favor of prioritizing objectives. Comm. Cooper would like to allow time for the citizens committee to prioritize the items and the Planning Commission should have this input before making recommendations to the City Council. She suggested the Director of Public Works just call attention to the changes made to the Capital Improvements Program and on December 9th the Commission could go into the Program in depth, and hope to get citizen input. Comm. Adams suggested the unprogrammed items be listed separately in the report, Mr. Bob Gonzales, 10461 Stokes Avenue, Cupertino, representing the Capital Improvements Committee, said the Committee has just met briefly once so far. They felt that they were not notified in time and therefore decided not to come up with a recommendation, pro or con. They have decided they would like to review the Capital Improvements Program but probably would not in time to report to the Planning Commission. Their report will probably go directly to the City Council. They briefly reviewed the staff's report and noted several items that they did not recognize. Also, two more years have been added to the Program. He answered Comm. Woodward that it is questionable whether the Committee would be ready to make a recommendation by February 3rd. The steering committee has decided to invite the Committee as a whole to parti- cipate in this project. Last January the City Council went througi the entire program at one, long public hearing, taking into con- sideration the input from the Planning Commission, the Capital Improvements Program Committee and the general public. Comm. Gatto said it appears the Housing and Development Act public hearings will be held chiefly at the City Council level. It appeal the Capital Improvements Program will be reviewed in depth by the Committee. He felt the Planning Commission should review the two programs as they relate to the General Plan. PC -174 Page 5 PC -174 rage 6 Capital Improv. Program cort'd MINUTES 0I' THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Chairman O'Keefe to continue this public hearing to December 9, 1974, with the express purpose that this Commission study the matter as it relates to the General Plan. Motion. carried, 5-0 Application 30-U-74 of DONALD WIENER AND PAUL CASTANEDA: USE PERMIT to allow retail tire sales in an existing service station. Said property is located at southwest corner of the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Pasadena Avenue. First Hearing. The Associate Planner located the property on the aerial photograph. The application is for approval of a use permit to allow retail tire sales in a former service station structure. The staff recommended the use be limited to two years. A plan line study for that portion of Stevens Creek Blvd. has not been resolved as yet. It will have a drastic effect on this property. Demographics are presently being studied so the traffic study can be updated. The staff recommends limit the improvement requirements normally associated with a commercial _e\e1opment i the un. ers an ir_g that the .use > s a temporary one Comm. Gatto askedwhat the time frame is for the Stevens Creek Blvd, improvements, The Associate Planner said this work has been delayed because of the Housing and Community Development Act work. It involves two, phases: street width and street alignment. The City Attorney answered Comm. Gatto that all things considered, what is being proposed is reasonable. He urged the City to work out the problem of street width as soon as possible. Comm. Cooper asked what would happen if the project is approved, a minimal amount of landscaping is put in, and then the City decides not to widen the street, The City Attorney said there is the two-year limitation on this use permit, at the end of which time it shall be reviewed_ Mr. Martin Hall said he was representing the applicant. He strongly suggested keeping the alignment of Stevens Creek Blvd. in a straight line rather than curve it to the south. He said these people are willing to improve this property and would like to run a successful business. He has paid taxes on this property for the past two years. He said they will keep the weeds down and will put a mansard roof on the building, as required by the City, MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC -174 Page 7 Comm. Gatto wanted to insure that the applicant was aware that this use permit is for a two-year period only. He asked if all service$ will take place within the structure. Mr. Hall said they will not be changing tires outside the structure. Mr. Hall answered Comm. Adams that the applicant presently has a similar business in Los Altos, across from the post office. Ms. Ann Anger, Monta Vista, said this proposal for the Stevens Creek Blvd. plan line sounded quite different from the one pre- sented the previous year. Also, the use for this property is different from the proposal made the previous year. She would 1 to see the plans before this use permit is approved. Ms. Anger said she has heard about the widening of Stevens Creek Blvd. for some twenty years. Because this does not get resolved, nobody can improve their property in Monta Vista along this street, She was upset to hear of the possibility of a loop for Stevens Creek Blvd. through Monta Vista. Ms. Anger asked how much the unincorporated area will receive of •the anticipated half -million dollars from HUD. Comm. Cooper said these funds will be expended in a manner as decided upon after receipt of citizen input. Ms. Anger said the 137,000 people living in the unincorporated area are still waiting for their portion of last year's revenue sharing funds. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 Comm. Cooper wanted to add to the end of Condition 16 that the Planning Commission will review the use permit at the end of a two-year period. Moved by Comm. Cooper, seconded by Comm. Gatto to approve applica- tion 30-U-74 with the 14 standard conditions and conditions 15 through 18, including the addition to condition 16. Comm. Gatto asked the City Attorney if, at the end of 2 years some decision has not been made to improve Stevens Creek Blvd. within another 3 years, what options are open to the City. The City Attorney said the use could be continued. AYES: Comm. Adams, Cooper, Gatto, Woodward NOES: None ABSTAINED: Chairman O'Keefe 30-U-74 approved Motion carried, 4-0-1 pc--174MINUTESOF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 8 I Application 10-V-74 of HOWARD E. MALLETT: VARIANCE from Section 16.28.010 of the Fence Ordinance to allow a 6 -foot hedge across the front property line. Said property is. located at 20699 Rodrigues Avenue in a residential, single— family zone. Second Hearing. Mr. Mallett showed colored slides of his property in relation to the other properties of his neighbors. He said he had already had a public hearing but had not received a copy of the staff report in time to prepare a rebuttal. r. Mallett gave hispersonal thoughts as to why he felt he should receive the variance. The plot plan was displayed on the screen. He said there is no truth to the statement that the hedge blocks the Iview of the adjacent neighbor. There is a 10' space between the hedge and the street. The hedge is about 12 years old. There is a large pyracantha bush and telephone pole blocking children or other people from walking directly behind his neighbor's car as it backs out of the driveway. He said the hedge is not "unaesthetic". He had statements of people on the block who have no objection to his hedge. Mr. Mallett explained how his is an exceptional s:itt ion.. There. are o two -Story hOeEn ei aer S1d�dT with his neighbors being able to look directly in his front windows. �Unless he keeps his drapes closed at all times, it is possible for ppeople to look through his entire house and back to the pool area from the front street. In the summer the hedge helps -cut down noise, dust and exhaust fumes and chemical spray. He said his wife's doctor has written down statements as to her allergies. Lastly, he said the hedge keeps unwanted. intruders off the property. Mr. Mallett said that if he were 20 years younger and had more time and money he would consider putting in a new hedge farther back and within the ordinance. H.e said he does not have another 10-12 years to grow another hedge farther back. There is no safety factor involved here. The hedge does not block the Hillquist's view, he summarized. He said he had pictures of other landscaping in Cupertino and in the immediate area that is also illegal. he trailer on the Hillquists' driveway was noted in the pictures. The City Attorney quoted the law in regard to the granting of variances. The October 2, 1974 memo from the Planning Director sets forth these conditions. The City Attorney said that the Planning Commission is required to make findings that are to be forwarded to the City Council. He added that Fence Ordinance No. 112 was adopted in 1960. MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Chairman O'Keefe asked for comments from the audience. Mrs. John E. Hilquist, 30685 Rodrigues Avenue, Cupertino, referred to details in her letter of November 8, 1974, to the City. She said her property was sprayed by a normal spray and the Malletts called the police and signed a complaint. She contends the hedge does obstruct the view from her driveway. She said the accident she was involved in involved a young student driver who wasn't looking. Mr. Mallett rebutted that the only reason she hit the young student was because she wasn't looking. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Cooper to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 Comm. Gatto said he believes the Code, as written, needs some work. We have a number of instances in the City where we have plants above 6in height within the setback line. He believes the intent of the ordinance is to prohibit blocking of view. He believes the character of that side of the street is somewhat different from the history of other subdivisions. It is unfor- tunate a neighborhood disagreement is involved in this ordinance. He believes some slight trimming of the hedge might solve the problem here. Comm. Woodward noted on the pictures some bicycle tracks on that 9' wide strip which go out to the street at the pyracantha bush, which is probably more than 3' high and could create a. safety hazard. He suggested something further be done to prohibit bikes riding all along the frontage. Comm. Cooper agreed that perhaps this ordinance needs some rework. For instance, many people in Cupertino have high plants along their 6' fences. She does not see extraordinary circumstances that apply to this property more than to other properties. She noted that 2 out of .3 of the criteria would not allow granting of this variance. Comm. Adams stated that it appears that because of a dispute between some neighbors we have a variance request. This is a .Planning Commission. Our ordinance needs a little review to help us out of this situation. If this request of denied there will be a lot of clipping and pruning that will have to be done all over town. He would like to put this request in abeyance until the ordinance can be updated. Chairman O'Keefe agreed. The Planning Director estimated this could be done by the January 13, 1975, meeting. PC -174 Page 9 PC -174 Page 10 10-V-74 continued to Jan. 13th Hillsides discussion continued to Dec. 9th MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Chairman O'Keefe to reopen the public hearing on application 10-V-74. Motion carried, 5--0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to continue application 10-V-74 for the express purpose of a more definitive review of the Fence Ordinance, and to be placed on the January 13, 1975 agenda. Motion carried, 5--0 At this point it was moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to continue agenda item 11 a (Hillsides) to December 9, 1974. Motion carried, 5-0 hairman O'Keefe called a 'zecess=-at 1f -:30 P -.M-. -The meeting reconvened t 10:40 P.M. Chairman 0 heete left the meeting. Vice -Chairman Gatto called the meeting back to order at 10:40 P.M. 9. CITY OF CUPERTINO: Public Hearing to consider vacation of 20 -ft. walkway easement at Riedel Place, behind Portal Park. The Associate Planner explained that the City had received a petition signed by some 40 residents within the Wheaton Drive/ Riedel. Place/ McLaren Place neighborhood requesting the walkway easement connecting Riedel Place to Portal Park be abandoned. Said petition outlined deviant behavior occurring at the south end of the park and on Riedel Place. The Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the case and has subsequently recommended closure of Riedel Place. Comm. Adams asked the staff what would then happen to the property if abandoned. The Director of Public Works stated this property was granted to the City at the time of filing of the final map. Comm. Adams noted that the City would not want to maintain it if it is abandoned. The City Attorney said it would revert back to the original owner, The Director of Public Works said the adjacent property owners could landscape it and incorporate it into their landscaping. Mr. Robert Harrington, 10183 Riedel Place, stated his house has been burglarized; there are large spots on his two-story house, and his yard has been littered with a collection of garbage. They have received vocal abuse as well. There has been late -night activity within the MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, ].974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Mr. Harrington said they have four small children. They would rather put up with the inconvenience of having to go around to get into the park than put up with these problems. He said he is not particularly anxious to acquire the additional property, but would be happy to cooperate. Mr. Fred Kinney, property owner on the other side of the access, said he agrees very much with the comments of Mr. Harrington. He, too, purchased this home because of the access to the park. But now this closure will help them, although he feels it will not solve the basic problem at the park. He said he would be more tha willing to take care of the property after it is put into conditioi to be taken care of. He answered Comm. Cooper that there is no lighting of the park in that area. This pocket is dark and is concealed behind the knoll just inside the park. This area is not visible from the street nor from inside the park unless you actually go there. The Planning Director recommended a meeting with the Parks and Recreation. Commission to discuss the problems with this park de- sign. Mrs. Marlene C. Phipps stated she had met with the Parks and Recreation Commission and had quite a discussion about drinking and drugs. The people along Wheaton Drive are concerned about through traffic going •down there to Valico Park shopping center. Mr. Merrill Brooksby_said he lives at the end of Wheaton Drive and, Riedel Place. He said at the present time we are doing something', that will be of minimal effect in creating the kind of situation we want at the park. The path recently .put in is for the school children. He suggested other things to help solve the problem such as additional lighting, gates that could be locked,. etc. He would like to see significant improvements made to al- leviate the problem before blocking the entrance. Mrs. Phipps stressed that an interim solution is needed. Mrs. C. Trieckel said- she does not believe that a half -block walk is going tobe that inconvenient for anybody. The reason they were at this meeting was not to clean up the park but because they want clean up Riedel Place. She does not want to be out there, cleaninf up the broken bottles and cans every morning. Master Ray Brooksby said he agrees with the request to clean up the park and the plaza. The fence would help at night, but it would hurt during the day. He felt a gate would be all right. PC -174 Page 11 0 PC -174 !MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 12 Mrs. Rochelle Gutmann, Riedel Place, said the problem starts at 2 and 3 P.M., not at night. She questioned how people would know when to go and lock the gate. She said the citizens said they were told at the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting that installation of lights would he a waste of money because they would be shot out anyway. Comm. Adams suggested closing off Riedel Place, retaining the ownership of the right-of-way, and asking the Parks and Recreation Commission to plant pyracantha along both sides of the fence. This would eliminate the problem of the kids jumping over the fence because it has thorns. Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Comm. Cooper. was concerned about putting up a gate here. Closing of the right-of-way does not solve the real. problem. The City of Cupertino is - going to have to address this problem and enforcement is probably the answer. 'it will cost some money. She said she would opt for closing off n it lo�t�e�-�f� no on,-���i�^�; �e at all. �` de`d el Place and making- Rie-d-el -P ac€- ----- Bair d -:-by _C.omm..- Mama ;seconded by --Comm. W«o 7 rdto close -_the- side park . opening walkway easement to stay within the ownership of the City, per the recommended recommendation'of the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation. for closure In addition, pyracantha should be planted on both sides and the Parks and Recreation Commission should review the.landscapi.ng design. Comm. Gatto said he was in general agreement with the closure of the easement. But we have a much deeper problem here. All these great planning concepts for providing neighborhood access to City parks seemed desirable. This amenity concept needs some close scrutiny. AYES: Comm. 'Adams, Cooper, Gatto, Woodward NOES: None ABSENT: Chairman O'Keefe Motion carried, 4-0 Minute Order to Comm. Adams offered a Minute Order to the Parks and Recreation Commission P & R Comm. requesting them to attempt to find a way to work with the school to modify walkway strip near the playground area. It was noted there are motorcycles that go -from Portal to Blaney here. Comm. Woodward added to the Minute •10rder that a review of the cul-de-sac area behind the berms should be considered for additional planting. MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 10. CITY OF CUPERTINO: Public Hearing to review supplemental statements of policy to the Goals of Cupertino regarding annexation of unincorporated territory. The Planning Director stated this was referred to the Planning Commission for review and comments. It was generally felt by the Commission that this document needed more work before being given out to the general public. Moved by Comm. Cooper, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Moved by Comm. Cooper., seconded by Comm. Adams to drop this item from the calendar and readvertise at a later date Motion carried, 4-0 11. CITY OF CUPERTINO: Public Hearing to consider 1973 Comprehensive General Plan. a. Hillsides CONTINUED T8 DECEMBER 9 174. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE: Recommendation for Negative Declaration 12. Application: 64 -EA -74 Applicant: Roderic. E. & Gloria G. Castor Location: 22433 Santa Paula Avenue Discretionary Action . Requested: Prezoning-from Santa Clara County R-1 to City of Cupertino R1-10 (Residential single-family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwell- ing unit) PC -174 Page 13 Goals policy statements dropped from agenda for the present PC -174 Page 14 64 -EA -74 neg. decl. 65 -EA -74 neg, decl. 66 -EA -74 neg. decl. 67 -EA -74 neg. decl. MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 25, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Cooper to instruct the Planning Director to file a negative declaration on 64 -EA -74. Motion carried, 4-0 13. Application: 65 -EA -74 Applicant: City of Cupertino Discretionary Action Requested: Amendment to City Ordinance No. 220 by adding the Zone R1C (Residential, single-family Cluster Zone) Moved by Comm. Cooper, seconded by Comm. Adams to instruct the Planning Director to file a negative declaration on 65 -EA -74. Motion carried, 4-0 14. Application: 66 -EA -74 -. Applicant: City of Cupertino Discretionary Act -ion Requested • Amendmen-t to. City _Ordnne< -No- _O02_ by adding the zoning classification entitled "Park and Recreation" Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Woodward to instruct the Planning Director to file a negative declaration on 66 -EA -.74. 15. Application: Applicant: Discretionary Action Requested: Motion carried, 4-0 67 -EA -74 City of Cupertino Amendment to City Ordinance 220 and regulating, residential single-family (R-1) zones. Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Adams to instruct the Planning Director to file a negative declaration on 67 -EA -74. Motion carried, 4-0' 0 tl::f;t'f5 ') 1:... ::O'r:iBER 25, 1974 PLANIG COSLSSTON MEr'rING 16. t.pplication: Appl ic:at Project Nanne: Location: Discretionary Action Requested: Moved by Cc:am. Adams, sec Planning Director to file 68 -EA -74 So`>rato-Berg Properties Valley Green Business Park - Unit 11 Valley Green Drive and Bandley Drive Application has not been filed. ..nded by Comm. Cooper to instruct the a negative declaration on 68 -EA -74. Motion carried, 4-0 REPORT OF THE PLANNING COH-1ISSION -- Nothing further. REPORT OF 2?:r_ PLANING DIRECTOR On Saturday, January 18, 1975 there will be an all -day PPC meeting The Planning Commissioners were invited to attend the Dece-;.per 19th H -Control meeting. Conmissioner „ocdward reported on the hike the previous Saturday with the ''Trails" people, along the railroad tracks, through the Creston subdivision, etc. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Cooper to adjourn the meeting at 12:05 A.M. ATTEST: /s/ Wm. E. Ryder. City Clerk Motion carried, 4-0 APPROVED: /s/ Daniel P.O'Keefe Chairman PC -17- 68 -EA -74 neg. decl'.