The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-24-1958 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF-SARATOGA PLANNING COP4MISSION .... ~.~].' TIME: February PLACE:' F~remanrs Hall, Oak Street, Saratoga, Cali.f0rnia TYPE: Regular P~eeting- '. -' I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL : " " PreaCh-t: Ander. s0n, Bennett, Crisp, Higgins~ Webste~ .::~-M,- Absent: Pasetta .Bj. MINUTES' Commissioner .Anderson moved that the reading or the minutes be d'ispensed with-and th~t..they be accepted as distributed -.. and corrected by a memo'From the Secretary. Commissioner t~iggins seconded. C'arfied unanimously. II -.NEW'BUS'INE.SS " WRITTEN CO,~IUNICATIONS 1. Saratoga Chamber of Commerce re County buildings.' Saratoga The SeCretary read a 1.ett'er ~ro~ the $ar'atoga. Chamber oF" C. oF C. . . County Commerce da.f'ed February..21,.19~8;- Buildings :' 'Commissioner.Crisp sta~edi that the Santa Clara. County Plan- nin9 Department would 1.ike a recommendation From the City. .. as to the'Vasona Junction site For future County DuilSings. -. A~ter a brief discuSsiOn ~ommissioner Crisp moved that the Pl.anning Commission' recommend '~0 the"City Council [hat the Vasona J.unction sit'e"D-e'-approved. Commissioner Anderson seconded. -Carried unanimously.- III UBLIC HE n!NSS t.- . .'. · - "' %7 :?" ' -- A. -USE PEP~IT'S Al%rf) VARIANCES ':' .'....' " .. : : None .- .. -. . .-' ~. .- .: --' IV COMMITTEE REPORTS' ~ "'-"~ -" . - f'A. 'ARCHITECTURAL ~ND"SI.TE CONTROL COMMITTEE :Vi'60 ' " .. 1. V-60 - Evelyn .Crabare'i - -"EV. elyn :. G'~aham. The Secretary 'explained 'tNe.requ:e'st t.o move a ~.resent'com- mercial build. fng to 'anoth'e.r site in 'the. commercial district. Commissioner Higgins moved td refer. the plans to the County. Plans-~ef- Planning .Department for their recomm..endat-ions. Commissioner fe~d -.to County Plan- Crisp amended the motion(to also refer the plans [o the 'Ring Dept. & .... ' Arch. & Site Chttectural and Site Control Co~Lmittee for a .report.. 'Com- Control " .missloner Webster seconded .the' motion as 'amended. Carried " unanimously. .' " " Mr. Oe0rge Payne, .~Sarat0~a, asked how lon9 would this take." Chairman Bennett stated ~hat the next Plannin9 Comission meeting would be March 10', 19~8-. change in Mrs. Caldwell explained the changes to be made in'a residence residence " on Big -on Big. BaSin Way. :- Basin.~lay C0~missioner Hi99ins moved for approval..' Commissioner Crisp seconded. Carried' unanimously. -. B. SUBDIVISION CO;,~I. 1TTEE L. A. Palm- : The secretary r'ea'd the minutes of the P'lannin.9 commission meeting of January 27,' 19~8 in which-Mr~ Palm agreed to 'a- Fire Marshall time extension of :v3.0 days."' Fire MarShall Bruce Wiggins explains need fo~ dual 'stated that t.he pol icy. o~ ,dual access was establ i shed in- access' roads- ' .. November 1956 by the .County Plannin9 doelesion. It did not' intend that individUa}ls construct. 'expensivelcoaved' roads -" but .that emergency egress:. be provided s9 that people can get out and fire fi,ghtin.9 equipment can get in in case of fire. He stated further-that.he: had directed a'letter to the County Executive' requesting acti'.on on many roads including' Bohiman, whic-h have- 'the same. orobl'ems of access. -' The S~c. reta~y stated [hat' the '~o~nty Planning Commission had disapPrd'jed =2"othe'r-pi=e'ce:s.o~ p.r0pe~ty .on $o'hlma~ Road beyond the City limits on the sac day as.the 'Palm bui. ldin9 site approval came :.up fojr cDn'SFid.erationk· The Secretary explained -- '7' that according to'ja~ E~o~hs of:..the County-_Engineers Office .. .-- ~.. .. the'coUnty intends to bu.i!d a 25% road. (bul dOZed 'and gra-" vel-ed). for one half mile.with fences.-that can be knocked down in case of emergency, this road to ~'o.nnect Bohlman Road and- Montevino Road,. The C~ty Att'orney stat.edlthat the.Plannin9 Commission halve the right. tolimpose reasonable restrictions as to,Health, safety and morals. Commissioner Highgins.moved to deny bui'l'ding Si.te approva'l, and then withdrew'his motion. The Secretary re'ad'furth~r conditions secured from the County Pla~nin9 Departm~ht.' Shbd'iVision CSmmittee meetin9 of :~.. ... ,. .-. Com~ission'~ 'Hi99i'ns ~ov~d for"B'uildin9 site.approval sub- jeCt to the c-ond. itions-Set-. by the County Subdivision 'Com- mittee meet in9 of .February ~18, 19~8.~ Chairman Bennett seconded. Commissioner 'Crisp 'sta.te~ that he felt the Plan'- , nin9 Con{mission'h~d n'o' ri!gh't to.Wi'thold the right ~o build on' his own property from Tany properly owner. The follow~n9 roll ~all' vote was.recorded:' .~yes: Anderson, Bennett, Hi99'ins, Webster. Noes:, Crisp. Carried. Commissioner Webster asked that it be noted in the'minu~es that Mr.' LSr'rtll A. P~lm 'was. notified 'of.'the P!annin9 Com- missi'on meeti'ng"of February'2~., 1'958 when the_ Secretary assured him that this had been done. 'SDR 59 ~. $DR 59 - Benedek Hejj.a Benedek' Hejja The Secretary read the condit'ions set by the Subdivision ,"" '. Commlttee of the County ~lannin9 Co~issi0n-on FebrUary 18 1958. Mr. 'Oilbert of.'Mark Thomas ~ Co.'.,~engineer for.the applicant, questioned condition #2. With approval by the peti'ti-oner'Chairman Bennett o~dered th'e case post-p.oned to March %1'0, 19'58 in order to clarify Con- dltion #2 with the Eountyl Engineers. " -3- 'SDR 60 3. SDR 6Q -'Fred J. MiZller Jr. Fred J. -- . --.=-' · Miller It.' The Secreta~y read.'[he. ~jo~'i[ti-0n-s s~t by the SubdiviSion " Committee of '~he Co'unty. Pl.~nn.i~9 D~par.tm. ent at their meeting Mr. Gilbert, ~4arR Th'0mas':-ehg'in~erj explained the reque'st to ~.'. .. -- the commissioners. ;- = ..... ~ ... approval Commissioner.lmderson moOed'for apprOVal of' the map, subject o'f map ..... .:- to the' conditions.-Se~,'By~.the County SubdiviSion' commit-tee on -'.:.:. February'!6, 19~8 plus an added condition, #7 "Co ect to ' nn ' sanitary se~er". CommisS-io~er':Higgins seconded. Carried unanimously. CommissiOner ~ebster sta~d that t'here seemed to be a great Need for " .Consulting need for a consulting efi~ineer-for the City to.help interpret :~ngin'eer .: the conditions se't by the County engineer.: C. CITY ADMINISTRATOR. ': .... -- 1. Plannin9 Consultant "Plann'i.ng The Secretary read from the minutes Of City CSunci. 1 Meeting Consultant .. of February 19, 1958. ... Commissioner ~derson moved ~hat' the' Planning Commission endorse the City Administrator~'s proposal to-hire a permanent Planning Consultant. ...Co~nissi.oner Higgins seconded. Carried unanimously.. V ORDINANCES '~ .. A.. ~41NIMUFI LOT SIZE - PC 3 : PC-3' The' secretary read a direCt'ire from'the City Council con- cernin9 the minimum lot size ordinance. .z- Chairman Bennett r~ferred the 'ordinance a~d'di'reCti. ve tO the Subdivis'ion Committee for study~ no date'being set for a report. '-" In anm~er to a question by Commissioner Crisp the City , AttOrney stated that the report of the Subdivision Committee : need not be a 'public' hearin9 but that the date for public hearing-~ould b~ set at the time of the report. :.. . .. .!-: .. .- The secretary 'stated.that the Mayor had been notified of -t:he Pla~nin9 Conmission request for a member of the Council! to consult with the Subdivision Committee on the revision and change of' the ordinance ... Bo SUBDIV'ISION ORDINANCE - PC ~ ~ .Report from City. AttOrney PC 4 The City Attorney commented.on various sections of. the pr.oposed ordinance as follows: .. 1, In definitions the ordinance adopts. the definition of' · .Definition subdivision as it is in the Map. Act. This constitutes a of-sub- ,. " division basic change as 'the pyF~sent Count~.'o'r. dinan. ce-defines a sub- " 'division s.s 3.or more. lots and does not exclude acre lots. ~ , The Map Act defines sub, d[i~ision as.~or"m0re lots and exempts one acre lot sites. This is on-pa9e 2, (j). , 2o Pa9e 2, 3e'~tion 3 ~' ~m ordinance' iS'a'.'law of'the City,' and a'viol'ation of'it is a misdemeanor. 5houid instructions be'-'included.in the -- 'o'rdinance or printed up separately 0n.'a schedule [o be handed out to the subdividers? 3. 'Under the present Coupt~.ord!nance the Cbunty Health Standards for officer investigates sewerage disposal and the County Engin; flood & drain- ' :- age control eer makes'a report-on the'drainage and each send a certifi- cation of the findings to'the Planning CoF~ission. This mandate iS left out of 'this proposed subdivision ordinance, in 5ec'tion 7. 'The procedura~ statement covers drainage 0nly. -The ordinande should s'et ~or~h the power's.and duties'of the .. Health and Safety agencie'~.- The standards-for drainage flood · control.and s~wsrage are missing. ~. Section 27, Page '15 - Section 9 of the County orainance · requires offers of dedicati.on'b~ the subdivider. The proposed ordinance does not.require these offers. Section.A - is the'intent' t'o limit to streets or should off- site improvements be incl'uded? Since 19~l standards for improving.Streets must be':-set:forth i.n. ~uDdivision Ordinances '- but may' be adopted by 're~ere~c'e~if they. are-in-.p~inted form and on file in t~'e ·City Clerkrs 0frice.. inspection Subdivider pay~ inspec'tio~"~ee..for. s~reet i~provement in- fee " .. spec'tion; The ordinance flust set the fee - it cannot ~e left 'to the di"sCrZ'ti.0n. of ~,~he.:~gineefo .,Re~er to a schedule of fees and at.tach-.~-he schedule to [he ordinance. .. .. -:. ~ · .. -- ~. There-is no requir'emen['that the: ag'reement or the.~ub- .. ~- .. divider be bQndedo Under,COunty ordinance a bond i's required. Section 29 does not cove~ithi-~. Section 8 of the Los GatOS ar'dinance iS 9ood on this subject. 6. Sub-section 12, Page 1~ Each engineer h~s his own .idea of certifica[ion form. There ..: C'e-r'tifi- ShoUld be a standard certi~fic'ation form set forth in the cation .form ordinance'for the City Cle:rk. "- Subsection 12, (d). The.Council-is reje'ctin9 all offers and acceptin:9 them subsequently ~hen they are impr.oved .--thi's .. should be in the City Cl~rif-certification.. F. -Shouldn't all action on the final map be in one section. Fibs.1. SeCtion ~ deals with approval of final maps and Section 2~ Maps also ~eals with final maps.. The County-ordinance calls for -' the filin9 of the final map within One year with the County Engineer. This ordinance does not state with'whom the final .map should be filed. Summary. The City-Attorney summarized 'hiS' r~port by stating that the most important points were-:' 1) .Make sure-the ordinance -. .." -'. includes one acre lots, 2)' Describe the duties of the Engin- :--' .eer and Health Officer, 3)-' Standards for roads should be se't forth. -. -_' The City Attorney further. ;rated t'hat the Pl-anning. Commission .... i~fl not required to have a public hearing on the subdivision .. ordinance now that the zonin9 regulation part has been taken '-. out. Chairman Bennett adjourned the meetin9 at-9:50 P. Mo 12 present-, no press' .. m~ P~