The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 04-17-67 . . . . . 10300 '!'orre Avenue. Cupertino, Calif., 95014 Phone: 252-4505 CITY OP CUPERTINO Cal1f'onûa ø&Â. OJI 'l'JII RIIJULAR ............ OPTHB CITY wûeIL - APRIL 17, 1967 pr.......' Council CbalDber. 10300 '!'orre Avenue, Cupert1Do T~ 8100 P.M. z SADJ'fB TO 'l'IIB n.aø n ROLL CALL Counc. present: D peter (8:25), Johrulon, Roel, Stokes, fttzpra1d Counc. absent: ame MaJOr Stokes introduced the staff to the audience: Staff present: Cit7 Manager, Phil Storm Clt7 Attorney. Sam Anderson Clt7 Clerk. Bill RJder Director ot Public Works, Prank P1nney DireCtor ot Planning, Adde !Aur1n Cl t7 Bng1neer, Be b Shook Director of Parks. Recreat1on, John Parham Aaalatant Planner, Jim Nuzum Cb1et Build1ng Inspector, Bill Benev1ch Record1ng Secretary, Lois In_rds mrr.1Ir.TI0N 011 0PP1C111S POR IŒX'l' TIRII xn: Mayor Stokes thanked the members of the C~ur.('1l and the statt tor the1r support and cooperation th1s pest year. A. MAYOR Moved by Counc. Jomson, seconded by Counc. Noel, to no1l1nate Counc. JP1tqerald for the office of Ma70r. AYES: NAD: ABSTAINED: a~mrr: Counc. Johnson, Noel, Stokes None Counc. JP1tzgerald Counc. Detapster Motion carr1ed, 3-0 MaJOr Fitzgerald. Spepking tor the entire Counc1l, thank8'1 to~r Ma70r Stokes tor the good Job he has done this pept year 1n in1tiat1ng policies and 1n running the meet1ngs. -1- , B. MAYOR PRO TBMI'ORB IIoved by Counc. Stokes, seconded by Counc. Johnson, to no1I1nate Counc. Hoel tor -the office ot Vice-Mayor. " ADS: aD: A1ØfADBD: ·"--.-f: . Counc. Johnson, Stokes, Fitzgerald IIone counc. Bo81 COunc. ~-418ter IIotion carried, 3-0 c. '1'RIISU1IIR IIoved by COunc. lIoel. seconded by Counc. JohnsOn, to ..-1nate COunc. Stokes as 'l'reaslU'er. ADS: BAYS: aM1Dl'l': counc. Johnson. Hoel, Stokes, Fitzgerald Hone Counc. Dempster MOtion carried, 3-0 . D. VICB-TRBASUIŒR Moved by Counc. Stokes, seconded by Counc. Hoel, to nom1nate Counc. Dempster to the otf1ce of V1ce-Treasurer. AYES: HAYS: ABSINT: Counc. Johnson, Noel, Stokes, Fitzgerald None Counc. Dempster Mot10n carried, 3-0 . IV MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS JlUSa"uNGS - Apr1l 3 I: 10, 1961 Avr1l 3: Page 7, paragraph 6, Counc. Stokes asked that the . t1rat sentence be str1ken from the record, as he does not pre-Judge an app11cat10n. Page 8, paragraph 7, Counc. Johnson would like to strike the ent1re paragraph and have 1t rewr1tten as follows: .Counc. Johnson sa1d cOIIIDerc1al development ot this large s1ze 1s go1ng to produce a lot of problema. He be11eves this large plant 1s unworkable on this small lot, but the zon1ng 1s workable w1th certain protections 1nsured for R-l 1n the area. Moved by Counc. Stoke:sJ. seconded by Counc. Noel, that the Minutes of Apr1l 3, 1';101, be approved as corrected. Mot1on carr1ed, 4-0 Moved by Counc. Stokes. seconded by Counc. Johnson, to ap- . prove the M1nutes of Apr1l 10, 1967. as recorded. Mot10n carr1ed, 4-0 -2- J.: .. - . . . t , , 1. I i V ORAL AND WRITTEN CCIIIIUNlCATIONS A. Mr. Tom Traeumer, 22284 De Anza Circle, Cupertino, spoke on beha1t or the 1ndiv1dur,ls who tormed a group 1n the 1nterest or ~v1ng the C1ty ot Cupertino. They were disappo1nted tbat the Council cUd not to11OW through on their 1ntent1.oD of hav1ng one member or the Council present at~la8t Board ot Superrisora' Meeting in regard to tbie Jluarry. Be aaked that, 1n tbe future, the CoUDOn IrØP a closer eye on wlat 1s lappen1ng up 10 tlat area. as 1t 1s very s1gnU1cant to the future ot CUpert1Do. B. Mr. Louia Stock1M1r, 22120 Stevena Creek Blvd., Cupertino, was concerne4 about a mot1on paased. 3-2, at the April 3M Council ...t1ng, that the Council sba11 uee the services or 01117 those travel agencies located within the C1ty 11ld.ts. He spoke on behalf or Bianca Macchi, 2453 Foreat Avenue, San Jose. and read her letter, stating tbat ahe 1I8a concerned why such action 1I8S taken 1n favor or one apec1f1c travel agenc)'. She teels thia 1s setting a precedent. Even though her bus1nesS 1s not located 10 Cupert1no, she feels hers 1s not an 1301ated situation. On these bases, she asked that the motion be resc1nded. Adding to Mrs. Macch1's statements, Mr. Stocklme1r noted that the theory behind this act10n is admirable, but perhaps 1t was done 1n haste, w1thout reflect1ng on the ramificat10ns of 1t. Mrs. Macch1 1s Cupert1no's Ambassadress to our S1ster Cit7 1n Italy. She has gone out of her way to help our C1ty along and has spent much of her t1me and money 1n this respect. In add1tion, she has the background necessary for th1s Sister City relationship. As a c1t1zen of Cupert1no, Mr. Stocklme1r asked for recons1derat10n on th1s matter. May~r F1tzgerald clar1fied that the aoeve was a Minute Order, not an Ord1nance. It w111 be reevaluated. WRI'l"l'EN COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter of Apr11 17, frOM Mr. Robert van der Toorren, stat1ng he wanted to clar1fy that he was represent1ng the Board ot Governors, Pen1nsula Fine Arts League, w1thout compensat10n. B. Letter of April 14, from Jackson P. G111am, 1n regard to applicat10n 265-HC-67. C. Letter of April 15, from Hugh F. Jackson, appealing Arch. & S1te Control decision on appl1cat10n 265-HC-67. D. Letter of April 17. from James A. Prost, ask1ng that app11cation 4-U-67 be continued until the second meet1ng 1n June. -3- ~" ~.,. ",' t~ .:' - ,-c, ~ E. Letter of April 13, from Jea~ Pullan, stac1ng Library Commiss10ner Hugh L. Monahan's term w1ll soon exp1re and that he is unable to cont1nue. The Board of Superv1sors asJœd ror recommendat1ons by JW1e 1st. '. F. Letter ot Apr.11. 11th. from Mr. Walter Ward, General Mlt.nager ot Va11CO ,Park, in regard to asses81IIents tor Project 64-1. ' G. Letter ot A~l 17, trom Mrs. Luc1en Hertert, 22380 San Juan Road. announc1ng the May 1st concert at 7:30 P.M. at CUpertino High School. Mayor Fitzgerald coanended this worthy activity and urged all who could to attend. Counc. Stokes noted that the Counc1:, at the meet1ng of April 3rd, agreed there should be no more cont1nuances on appl1cat10ns l-u-67 and 4-U-67, reflecting that this . detero1nation was made atter Mr. Crocker had pat1ently sat through a long C0W1c11 meeting on:y to f1nd that the other appl::a::t in a s1milar case had re~"..Iested a postponement. . Mr. ~~~~~: Crocker said that, after "iste~i~~ :0 the other ser>':ce s:at10n manager's lette", ~e wO"..lld agree to this furt:-.er postponement. . Move': :~: :ounc. Jor....9'l50n, secor:.:iej to; Cou:--.c. !;?e:'. to con:~~'..:ë 3.pp11cat1ons l-u-67 a::'::--'!-¿: :0 tr,e 3econd mee:~~~ ~~ June, b~~ w~th no f~~~~er co~~~~ua~ces to te gra=--;:ej. AYES: NAYS: ABSE~:: : 2ounc. Jor~so~, Noel, :~::~eF~.d 20unc. Stokes ':-ounc, De:::pster . Mo:lon carried. '-' Move::' t:.- ':-ounc. Noel, seconded ty :'.:n:;c. Stokes, to receive the Ä:,~::en commun1cat1ons. Mot10n carried, -. 71 A. ~?'2:n' OF PIANNING COMMISSI')~ (See ~nutes of Apr1l 10 & ::, 19ó7) Chain::-.a.~ 3uthenuth rev1ewed act:.:>~ taken 0:: 3-v-67 and 1-~-67 ty the Planning Commission. 1. OAK !CiOLL COMPANY: VARIANCE (3-v-67) TO PERMIT CON- S:'RUCTION OF ARCHITECTURAL WALIS WITHIN THE 20' SETBACK, N0T TJ INFRINGE MORE THAN 5'3" INTO THE 20' 0" SETBACK, PLUS EXTENSION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL WALLS INTO THE 6' 0" S:DE YARD, APPROVED AT PLA~'NING COMMISSION MEETING OF A?R:L 11, 1967. PLANNING CJ~~ISSION RESOLUTION NO. 408. -4- . : · . · . · Mr. Dave Franklin, of J'rankl1n-Bahl Developers, stated they are tt¡'1ng to do 80IIIething a little different in this area in that tbeT do not allow the same e1e;rat10!1 w1thin th~ various P"OUpe ot homes. These are customized homes; they are DOt ba11t until sold and they are then built to specif1~1oD8 of the buyer. Mr. J'rankUn said the)' are atte__. to develop 8OII8thing here of which Cupert:lno can be PNWl, but they have run into somewhat of a problø. The7. do DOt PI'OIIOSe to move the homes into the setbacks, but 110u14 like to put architectural walls 1n the front and side ;yard set.backs ot some ot the homes. Counc. Stokes asked how maJ17 lots were Invol ved. Mr. Prankl1n said th1.8 18 liard to Judge because they don't build a home until it i. sold; perhaps a max11DU1D ot 5O:C could be placed on this appllcatlon. even though tœy don't plan to build that many of tide ~ype. He placed four renderings on the bullet1n board to illustrate these architectural walls. Counc. Dempster asked if these architectural walls are not already constructed on the model h~oes. Mr. Frank11n sa1d the ::)Cdel homes were built according to the C1ty Ordinances, but :~ey have all been sold. He added that c~~~r cit1es are a:lowing this variance for de,elopers 1n an effort to ga:~ some var1ety in the neighborh00ds. Mov~= :1 Counc. Stokes, seconded by Counc. Noel, to grant app~:.~l of appl1cat10n 3-v-67 under Council Resolution Ne. :--9, subject to the two condltic:1.s made by the Plan- nir~ ~:~lss10n, plus the condition that no more than 5~ of :~~~ subdivisIon have this va:':a:1ce. AYES: Counc. Dempster, Johnson, N~el, Stokes, Fitzgerald NAYS: None Mction carr1ed, 5-0 2. :OHN RODRIGUES, JR.: TENTATIVE MAP (1-TM-67) WEST OF FROPOSED VEST VALLEY FREEWAY, SOUTH OF STEVENS CREEK ROAD, NORTH OP JlcCLELLAN ROAD, EAST OF PENINSULAR RA!LROAD. APPROVED AT PLAm"I~'J COMMISSIOtl MEETING OF AF!UL 11, 1967. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 407. - and ¡O. VII D. APPLICATION 4-Z-67: JOHN RODRIGUES, JR. - REZONING OF ;'PPROXIMA'l'BLY 32 ACRES LIMITED BY STEVENS CREEK BLVD., S'I'EVENS ppRml&Y. II<:CLELLAN ROAD, SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAIL- ROAD PROM R3-2. 7 TO LIOIfl' INDUSTRIAL (ML) USE. APPROVED BY PLANNING C<lMISSION MARCH 27, 1967, BY RESOLUTION NO. -06 (AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 409 APRIL 11, 1967). CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 36c. (First Reading) Cour.c. Dempster suggested the above Hearings be combined and :hat they be heard under Public Hear1ngs. -5- B. REPORT OF THE ARCH. &: SITE APPROVAL COMM1TTEE (See Minutes ot April 13, 1967) 1. Chalnna.n Irwin stated the Comm1ttee recommended den1a1 ot appl1catlon 265-HC-61 tor the reasons stated in the Minutes and, in addition,. tor the reasons delineated 1n Sect10n 1.PURPOSE, ot Ordinance 306. . 2. The car wash landscap1ng plan was recommended tor approval. 3. '!'he application ot the CUpertintJ Commerc1al Center was recommended tor approval, subject to the applicant's obta1n1ng approval of the Var1ance. 4. '!'he canopy tor the Mobil Highway 85 and McClellan for approval. In addit10n to the appl1cat10ns heard by tl.e Committee, Cha1nna.n Irwin stated they would like to change their meet1ng n1ght from the second and fourth Thursday to the second and fourth Wednesday, to enable one of the membe~~ to cont1nue on th1s Commi~tee. Chairman Irw1n requested the Counc1l to retain this man on the Co~itte€ because he has much to offer as ¿, !'esult of his longevity in Cupert1no C1ty Goverr:.ent. He requested a 2o~cil decision on this ~atter as soo~ as poss1ble, as tw~ of the member's terms have expired. Oil Serv1ce Stat10n at Road was also recommended . . Mayor F1tzgerala rel~ested and rece~ve~ ~pproval from the Councl~ to abstain from discussio~~ O~ ~ó5-HC-67 on the grounG~ that a bus1ness associate .:>f ~~~ ~a3 involved. Counc. Dempster asked to hear fro~ ~~e Speedee Mart appli- . cant directly after the City Cleri< ~p..j tLe letters per- ta1n1ng ~~ this application. 1. Letter from Jackson P. Gll1a~, Speedee ~art Representa- t1ve, 2531 Newhall, Santa Clar3., statir~ the objections to this app11cat1on were not ge~~l~ to architectural and site control. 2. Letter of appeal from Mr. Hugh Jackson, 22608 San Juan Road, Cupertino; owner of the property in question. C1v11 Eng1neer Tom Henderson placed the rendering and plot plan on the bulletin board. He said that after Mr. Jackson's f1rst proposal was obJect10nable to the neighbors, they hired an architect whO, based on suggestions made by the people who opposed the first rendering, took pictures of the De Anza build1ngs and consulted with the De Anza . architect and then came forth with the render1ng now before the Counc1l. -6- . Jr. Hendo~:~ pointed out the wood along the sides, the caram1c :~:.~ roof an¡! the overhang. Every attempt has been .ade to ::a"~ this bu11d1ng compat1ble w1th De Anza, as requested :7 res1dents 1n the area. This plan meets the Park1r.g O:di.nance and all. other applicable Ord1nances of. ~be C1ty. !he applicant 1s even trying to purchase the __ color tiles ao De ADza bas spec1a1-ordered. Counc. Noel as 1101'8 CODCaraed. not so much with tile bu11d- J.Ds design, as nth the let.ters received fl'Om the principals o~ the t1IC scmols and h..- tile Superintendent 01' Schools. .. 1'el1; th1s would be _ ata.ctlve nu1sance, and be was primarily .:oncerneð 1J1th aaf'et7 here. Counc. Stc:kes asked ..,. close this property 1s to the school. X:'. HenderllOD øa1c1 this 1s 60<1' south ot McClellan at the 1r.~e:"Sect1on 01' Presidl0 Drive. Kennedy School 1s OD Bubb Head and ø:rann1sport Dr1 ve and Lincoln Schoo: 1s on McCle::a:: Road. 1Ir. Benderaon sa1d the letters trom the schcc:s would indlcate they thought this was a matter of rezor~,~. . . Mr. Roè-e::-: ='~ke, 939 Bubb Road. sa1d he represented York- town su:.:~ ';:s~,Jn and he hoped the City Counc11 111) '..lId take the tioe ~: ~~vest1ga~e the area. The homeowners believe their ~':':~s 10:'11 be de-evaluated with ~he development ')f this Spe~:~~ ~rt, for the following reaBons: increased traffic, ~_:~S':!I a hango:¡t for older ct:i:'dren, a t:.eer ar.d w1ne ll:~~s~. A year ago, Safeway made a survey w"l1ch 1nd1ca:':!: ~: ~ecd or w1sh for a grocery store in t~e area. He aske: ~~~ ::~ncil net tc allow str~p commercia:' here. . Mr. M. ii. 3,:~ :~, 8099 Presidio, said :wo-story ho~.es would look d:,~-~~} into this stcre, whic~ w:~:'j probat:y te open ;,¡:",:~~ :: P.M. Mr. Js~~ò 5¿~::" 915 ~~t RGad, and 3. ~~r~rt1no ~r:per~y owner, òL: ~~ lives 11agor.ally ac:':~'s :":'cm this ~ro~:'ty. He does '_:' :",.el th1s 1IC..:!.:1 be co!:'.,a· ~~.e w~th tr'.e r.e1gh- torhooj. ~~~~y shou:d =oæe f1rst. ~e ~elt the ~~m tall _chines. .-:., would be ar, attrac:i-;e :".;,¡~sance. He r.aid the mis::,= ~~s made s1X years ag~ ~t.e~ this ~roþerty was :oned C:~~~~:~al; he :1i1 not think tt.e ~:~ncil sr~~:d ~ow make a~~~-~~ ~istake. He ~elt a Spe~j~e Mar~ .c~:j ~~~ be 1n t~~ :~s: 1nterest o! the people. Mr. Smi:~- is,,:,:!j that the petition pla.:-ej before the Ar-::h. '" S1te Cc~::':: ;omm1ttee also be submittej to the C:uncl1. . Mrs. Dia~~ ~:~f, 1031 Per~1ngton Lane, said she represented some of :~e ~ople 1n favor of Speedee Mart. She sa1d there are ~ives ~~ :he area whe don't drive or are one-car fam11ies who WO.l:'j,~:come a Speedee Mart in the area. She under- stood wr~ :~e people 11ving across the street ar~ ~:~cc~ned, but felt :~~y should have looked into this sort of th1ng before ¡:-;;.:-::-asing their homes. She also felt that small childrer. s:-,,::-;;.ld not be allowed to play out in front and in the stree:s. Children should be tra1ned how and where to -1- cross st~e:¡¡, espec1al17 U they l1ve on or near a buay street like 3ubb Road. ~ C:1ty Clerk read l.et~ or protest from: Mr. and 1Irs. . Wr8ass, Mr. iI.obert 8ch1a1er. &apt. Charles Jtn1ght or tbe CUpertino School District;. u-oln S<!hool h'1nclpa1. Bert Q1bbs, Kennedy School 1'rJDd,pa1 Leona Thornton, 1Ir. ¥:I11h. 1IUm, <lnd a letter Sip-' __ 8<l1ll 14 people Ih"1ng in the area. 1Ir. ftnn 18 letter I -'tee! a referendWD, .aldns töbat the .Jackson and '"'1'1 '1'1. cOIIDere1al land be reZOD8d residential. He also ..sa ..~ are invest1gat1n8 the poaalb1l1f:7 of being diu' -""" 117 San Jose and &nI1fZfNt b7 Cupert1nc. '!'here al80 ... a Jetition with 2t papa ~~ a1gnatures of people prot 1t.J.ns t;h1s co..ercial develor-.....t. 1Ir. Boor Billawa11:1, 9'18' -...,.. Dr:ive, San Jose, aa:id be represented the propert7.. ....rs in the area. Th18 zon1nS does exist a."1d did bet'ore UIe property owners moved into the area. In regard to -d1.a-ZOn1ng" and -,'Us-annexing-, Mr. Billava:la said San .Tose recently denied c01l'Jllerc1al zon1ng at ~::;lellan and Ba.bb Road on the basis that th'tre . _s a1rea:ii enough COllDerc1a1. in the aI·ea. In regard to 1Ir. G111a~'¡¡ letter, 1ndicat:ing the property owners ap- proved o~ :::e rendering Ò'.1t not the zon1ng, he sa1d tr.~ Comm1ttee :ased the1r rec~ndatIon on the arct.1~ecture. He sa1d :::~ ~ender1ng does not show how the air cond1tlon- 1ng un1ts v::l look on the roc!'. He felt th1s 1:>uIld1ng would be ~~::mpat1ble w1t~ a proposed tcw~ and cour.'ry type shc..~:-~ center. He s~ested the building be t'.;,rr_ed so the ba:.: :f it is agair..st the I.'cuth ¡:::-operty llne and . the s1de :~ :he buIlding .~~ld ~e toward 3ubb Road, facing Pres1dIc :':':';e. He said t!".e P:ar.nIng D::-ector has -:ade the statemer:: :~~: Bubb Road _y s~=e day be widened to :;;:'. If this :-":;:;:"-:18, 15' me~ =~ ':!'~s pro~r:y would hare tc be taker,. =:: turn1ng tr.e :'.;,:':'1~r.g, thIs :ould be aC-:~!II- p11shed "::~,:.lt el1mir.a'::'':-.g ':!'.e Speede.. ~rt parkir:g area. Rr. Her~"'~!::-. said tr':'s Ò<~:':1:'r~ w~:: :-.a·;eo a parapet _:'1 . and all a;;:~~:enances o~ t~ ~~::;~ w~:l ::e ~oncealed te~ind it. It ~s ",asler to get :'r. ar~ ::;·_t ;)f ~he parkI:¡g ::;: w1 th tt'.e : _~ :jlng in Its preser.': l::;ca t ~_-:-.. As to H.e bright ::i~,:S, only the :e::ter portlon ::' the sign :;:-. tr.e overhang _~:: be 1U;¡m1r.ated. Mr. Herb ?,Hsic:e, 22600 Sa::. Ramer. Road, ;:'..;rertino. sa~:i ,:r.e people ::~~:-~ on the wee': s:'de =r town ~~~e to trave: a long dls:a~:~ to do ar~ ahopp1r.g. As to the safety :;r the ctûld~r., : ~,ere are now -ro- ctû1dren ":'.Kl:1.g along McClella~, ..here there are no s1dewal~s, to buy th~lr sr.acks, etc. If a :arket ls put :in here, wouldn't it be more des1rable :: have the ctû1dren walk on t~e sidewalk ar.d cross Bt.:.tt :;oad at the cro....l~ Roved by ::~o. Dempster, seconded by Counc. Noel, to close the Publ~: Eear1ng on application 265-HC-67. . Mnt10n carr1.ed. 5-0 -8- 1. " ~ .~' . . þ CDunc. Ðeçs:er wanted to .bï!G.r trom the City Planner hOW ~b _ prope=-ty here j.s %<i'V-1' ~~rc1al. The Planm-ng ~ector sai;l this j.S aI:GI& a lib-acre parcel zoned C-1.. Q]. Within the C1ty of' ~-t1Do. . -"., 'CI ..:. Johnson said be 4Gn DØt; think the architecture on , ... 1'ende~ 1s goodDØll; ...dIaJ18 61% years ago, wbeD it , _arst rezoned It -,. :,M1Nt been. The CUy of' San " .. was eocslderate of _ ftae11D&s of CI1~rtlno In not £ '."'dng t~ propert%" _..C1~11an. This C,\uncll adopted à "olut1œ that all ìÞ>'~ "1t.Jea a1")uncI thP -'nlleøte ._,,, W B-1. O"..ber uatten JI,~ ø L up by the nej.ghbon were JDcaased tratt1c and tIIit"f n:I.Ml1ty of the sale of' beer .... Wine at th1s uarket.. .,-. tb1s 1s nct "town and ~~t.17·; it 1s ·strip C ~lll. The people who !aye ."ut moner to develop Uda area should be considered here. Coanc. StoJœs asked Counc. ~oI:msOn what cons1deration should ~ given to :he propert7 Glmer. Counc. Johnson sa1d the property ov::er here shou1d DIñ have wa1ted six years to build. ~c. De!:;::!:er asked Coœx. Johnson 1f he would be 1n f'aY'Or of ":~..:.s appl1catj.on 1r ~be: appl1cant ~ame 1n w1th .~ and = ='.;:.try , al'Cb1tee'ture. Counc. Jotmson answered that what ~:s best tor the people 1n the area should be approved. Counc. De=;,¡;:er felt this 1I&J a guise; the people 1n ':!'.a.t area s1np'y ==:f,ct to the z.o-~r.g under the guise of oppos~ng ~2 arc',~:~~:'.;.re of the ~~~ng. The applicant has s~1f!:. 2 1s w1::::-~ :0 use the t7;Je ot architec<;ure the ~op:e llant. CJ:';"-.=. Jempster sa.:.:I 'tb6\t it' this is denied. ,-.er:-.a.ps 1Ihoever ::aÁ~S :~e mot1on sbl:r..ld also say that we are g~l~.g t= rezone :~~ w~ole s1x acres. This mar. ;lid everyth~~.g :-.e ~ IIsked :: i~, on the b&a~s ot how the people have arg'.:oed. 300d judge~~: would d!ecate ~hat the app:icant as we:: as ~ reside~,: 5 ~!: the area "0:.0-"':'11 be cons1dere<1. Zon1~.g ~s DOt tM 1.~ò_e. tat 1'111 the pe-ople protesti~.g this app:~:a':~~n ~.cuased ~::ers pe~~ ':0 zon1ng. :ounc. Demps':er aa&e<S the :::y A ':torne7 1r <;heM argulll8nts sh.:luld be ':A;œ~. 1nto cons~:'~:'S:1:;r:. n.~":7 A':torney SA1d he has Che:lC~ tba Genel"!i: ::3.~ and 1t ~cates cOlllll8rc1a: zon1ng r.ere. A Speedee "\ö:.:- ,ts a stanclarl! ::~rcial u~e¡ theret'ore, t2 matte::- :~:'n-e the C~t7 :O-z:cil 1s arc¡~tecture arod s~':e e~~rol. Counc. Jo~.::s:~ said the Arc:~te':tural and S1te CoJlllldttee _tj.ng we~ :ardened With the zoning 1ssue and the er",IIZñ':- ~ was me~::; answer1ng q;astj.ons posed by the aud1er.ce. Counc. Noe: :Juld f1nd no t'ault nth the proposed arcM.tec- ture. The =:::1ng 1s there. 'l'bere 1s presently no sidewalk CII1 th1s sl.'ie :;,1' the st"R. We have letters from the schools asc,.g that we use ... cons1deration here. With the C-l z,,:-":':-~, if a larpr e~rc1al center were put in tboere wou:=. :e better cOMrols aver 1t. He, personally, f'e',t this :::e build1ng WOGl4 be an attractive nu1sance. ~ :~ Counc. 3t,~;s said he had to agree w1th Counc. Dempster 1.11 that t::; ::latter before the Council 1s the arcMtett\U'e. Be sald Ì"Æ :ould not get out of the Arch! tectura1 and Site Contr=l Committee mnnteB wbat the basls of the denial was. He, pe1'8O....117.. b not 1n favor of Span1.sh arch1tectu..-e, but It SeeIIS to be what the people wnt. '!bere w111 be sldewalJea 10 t'ront of this prope~ ~ Sot is developed, as~ ,,'~lks. He said the ~h1tectU1'81 and Slt.~#-J"bJ bas functioned ve%7 well .80 far; he would hate .~ ... ·1.- put to the test on en 'Item such as this.· JIIr coa14 t'1Dd absolutely nothing OD '1Ib1ch he could base. a ð......1; rezoning 1s not the ls81le. Counc. Johnson referred to the t'irst paragraph of Ordi- nance 306. He sa1c! the applicant was ask1ng for this type co.aerc1al in th1s area. CoUDC. Dempster sald the appli- cant poss~~ly could consider .hat Counc. Johnson feels would be ":::e proper architecture for th1s area. He sa1d that 1f t!"..e Council cannot accept this arch1tecture, the Counc11 shc~ld g1ve the applicant some 1nd1cat10n of what would be a::eptable. At this p:~~":, the C1ty Attorney clarified the ground rules. The Chai::' :-..as d1squa11t1ed himself from the vote w1th suf- tic1ent g::-:~,.ds. In c1t'~5 vith f1ve Counc1lmen, there somet1me~ ~~ a t1ed vote vhen one absta1ns; but the C1ty's bus1ness ~_~: go on. The ~¿le ~f necessity is then app11ed where1n ::-,~ ;ha1r 1s req~red to;) vote. Moved by ~:~~:. Johnson ~!"¿t app11cation 265-HC-67 be den1ed :~ :~:er to ma1nta~ ~he :haracter of the ne1ghbor- hood as ~~ ;::'~sently ex~s~s. Mc~ion died for lack of a second. Moved by ~:_~:. Stokes, s~::nded ty Counc. Dempster to ret~ appl1. 2~=-~~-67 to the A~r.. & Site Control Comm1ttee; tr~t the ap~:~:l~: meet w1th ,:;~~s Cc~~ttee to determ1ne what arch1te::_::'~ would be ac:e~':;at:e ':;~ the Co~m1ttee; with the specifi: ~~~::,uctions tr.~ ze~~~~ ~s nct the issue here. AYES: ~. :.:. Dempster, :::!":_s::~_, Neel, Stokes NAYS: ;;:~¿> ABSTAINE:': !o!ay.:>r F1tzgera:: Mot10n carr~ed, ~-O Counc. S::^¿>5 asked 1f a~~:~. 231-HC-67 involves extensive landscar~~~. Ch. Irwin Sð~j ~his is only for the car wast. portion ,= :~e property. Co~c. Stokes sa1d he is ~oncerned about cc=:::,:1al landsca~ng w1tÌ".1n the C1ty. He would i1ice: 1. All :l~;scaped areas enclosed by 6w concrete curbs. 2. All :=~;scaped areas to be fully sprinklered and con- tro::,,~ ty one valve. Moved by ~:~~:. Stokes, seconded by Counc. Dempster, to add the above 2 :ondltions to the approval of appl. 231-HC-ó7, and grant =;proval to the remainder of the Arch. & S1te Minutes c: Apr11 13, 1967. ~YBS: Cc~:. Dempster, John~on, Noel. Stokes, F1tzgerald )lAYS: Nc~e Mot1on carried, 5-0 -10- . .o' -. . . · . · . · Counc. Dempster 1nstructed Cha1rman Irwin, in regard to the appl1cat10n that was returned to the Committee, that _tters such as these are very d1ff1cu1t to handle. He r.lt the reason we have Architectural and Site Committee 1.s to 1mprove architecture and 1andscap1ng. The app11cant bas the right to hear r~ the COlllll1 ttee why they do not approve ot the applicat1.CY" The C1ty Council can also then decide whether 01" not hey agree or disagree. The C1ty Council can give .ore guidelines 1f they know the reasons why applications are approved or disapproved. Counc. Johnson, 1n regard to application 268-HC-67, asked H the procedure was not to have Architectural and Site approval atter the approY1ng ot a Var1ance. The City Attorney said the two are 1ndepende..t of each other. and the Architectural and S1te approval was cond1t10ned upon the appl1cant rece1ving app~val ·Jf the Var1ance. The Ass1stant Planner said that, 1n th1s 1nstance, the building was built some t1me ago but 1s now being remodeled. There has been a change 1n the Ord1nance s1nce the build1ng was built; therefore. a Variance 1s requ1red. C. REPORT OF THE PÞ.RKS COMMISSION (See Minutes of April 11. 196ï) Cha1rman Loom1s sa1d the COlllll1ssion rev1ewed R1bera & Sue's work1ng drawings and ccst analys1s the prev10us week and would be meet1ng the following night w1th Mr. Beck of Royston, Hanamoto. Mayes and Beck. The Comm1ssion re- quested a spec1a1 meeting e1ther Apr1l 24 or 25 with th¿ C1ty Cour.c11 in the C~r1erence Room to review cost est1mates and un1t pr1ces of all tt~e parks. The City Council dec1ded t ~ have th1s j::ir.t meet1ng with the Parks and Recreatl~:-: Commiss10n dur1ng the wep.k of May 1st. Cha1rman Loom1s sa1d tt.ey have not elec~ed off1cers for this comir~ year, but t~pe te do s~ at their next me-.t1ng. They stil: need Council act10n en )ne member who has reapplied. J[l_.,.:u~ ORDER: Mo\"ed by Counc. Stokes. seconded by Counc. Noel, to reappo1nt Mr. Parsons tc the Parks and Recreation Comm1ss1on. AYES: Cc~nc. Dempster, Johnson, Noel, Stokes, Fitzgerald !fAYS: None Mot1on carr1ed, 5-0 VI:n ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPl'ION A. ORDINANCE NO. 354: APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN CONTIGUOUS UNINHABITED TBl\RITORY DESIGNATED "HOO-HOO 66-1" TO THE CITY OP CUP!mTINO. (Second Reading) -11- Attorney Hill, of Wilson, Jones, Morton and Lynch. read the Addenda: "RESOLUTION REQUESTING CONSENT OP 'l'BB BOARD OP SUPERVISORS OF TIm OOUN'l'Y OF SANTA CLARA TO, 'l'BB BIBRCISE '" BI'rRA-TBRRITORL\L .JtJID:SD:ICTION TO MAKE CHANGES A1ID .-cÐ..ur~CATIONS. This has ref'erence to DB ANZA. e1; a1. . .lllhuvJIIU'NT PROJEC'l' 110. 66-1." ( IIoveð by Counc. De\IIPSter. seconded by Counc. Hoel. to adopt "solut10n 1381-23. A~: Counc. Dempster. Johnson, Noel, Stokes. nt"J:gera1d 818: None Motion carried. 5-0 Mayor P1tzgera1d called for a recess f'rom 10:00 to 10:10 P.M. VII PUBLIC HEARINGS A. APPEAL: CROCKER'S MOBIL SERVICE: APPLICATION 1-u-67 FOR A USE PERMIT TO CONOOCT TRAILER RENTALS AS PART OF . SERVICE STATION OPERATIONS AT SW CORNER OF S'1"JSvMS CREEK BLVD. AND VOLPE ROAD. DENIED BY PLANNING COMMIS- SION AT THEIR tw.KILAR MEETING MARCH 13, 1967. This item has been postponed. B. APPEAL: ESTATES MOB:IL SERVICE: APPLICATION 4-u-67 . FOR A USE PERMIT TO C<JmUCT TRAILER RENTALS AS PART OF SERVICE STATION OPERATIONS AT SW CORNER OF STEVENS CREEK BLVD. AND VOLPE ROAD. DENIED B'i PLANNING COMMIS- SION AT THEIR REGt.'1.AR MEETING MARCH 13, 1967. This 1tem has been poso;poned. C. APPL1CA':'ION 3-Z-67: SAICH BROS. - REZONING OP LAND . LOCATED EAST OF sœ7HERN PACIFIC RAILROAD, NORTH OF UNIVERSITY AVENUB. VEST OF STEVENS PREBWAY PROM RESI- DENTIAL MULTIPLE MEDIUM DENSITY (R3-2.7*ma) ZONE TO PLANNED DEVELOFMENT (P) ZONE WITH PLANNED INOOSTRIAL USE. RECOMMENDBD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4()4. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 358. CONTINUED PROM COUNCIL loIJSr;1".l.NG OF APRIL 3, 1967. (First Read1ng) Counc. Dempstc~ suggested that, since all the Counc11men were present to hear all the arguments, pro and con. presented at the previous hearL~gs. perhaps this hear1ng should be lImited to only ne~ arguments for and aga1nst 1t. Mayor P1tzgerald agreed. . -12- :.. · . · · .. ~s Krausz, represent1.ng the Saich Brothers, said they __ compl1ed nth the C1.ty Counc1.l's request and 1dtbdrew ~ l1ve-acre piece from tb:1s app11cat1on and are now pre- ,.,:'''' only the 35-acre puo::el tor cons1derat1on. 'l'IJe ~..........., obstacle seemed to be access to the property. He t¡'fiIþ.zoeferred the Council 1;0 C2.Y11 Engineer George Somps, 1fé IIa1d the po1nt was bJ.'OUSht out that when this property . 1Iiiiåf; SIII1ed R3, the access was cons1dered a very sign1t'icant 1t? or""'&". Southem Pac1t'ic, at that time, would not give i i-...-.,.t1a1 easement, but tbe7 have now consented to give '.. J.511 easement if the proposat zoning 1s achieved. Mr. ~ _ rev1ewed the proposed trat't'ic pattern, po1nting out tile llm1t1ng factor was not so much the roads but tM inter- n LJ..ons. Approximately 1000 people w111 be ~mp10yed here. VI..,.. a three-prAse operation: i.e., three lan.:!s 1I'<;,v1ng øat; mrt;o Steve~s Creek Blvd., the expected tra!'fic could be adequately :-A:1.dled. Ik'. Irausz 5a~i th«y are r.~ :10'1\':'1 to the mechan1cs of ~1ng the ~~;~t-of-way fros Southern Pac1fic. The ~cs of ::-.e 51tuat1o:'" nIl not at th15 t1me Just1fy t:::e solutior. ;:,,;)posed by o;:-.e Planning Director. He sa1d ~--~ veh1cle~ ;er hour car. be handled with the applicant's ...._,osed pla~. ~~ ~:anni~~ :~:'ector exp:a~r.~d the traff1c prognosis for ~=e area we~: :~ Stevens ?ree~ay, as set forth in ~~s me~o ~~ ~,~ll 14, :~~-. The ccr.c:~sions of r~~ presentat~or. ~: Futu~ :~ffic ger.erated by reside:1.tial deve~o~ent ~~tted ty ~:::'eady ex~st~~~ zon1ng w11: exceed the capacity ~~ ~ conte~;:~:ed major streets and freeway intercha~~e. ~. State s~:~:i ~e app~c:-~ about a poss1b1e redes1gr. =~ ~=-e 1nter:,-..:.,~e and ~";S a;:¡;roaches. ':'e::¡porary 1r::prove- ~s in Ste~~~s ~reek E:'r.i. could provide enough capac~ty ~:-: ~::'-e nex~ ~:'f:-.~ years, a.!'-:er which t1:::e further ~::¡prove- ~s 1n co~~~::l.:>n w1t~ t:-.e ~reeway cor.s:ruction would ~=:-ease cap¿.:l:::. Indus".;~a.: areas nor::-.3.:1y produce :::ore ,:~~~c tha,. .;.;¿rtment areas, but because ::1.duso~ria: and ~s~~ential ~.;." traffic .~~~d move in .:>pposite d1rect1o~s, re%~~ng to l~i~strlal w~:: r.~t aggrava:e the traff~c 3~~~tion 1~ ~:evens Cree£ ~:yd. The developer of "';he ·-.~-:tr1al a~.;. south of ~teven5 Creek Blvd. w111 prov!de a ~ not 0,,::: with enoug:-. capac1ty for traffic created ~ t~s area., :~t wh1ch .~~: add to the City's network of 3-~~ls. 7~e ieveloper of ~he area north of Un1vers1t7 A~ has pr.:;x:>sed an !l.ccess that w111 have enough capac1ty ~-:7 ~t the :~ffic genel....ted by the 1ndustrial area w1l1 .........e to be :ess than aV'='I"a6e, and the traffic w1] 1 be ~~ntal :.: resident~a: values. The County Plann1ng De¡artment ~.a.s proposed a::d 15 expected to present a plan 1I!!::1ch would :~ ::.lst to reslde:'lts and could save the taxpayer or ~be fUture 1~du5tr1al e~terpr1de5 in the area h1gh C-J....u."C expe::ses. -13- - . " , " ,·,··l 'it';' : The Director of Fubnc Workl rev1ewed the traf'f1c pattern. He said the prime .overs are fa1rly well de11neated. De Anza Junior Collep 1d.ll have a serious ef'f'ect on the traffic pattern. IJè noted the cross-sections of' streets reco_nded by the League ot Ca11t0rn1a Cities and stated that CUpertino's sU....·~s exceed these recOIIIIIendations. ß1shway 85 1s ncnrbahÐ1Dg 3500 veh1cles per hour. It was the teel1ng Of' t~.~tor ot Publ1c Works that what 1s now being propOsed 1f(g]ð be adequate. Mr. Ray Carter. Mann Drive, said that, as a point ot order, he wondered 1f' a developnent plan had been submitted wh1ch Est depict types or build1ngs, etc. Mayor F.1tzgerald quest10ned at what stage of development the development plan can, pract1ca1ly sp-alr1ng, 1nd1cate the placement of build- 1ngs. ~. Carter then sa1d he understood zones around the De Anza College were to be reta1ned residential, and felt th1s property was not that far away from the campus that th1s ~l1cy should not be cons1dered. He then d1scussed certa~~ sect10ns of Ordinance 002(x}. The C~:y Attorney advised that Ordi~ance 358 makes no refer- ence :: a development plan. Prev10usly, we have deferred deve:~~ent plans to the time Use Perm1ts are requested. Mr. Za;;, 10330 Mann Drive, Monta Vista, objected to this Tenta:~7e Map because it shows no access to the property to t~e ~Jrth. This would leave approx1mately 15 acres land::::Ò:ed. '''.., . ).: , , . . . Mr. R:::ert van der Toorren, 231 Old Adobe Road, Los Gatos, quote':' ;ortions of the Çal1fornia Government Code. He consi':'e:'s 1t to be an error that a development plan has not tee,. brought forward. The dec1s1on on this appl1cat10n w111 ~~7e an enormous effect on the people 1n the area 1n the ¡:-¿::ers of health, safety, welfare and morals. He sa1d :~~s area 1s also at the gateway to the rooth111s. Mr. E:~::k, of the San Franc1sco Office of the State D1vis10n of H1~~'~ys, told Mr. van der Toorren that 1t was the C1ty of Cuper:~~~, not the State. that k1l1ed the cloverleaf inter- secti::~ at th1s po1nt. The Director of Publ1c Works sa1d that while ~.e preferred the cloverleaf h1s research of the records had 1,,':'~::ated the original design wa3 fcr one but had been change':' :0 a d1amond 1nterchange at the request of the City ot Cupe:'tino. Mr. van der Toorren went on to say there was no ev~':'e~ce that the problem here has been solved. Mr. Er~::e Wenn1gar, 10298 Mann Drive, Monta Vista, sa1d he was op;osing tte 1ncrease in railroad traffic which would be crea.:ed by this industrial park. The railroad cars would :e coup11ng and banv.~/lg and would destroy the resi- dentia: characterot the neIghborhood. The State and County ':'0 not now have fUnds to develop the freeway further and t~~s would result 1n a bottleneck of traff1c in Monta ';~sta. . -14- The C1ty Attorney sa1d the General Plan shows this area as Light Industrial. Next. the Council must dec1de whether or not this would be the highest and best use of the pro- perty. The op1nion ot the City Attorney was that 1t 1s . w1thin the power of the C1ty Council to set a t1me 11lll1t , for a development plan. Mr. Collins. loò9o Peninsula Avellle. said that whether the prope!'t7 rema1ns R3 or goes Ltght Industrial. 1t means trouble tor the res1dents on bis street. You can It replace the $12,000 to $15~000 homes BJQíDOre. The street 1s too narrow and the front yards at. too s_l1. Th1s 1s a low rent areaw1th lots ot children; where will they plaTl He asked ., , would pay tor the 1nata11ation ot the new sewera that w111 be needed. W111 the railroad actua117 be wilUng to grant the ease1'lent to the developeI 1 Last17, there 1s no prov1s10n for emergency vehicles. Moved by Counc. Dempster, seconded by Counc. Noel. to close the Pub11c Hear1ngs. AYES: Counc. Dempster. Johnson, Noel, Stokes. Fitzgerald . NAYS: None Motion carr1ed. 5-0 The City Attorney questioned the matter of the development plan. Counc. Dempster equated the arguments brought out at these hear1ngs w1th those at the t1me of the Vallco Park . rezon1ng. He sa1d the pol1cy statement made by the Counc11 ,. was that the property around the college perimeter should rema1n res1dent1al 1n character. This is far enough re- r.~ved from the College. not to confl1ct w1th th1s pol1cy. He felt Vallco Park rezon1ng was to the advantage of the City. This property 1s presently zoned mult1ple and 1t seemed to him th1s proposal w11l create the same or more traff1c. But the fact that th1s 1s Light Industr1al means it will create traff1c flow 1n d1fferent d1rect1ons. The tI City Counc11 asked for a study and recommendat10ns from the D1rector of Pub11c Works. He felt the traff1c problems would be here no matter what the zon1ng is. The appl1cant should be alerted that he w111 be held to the same r1g1d controls as Vallco Park. The ra11road and thl freeway are good buffers. Counc. Stokes wondered why all these problems had to be solved before they are created. The D1rector of Publ1c Works has presented a traffic flow plan and he has recommended a solut10n to the problem. The De Anza cars w1l1 not all be go1ng to and from the College at the same time, nor 1n the same d1rect1on. Counc. Stokes noted there was some quest10n of whether the College had actually stated the1r pos1t10n on this. It was h1s feel1ng that the College 1s well aware of this application and has not indicated their opposit10n, if 1t exists. . -15- , ( ! f. : . . . . Counc. Noel's bas1c concern was the traff1c. The staff had been 1nstructed to come up w1th a solution and they presented the1r recommendat10ns. Counc. Johnson cUd not understand that the staff had stated that the problems had been solved. And another problem came up at this meeting: the development plan. He felt a study should be made Jointly by the City, County and State on this traffic situation. Mayor Fitzgerald agreed that Vallco Park 1s d01ng a good Job. He agreed that the State should be asked to restudy the area as to the freeway ~nterchange problem. Counc. Johnson said t~t, without rezon1ng anyth1ng. that 1ntersect1on w111 be terr1bly busy. He would l1ke a pro- fess10nal traff1c eng1neer to study the area. Mayor F1tzgerald felt the City would benef1t from the users of the propert1es. He does not feel anybody would go 1n there blindly, and he sees no real problem here. Counc. Johnson did not th1nk the Council was aware of all the problems connected with this rezoning. Counc. Stokes felt the Council should work toward gett1ng a cloverleaf interchange here, and :ur position would be much stronger if this property were Light Industrial. He asked the D1rector of Pub~.ic Wo','ks if thE: intersections of Peninsula and Bubb Road are now lined up. The D1rector of Public Works sa1d it would be very improbable that we could get this realigned. Moved by Counc. Dempster tr.at application 3-z-67 be approved with the following conditions and the ordinance be prepared for the next meeting: 1. The development plan to be submi:ted before any bu11d- ing permit of any kind, as well as the conditions set forth by the Planning Commiss1o~. It was noted that this is Just a matter of rezoning and the Planning Commission has not seen the Tentative Map. The Planning Director felt a development plan would be very desirable here. The mot1o~ died for lack of a second. MINUTE ORDER: Moved by Counc. Dempster, seconded by Counc. Stokes, that the staff be instructed to draw up an ordinance in- cluding the conditions set forth by the Planning Commission as well as other pert1nent conditions. In answer to Counc. Stokes' question. Mr. Krausz said they defin1tely do have users for about 16 acres of this property, but noth1ng can be s1gned until the zoning is there. On t~t basis, Counc. Stokes believed we could now have a development plan. -16- Mayor P::zgerald felt the applicant could coœe up with a better =~.elopment plan once they have the zen ',ng and ñave 111:)= of' the pro~"1 earmarked. Counc. Dempater COIU- llented ':;mt a deve~o.-nt p~an based on supposition 1s or . 11ttle Talue. Counc. Jfoel could not see how they could put together a deveJ.cy- ¡It. plan at this point. Be felt the ~n would .~ bave control over the deve~opment. AYBS: Counc. Dellpater. lIoe1. Stokes. P1tzgera~d l'IAYS: CoImc. Johnson Motion carr1ed. 4-1 The Cit7 Attorney cited Section 15 of the Ml-PH Ordinance, which requires a deve1o~nt plan. It further indicates that the development pIan could be changed from time to t1me. D. AFr....ICATION 4-z-67: JOHN RODRIGUES, JR. - REZONING OF AP~TELY 32 ACRES LIMITED BY STEVENS CREEK BLVD., . S-a..:.....S FREEWAY. MCCT.1U.T-"N ROAD, SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAIL- RQI2; FROM R3-2.7 TO LIGIfl' INDUSTRIAL (ML) USE. AP?:;OVED BY PLANJiDiG COMMISSION MARCH 27, 1967, BY RESCl...-rION NO. 406 (AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 409, A;;::_ll, 1967). CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 360. (.__". Read1ng) Mr. Rc:~:~~es rev1ewed his plan. He sa1d that though the Genera: ?:an indicates med1um density residential, th1s area :~ ~~ ideal place for I1ght ir.justr1al because of the nearne~~ :~ the freeway 1nterchange and because the traf~ create: :~ the 1ndustria1 area does not pass through resi- dentia: ~::'eets. The State's corporat10n yard w111 also be 1n :~~~ area, and the State 1s willing to adjust the prope~:? :ines and use Bubb Road as access. Th1s property has be~~ =ûned R3-2.7 for several years, but attempts to devel=; :: 1n this way have never :,eached fru1tion. Mr. R=:~:~~es sa1d they are lookir.g for the smaller type 1ndus:~:~: use for this property. A total 1nvestment of 6.5 ~:::=~ dollars is ant1c1pated, and we need this tax base ~~ :~~s area. Or. Fl1nt and Dr. DeHart. of De Anza Collef~, ~4ve personally told Mr. Rodrigues that they are encou~~:,~ the broadening of the tax base. We are near the bc::=~ of the 11st of assessed valuations per student of the :- jun10r colleges 1n the State. Industr1al, as we know ~: :ûday, 1s ver,y d1fferent from the Industr1al of yeste~~~:,. He st1pulated that all uses w111 be subm1tted to the ?:ann1ng Commission to eliminate poss1ble objections. In add:::ûn, there w111 be deed restrictions. Each 1ndivi- dual ~~~ vl11 be sUbJect to Arch1tectural and Site Control appro\..:. Mr. Rodrigues 1s very familiar with and 1n full agree~~: with the standard3 laid down by the City. -17- . . . t Mr. F.=:~:-: Laws, 9l~ ~vldence C;;'.::-:, felt this would be a pote~:~~: slum. Be asked how ~a,~ of the 21 coñd1t10ns place~ ~ the Ord1.....,."e by the P:ar.nlng Coum1s81on .111 be d1sscl.e-!. He made the fo110wiJ~¡: :'ecolllllendatlons: 1. Disa;:prove this for IlL. 2. St'.ù;T further for other types zon1ng. 3. Pos:;one until a p18n for the ent1re West valle,. area r.as ::een completed. Mr. Rc~-t \'an der 1'oorren quoted portions ot t.he Planning D1rec~:,' s March 31st' 8eIIIO regarding traff1c and the 101- porte: :'act that the diamond Interchange would not be adequa:e. He sa1d the onl.7 thir.g :,equ1red ot the applicant was t~¿: ~e 1ncrease the lot frc~:a~e from 100' to 150' on the Te:::a:lve Map; and now we a:'e :ã:k to 100'. · Mr. \:~ :e:' Toorrer. sa~d he has s~¡:¡:ested the street end 1n a =~: !e sac Ins~~~ of cont:~~~;'¡: as an extens10n of Bubb ~:::. He feels v~en the la~j s:ands vacant for a while, :~e applican~ v~ll propese ::wer standards, plead1ng hards.....:.;. He noted ':!-~!'t Dr. De:;ar: ;.¡as not at this :neetlng to :=::::~ statemer.':s ~e~erred :: e::,lier. He recommended Cuper:::-,: support '::---= ::::',.mty In :::e~r study cf tt.e area. · Mr. =:-_,., Wennigar a,,;':,;-:: why M'. ::':'::'~gLles 15 askl~g for ML :'a~....,~ :har. MP z~,~,~. Mr. :-..:._;.- :!amona sa:..:. ~"",,:ce are, ,;:':'e::tly app:':c:atl::ns on the S::~,"~::1 prope:'::õ f::r Ii te:: ~:'::~0n dollar apart~er.;; com':e~ ::ea:- the :c:':'e¡:e. If :::e :r~n:ipals i:: these negc::';~::"s felt :~~:;-~ndustr~?: ~',,-:.;.: would ~~ ar~' way be detr:'-e-~;: to the~r ;:=-:;pe::,tle~ dO. w;)uld be !-.ere protest- 1ng. · Mrs. ,~,~ -::-.sJn, 206::: ?..:.j~lgues, ::-.;",:':::'no, as;';e::!. ~f there Is a,,:: 0;:;, under ::-.': )IT. Ordina,::e, "i:at any ':ypes ::1' bus~"e~ ~ -;~ can be :'e~:':y ellm:'::; ~ -;,:. She was t::ld that any .r:~;e:tive use ~~~:d be 5~::::':~ej to the Planning COmr.:~SL::-, and the :~::õ Co;,mcll :'.:::' approval pr10r to issè;.a~,:-; ~:' the bæ.:'::~=-~ perm!:. :-",¿> City A:,:orney added that, ,as :~ng as t[,'" :~:1ditlon5 a:'¿> :'easonable. they can be e:-.:::- ~ =",:1. Mr. ";::' ':e:" Toorrer. :;.a~d he ls ~:~ .::¡:,pcsed to this applica- tior.; :-..:.s ::sin obJe::~:;!l 1s the ::::-' frontage. This 1s a good _S7, :f you ca~ c:~~trol it. :: was his c:onte~tion tha: ~~~:: lots prco~':~ small b~:'::e55es wltt. l1mited capi:a: ;~j, thub, a~e ~re 11ke:y ~: fall. · Coun:. ~::~es asked the City At:c:'~ey 1f our present ML Ordi~a~'e ~as more ~~~trol by Use Fe:-~1t. The Gity Attorney said ::..:.~, basically, tbe requi:'e::e~: is tf~t it is a law-- ful ~S-;. ~he Planr~~ Comm1ss1:r. ~2' perm1t any use whlch they :"e-;: :'s not an cbr.ox1ous use. . -18- Mr. Rodrigues sa14 tbe7 11111 aubII1t to the P1ann1ng ~ 'sslon and the C1~ Cauncll a 11st of propoB«l uses Þr thIs pa~el. ~ td.U also be 11111111& to pit the allowable uses -in tile lIull Nstr1ct1ona 1I1th no cbanps to ,be made 1I1thout: C1Q' &p.ol&1. ~.. 1''''''''''1& D1~~... ... tMs 1s Int an a~caUOD for .' "....--1 IIdustl"1a1' , . ZOD1aIwMch requ1Ns .. b1ger CNa. am b1ger lotta~ ". . C1t7'" it need for -1 'er 1Dduatries under tile T....,..,. Twluatr.'..aJ. Zon1ns. aDII is a 6t.&"4IJg proponent 1D tJd.a .......t. '!Ida 1s a SOOd location Þr thIs use 1IeCaUlMt i.~ 1.8 .....ted fIooa the Collep by u.e bee_yanda 1a2p paft1ns lot &II1II a180 11111 be IleJl&rated troll re~ aNas. '!'be Plann1ng OQ 'sslon ball placed ve'r7 stroas coatro18 on the area whIch the Plann1ng Director felt -1" be adequate. ~ Planning Director rertewed the County Planrrl.ng Depart- 8eI1t's cOlllllents: 1. "The lot ¡ieslgn and 81ze needs further study. The odd shaped lots make buildIng placement dlff1cult. and the lack of variety In sIze and the small s1ze raIses questions ot the quailty of antic1pated developnent." The Plann1ng Director felt that consolidat10n or the 6 lots in the HE corner Into 4 lots would allev1ate this problem. 2. "Some invest1gatIon should be made on the poss1bil1ty of extend1ng Bubb Road along the west s1de ot the railroad to Stevens Creek Road. This would eliminate the ra11road Cro8S1ng and Improve lot des1gn cons1der- ably." The Planntns D1rector added that this 1s des1rable. but that unless and untIl we are sure this can be done, we should not gIve up the al1gnment through the 1ndustrIa1 area. 3. "Architectural and sIte control w1ll be the determin1ng ractor in t~ · s 4evf!1)~nt. The proxImity ot the De Ar:za Jun:..->r Collep and res1dentia1 developnent make it 1mperatlve that a development ot quality and compa<:1b1l1ty be p~ and required tor this area." The Plann1ng Director felt that the 1mposed cond1tions would safeguard quail ty. The D1rector or PublIc Works rev1ewed the tratr1c counts. Be sa1d the County feela thIs Is CUpert1no's problem. Mr. John !aylor, ot Yorktown Subdivis10n, relt that 11' thIs road 1s allowed to &0 tbroUCh to Bubb Road. 1t 1s &Olng to tunl 1nto qu1~ . apeed_y. He sugested the Council cons1der Bubb Roed extended to cormect w1th !aparial Vay. III'. a: !!N. Bauer. ~ ~ppertree lAne, Cupert1no. pro- tested t~.1s rezOn1ns and INgested alten1&t1ves. -19- t 4 . . .z: "'V;:~ , '\:~~':f;!.;_S;~;k.J~ · · · t Mrs. ~m SerkL~, 22380 Balustrol Court, Cupertino, also suggested this application be den1ed. Mrs. Ann Anger, Monta Vista, sa1d she paSBed out copies of a list of types of uses allowed in the proposed zoning. She sa1d she was concerned about enforcement, and sug- gested a new Ordinance be written that is more restrictive. Mr. Louis Stock1meir, Stevens Creek Blvd.. Cupertino, sa1d John Rodrig-..œø always stands behind his wo:rk. He felt the I5tarf was iIIOre than capable of handling th1s situat1on. ^ It was his content1.on that it is better, to have all the . small industrial uses 1n one place rather than scattered throughout the City. Mov;:d by Counc. Stokes, seconded by Counc. Johnson, to con- tinue the hearing. Counc. Dempster could see no po1nt 1n a continuance; the same th1ngs would be sa1d a1: over aga1n. Counc. Noel and Mayor Fitzgerald agreed. Mot1rm and second were w1 thdrawn. Mr. Dave Merrick, 20231 Merr1tt Drive, Cupert1no. felt th1s application should be granted on the basis that tpe pro- perty is between a railroad, a freeway, a cannery and an overpass. Mr. W~lters, Hya,~_~sport Drive, sai1 è~~è. a~cording to the Cou '~.:/, there is already eno'J.gr ind:':5t:-ial zoning for the next 25 years' development. This p:'~perty 1s relat1vely inaccessible. He s:.:ggested the ~ity Cc:.:r.cil table this particular applicaèion in view of ~te ~act that the newly rezo:'1ed Saic:: prcp,=:rty ('ould be \tse:: ~::-st. Moved by Co:.:~~. De~pster, seconded ty C::.:nc. Noel, to close the P~tl~~ Eea:-ing. M:.tion carried, " r ~- - Counc. Johnsen c~~~e~ted that he ~ ._~ like t~ table this application. Tr.e ~o=ents he has ;,e,,:,1 :~rol!: the College is that "they all tr:.:st John." He, t::, t:"~sts John; but what if sometr~~g ~~ppen5 to Joh~ a~j s:~etc1y else is 1n control of this p:'~perty. Coune. J~::~5:n wc:.:ld like: 1. A written co~er.t from the College as tc what their exact pos1t1c~ is on this. 2. A list of the specific types of :ndustrial uses that will be allowed tc go into this ccmplex. Counc. Dempster felt there was a legitimate compla1nt with the present zon1ng on this property due to the ra1lroad, cannery, freeway, etc. He could th1nk of no other developer he would prefer to handle the development of th1s property other than tÌ".1s one, based on his past ~rformance; e.g., Cupertino Town Center. -20- ~ç :~ " ",'-,:.. ~t .y ~:.;:, ~:~ . ¡, ~;.:< '1'.' ".f'. >!." - !.¿~ f Counc. Demp3ter asked ~or the cond1t10n that any prcposed use be presented to the Planning COIIIIIlss10n and the C1ty Council before 1ssuance o~ the building permit. Counc. Noel co_nted tbat he has 1nspected so_ o~ these .ma11 1ndustr1al areas and 80_ are done exceptionally well. Bis only quest10D _s the 100: frontages. Counc. Jolmson satdiÌlilt''''' quite sure the College would submit a written~. 'lhey should have a veJ=7 strong word on the list d:ti,~ or uses. He telt the C1t7 owed it to all the peop1e.1ÍIb) l~n because this _sting has run so late, to beft a lleCom hearing on this application. Counc. Stokes said be ... one o~ the two who voted against the po11cy stateMent tbat all properties arourd the College should be resident1a.l. 'l'bere has never been a doubt in his mind that this 1.8 d&r1n1te1y not good resident1,ol pro- perty. 'l'he small lots somewhat concern him, a130. He has observed the Santa Clara industr1al park and many ot these lots have been coû1ned as the need arose. He has slso observed many o~ tbe industrial parks that Mr. van der TOorren spoke about. He sa1d we have a certa1n amount of fa1th 1n the performance of developers 1n this C1ty. He wondered 1f Counc. Johnson's requests could be taken care of at the t1me ot the second hear1ng of the Ord1nance. Counc. Johnson stated he also has faith 1n Mr. Rodr1g'.leS; but here we are dea11ng with the land. Moved by Counc. Johnson, seconded ty Counc. Stokes, to defer this application to the next Counc1l meet1ng. AYES: Counc. Johnson, Stokes NAYS: Counc. Dempster. Noel, Pitzgerald 4 . t Mot10n fa1led, 2-3 Moved by Counc. Dempster, seconded by Counc. Noel, that Ord1nance No. 360 be introduced with the follow1ng cond1- t10ns: . 1-12 Standard cond1t10ns. 13-20 As set forth by the Planning Comm1ss10n. 21 Any proposed use 1n regard to th1s property shall be ~ubm1tted to the Plann1ng Comm1ss10n and C1ty Counc1l prior to 1ssuance of a building perm1t. 22 A list of the proposed uses 1s to be attached. Th1s motion and second w~re w1thdrawn. after further d1scussion. t -21- , '!f::... .' b7 Counc. Dempster, aeeonl!ed b.1 Counc. Ho>e1, t~ . ... .. t the start to draw up an o.rd1r.ance 1:: connectloa -. . . app11cat1on 4-z-61. 1Dclud.1ng all 20 conl1t!~ E.- '.. '..:OUS1Y set forth; cODlUtloa 21 all abon; c0n41t1~ 22 ~. Includes a 11st o~ ueea ~ tb111 propert7 U ~ttecl ,. .-,. . . app11cant after baY1Dg been surveyed b7 t.... ,,-.-.. """J J t"t....nt; am, to aHkO"" ~tlve Jlap (1-'M-61). aRM: COunc. Dempster.. tIoe1, Swire., Fitzgerald -~: Counc. ,:ïohnllon Motion carr1ed, 4-1 Vl.ll .-... -ufCES AND RESOLU'l'IOJIS POR ADOPl'lON .&.. ORD~··NCE NO.354: APr:tVY~ THE ANNE:<A¡'ION OP CER:.\¡. CONTIGUOUS :JNINHABITED 'I'ERR1'I'ORY DESIGNATED "IlOO-IlOO 66-1" TO THE CITY OP C'!J'~lNO. (Second Real.ling) þ 1IL~-d by Co=c. :>empster, secc:-.ded by Counc. Noel, to nave -:.2 Ord1nance 35'- read by ';~';:e or:ly; to accept the Mayor' II ~nlZ: as t~e Second Read~:-.g; and to adopt Jrd1nance 35"-. 1....:::: Counc. :e::¡pster, Jor,,::sj:".., Noel, S~ok~s, Fi tzgeral:1 :m. Y.S: None Mot10n ca~ed, 5-0 J -- ORDINANCE ~~. 355: APp:'~'-~;:; THE ANNEXATION OF CERTA:N CONTIGUOJS ~~INHABITED ~=r::TORY DESIGNATED "LIN~OLN SCHOOL 66-.." TO THE CI:'Y ')? CUPERTINO. (Second Read1!".g) 1ILrd by Co=c. Jempster, se::c'.èed by Counc. Noel, to have :~nce 355 lead by t1tle o~lJ: to accept the Mayor'~ ~ng as the Second Read~:-~; a:'ld to adopt Ord1nance .)5:;, þ .J..YES: Counc. :e:npster, J'O:-.r..50~, ~;oel, Stokes, F1tzgeral,l JIII.?5: None Mot1on carried, 5-0 - .'- ORDINANCE SO. 357: YEE ENr~PRISES - REZONING OF 1.3 ACRES FR'JM A RESIDENTIAL M'JLTnu: (R3-2.2*) ZONE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG-rd) ZONE. LOCATED SW CORNER OP KILLER AVENUE AND STEVENS t,;~ BLVD. (Second R.!ading) "'__4 by Counc. Dempster, lIeconded by Counc. Noel, to have ~ce 357 read by t1tle onl~; to accept the Mayor's ~'ng as the Second Reading; and to adopt Ord1nance 351. ~: Counc. Dempster, Johnson, Noel, F1tzgerald W111'S: Counc. St,kes . Mot10n carried, 4-1 -22- D. OJC~"CS NO. 359: ø ORDINANCE OF THE ern op cU1'KIftINO O-.....:.JI,i STOP SDDr m _ PLACED AT THE .IN.L"~-~'':'0IJ OP DUUa::E :>RIVE .am ...,~ YJUW&¡ DftIVB. (S6cœd R ."1ng) J!o...4 ~ :OZc. DI , teIP. ..tODded b:y Counc. Noel. to bave ~ u_..... 359 read bJ' uu. GDl7J to accept the IIQorI s '.., Ai. U :_ Secord ~r"'f.., ancS to adopt Qrdi...- 359. ~:'i' , a.ya: aD: , eo-~. no. ,.ter. JoÞo ~. Noel, Stokes, Pltzprald JIoDt ~1011 ean'1ec:Z. 5-0 JfK aYDG !!:--.~ A. ~IO:~:~=!: No. 1~ aDd 1447 Re.ol'.:":~:-: :....6 was read b7 Treasurer Jernpster. JIoved ::; ~:: =-: ~ Stoas, 54t::o~ed by :;:,=c. Noel, ';0 adopt He.ol~~~:~ :--c. A~: NAYS: . ...... -.. .... --... Demps,;er. :o~:.¿on, ~~e., Stoke~, F1,;zgerald ~~:.... '! Mo~~:~ :a~ed~ 5-: Ftesol.....: ~ :-. :--..,. was ~~~ =7 :-reasu~:, :e-:;¡p3ter.. 4 t ¡ MOved :7 ~::.=. Jor:.~~~, Resol~:~:~ :~? AYES: NAYS: sec~~ded ty :;)·~c. Stokes, ":0 adopt ..--... . Demp3':er. =~~:.son, ~;)e:, Stokes, Fi':zgerald ~- "'-,a .' ---.. ~o'::~~:: :arr:ed. ~ , :--... t z REPORT :? :??:CERS A. REP:::.. ::ITY :'?~:._:'~~ - ¡Ie ::.3.'::' =-.oth1ng f'ur<;;her. B. RE?:::>: . CITY MANA:;:Œ I r , , I f i \ i , I ¡ f ( 1. ~~e ~lty Mar~r introduced Mr. D1ck Draeger, of r. ::.!: E, who Idshec! to d1sc:1sS the streaml1ning :::: Stevens Creeic 3)~. for Je Anza College. He ~~.:1 the 111&1::. problem 1$ ae:¡thetlcs when we arr1ve £: 3te]11ng Roßd. 3e sa1d P.J; & E. w1l1 put a >ä::¡e on the existing t>lectrol1ers, purchase them ~=-;)Cl the C1t-)" ot cv.p!!rt1no, and 1nstall the new :::es, 1f th1s 13 .the w1sh of the Cuunc1l. -23- . ~ . " · · ~.. /,p.',....,.A. ()Jw£It: Moved by Counc. Dempeter, seconded by Counc. Noel, " 1;0 relocate the light standards from the s1de ot the s1:reet to the center ot the street on !;tevens Creek Blvd., "åt ot Stell1ng Road. Motion carried, 5-0 <, ..' ~':"'- ,-' :~ .:t · Xlll . . . 2. Mrs. Pauline Voòdru.tt' was present to ask permiss10n of the C1ty Counc1l to place a caretaker 1n the old house on the cOJllllerc1al property next to the post- otf1ce, now be1ng developed. to protect 1t t'rom vandals unt11 such t1me as they secure a lessee t'or 1t. So moved by Counc. Dempster, seconded by Counc. Stokes, with the st1pulat10n that 1~ be a s1ngle family only. Mot1on carried, 5-0 ADJOURNMENT Moved by Counc. JOhnson, seconded by Counc. Noel, to adjourn the meet1ng at 2:20 A.M. APPROVED: /s/ Jp~~v ~tz~erPl~ Mayor, C1ty ot CUpert1no ATTEST: /s/ Wm. E. Ryd~ C1 ty Clerk -24-