CC MIN 1972 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

404 seconded by Councilman Rhodes and carried . (MINUTE ORDER #72 --24 ) Application of LONGS DRUG STORES , INC .) for Exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide one parcel into six parcels , property covering most of the block bounded by Bay Road , Woodside expressway , Broadway , Chestnut Street , except the northeasterly corner of said block , in a " CG " ( General Commercial ) District . Planning Commission had at their meeting of January 18 , 1972 , recommended to Council that the exceptions to the Subdivision Ordinance be authorized , subject to the specific conditions outlined in report submitted to Council . Councilman Henderson felt that there were some complicated alternatives recommended by Planning Commission , and that there had been no opportunity before the meeting to see the tentative map . She also had the impression that the City Manager and Planning Director had comments to make on the matter , and asked instead that these be in writing , for consideration on the following week ' s agenda , in order that Council could consider the matter with a greater degree of understanding . It was also her understanding this would not work a hardship on the applicant , and this aspect was discussed briefly , and representative of Longs Drug Stores , Inc . was invited to comment , Mr . Sam Axtell , Corporate Secretary for Longs Drug Stores , indicated he did not feel the issues were that involved , noting their letter to Council dated February 4 , clarifying their position . He commented on the difficulty of putting together a 3 . 5 million dollar project , and indicated timing was critical . Principally what was involved was whether City could demand undergrounding while it did not know what its undergrounding plan was . A lesser question related to decorative lighting . Councilman Henderson moved to postpone consideration until Council had the benefit of written staff comments , and an opportunity to review the matter . Motion died for lack of a second , Staff was requested to provide verbal report , and Planning Director noted that Council had before it the report of the Planning Commission dated January 24 , 1972 , which took the typical form of recommending certain exceptions be granted as requested by the applicant . The Tentative Map , he noted , normally is approved by the Planning Commission . However , in this case , exceptions were involved which can only be authorized by Council . In this case , the Planning Commission report was unusual in one respect , that being that , in addition to making specific recommendations , they listed a number of alternative determina- tions Council might want to consider , and these were only provided in the event Council should be disposed not to accept the recommendations . 2 -7-72