Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-22-1968 Planning Commission Minutes ..: CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION . i. TIME: Monday. 22 January 1968, 7:30 P.M. . .PLACE: City.Council Chambera; Fruitvale AvenUe. Saratoga, California ' : '." TYPE: Regular Meeting . ' ; ' "' " ******************** ' ' I, ROUTINE ORGANIZATION. ' ............ '.:' .'." ' .... ' ' . , . .. . . .: '.~ B ~ MINUTES .. "' """' ': '.Commissioner 'McFa'll moved se~'onded by. Commissioner Johnson .'."that', ;. ....... ' ' .:.....' 'the .reading of the minutes of' t'he'a, January 196a meeting be'waived' "' '. .... : ..': :..' ';..... " and that they be'approved subject "to the following addition:' ":' "" .... "~ ' . ;:':.: i: ~' Z..~..' . .. :... :'.:Chairman Norton opened nominations. f.or offiders .for .the. coming year.' : ::.'.'" 'z ...., ... :and expressed his pleasure at the acceptance of 'another appo'intment ~ ~ .' ~ '.'. ..advised tha.t Commissioner McFa'l'l may not be able to serve 'a full 'term , .. ."" ...... · .:'but his services would be valued. for as "long as he could remain on 'the "" ....."~" ': ' Commissioner McFall. nominated Commissioner Norton as Chairman of the .! !. · ..' '. "'," Planning Commission for 1968. "Commissioner Crisp' moved, seconded by :' ': ... .,:: -.. .... ! Commissioner Kasner. that nominations be closed- motion carr.ied with :! I .iL .,':i'. Commissioner Norton abstaining. It was moved by Commissioner;McFa~ll"' '["'i' "!i' '..! · ':"' "'" "": ""' and seconded by Commissioner JOhnSon that the Secretary be'dt~:eCted ..... '..!'} '.:' ""::'~: "' :""' .... : : the Commission for 1968; motion carried. unanimously w~th Conm~is'st0ner.".i' i:"!;" ....:;!. :.' .'. ...Commissioner McFall nominated Commissioner Johnson as ViC'e Chairman- ... ". of the Commission for 1968.' Commi~sioner Crisp moved, 'seconded by ";.' "': · 'Co,,n~issioner Kasner,' that nominations be closed; motion carried with'. :.~ '.:.:.'Z:' .:..:. '....' ....and seconded by Commissioner Smith that the Secretary .be directed' to. "" ' ':..': .." .:.i,;'.;i..;:' .-'.' ',".."record a unanimous ballot for. COmmissioner Johnson as'..Vice Chairman . .". ".: ;.. ' . of .the Commission for 1968; motion carried unanimously with 'Commissioner. · ..: ... Commi'ssi0ner McFall nominated S'~anley' M.' Walker..Planning .Director, as .Secretary of the Comm'issi0n for" .1968 'Commissioner' 'Crisp moved'. seconded · .....' ".'; ... by Commissioner Kasner, that nominations' be clos'ed; mot.ion 'Carried ..unani- · .... .... mously.. It' was moved' by Commisaioner MCFall' ~nd 'seconded b'y".Co~mnissioner. ' .. " .. Smith that the .Secretary' be directed .~o record a 'unanimous..ballot .for' ' : ... .Stanley M. 'Walker. as Secretary Of the Commission:for' 1'968;' motion 'carried. " ... .. .. . .. . ~ . L..':... ..... , ':' . ... : . .,. .... ... .. : . . - ... . , ....".... ~ · . ., · ..:. . ... . .; . .. . ,. . .. "" .Plannfng Comm~ssfon/4eeti.ng'- 22 3anua 196~1 - Continued. :..'" [ ['~." : :'.": '. . ' . ' 'Co~ss~oner cr~sp moved seconded by Co~ts~oner'30hnson e~me the ~" ' " " Comm.~ss~on e~cpress ~s 'appreciation for the services rendered. ~n the '.' ..... .. . pas~ year by Stanley H. ~a~ker,' Plann~n~ D~rec~or, Gary ":':""""' "'~' ' ' ".'Assistant' Plan~er, Joan 'Loher ~ . 8~eno-Secreeary; motion carried unan~-' :"""':::"""::'" :' "'. "'The 'Secretary read' ~) a petition (w~th 59-s~gnaeures) subm~ed by ....'...'::.~ ....:.: ...... fr~ residents on Herr~n A~enue and screens connected or.'near~.eo .. " ....... ';' ~. & ~s. Rona~d L. Za~ez, and ~s. ~a~her~ne ~ns .a~l opposing the . be ~urned ~neo a Gol~ec~or 8eree~ and suggesting' .e~o a~eernaees 2). rea~ "' :..'::' ..:.' ..... drapetry sales be' added ~o ~he l~se of uses 'permitted under the V~s~eo~ [' :-: .: .L.. ~elch protesting the deve~0pmene o~ the SConeson property on B~g Basin ~ay ' ' . the Genera~ Plan for use as a: St. C~e~zen Re~reme~ C0~y or upper ' ' " ' ":" "' ~oldenber~, ~32 Sprinter Road protesting. ~he cue ~hrou~h. of Spr~nger ..... to protest the ~u~e~-~am~y Res~dene~a~ Zon~n~ fo~ the ~' property [' .'."~ 7"" ~.'.. ):"""~. and suggested Chat the proper~y be developed as ~'R-~'~ (8~ng~e Family ~"::~'~':-~'~ ~' " ~. Corer sta~ed he ~s sorry~ ~. ~v~ngsc.on .cou~ .hoe ~e present and"' ". .. ...... .: '-1lO-cars dur~ug'.peak hours ~n" the peak d~rec~on 2) Herr~n 'x~h """"'~ """ · :' ·proposed. extension shows ~70-~ars during peak' hours· ~n the pea~ d~rect~on' "' :' '~": '" : ·3). ~he ~ncrease being partially due '~o the' ~ncrease of s~udenes ~n the ,. ~'..? .'~..... "" .sch'oo~s serviced by Herr~n Avenue· at ~he present ~) very l~t~e 5r... :....' :' College .traffic .~s acidity anticipated... ~or Herr~mn ~venue and 5) the · -.j 'i. "-.'Z'-'.. ".Planning Commission Meeting - 22 Janu~.r'y 1968 -" Continued 'L, ' .Chairman 'Norton advised· that.' the Herriman Avenue ext'ension Mr.' ,Corer added that the .er~iman Avenue extension wou:ld grL. at].y '!: ~'i; i .. relieve the traffic at the' intersection of Fruitvale and 'Sara toga" ~ ".: ' Avenues. He. also. explained that Russell Mne.' ~s proposed aa a".:" "~."'.;~' :"."~'~'. ' ..~' ..as a. 30-foot street as suggested b'y. s~e people~... ,. ' '.~. ': ': " ". : widening 'proposed for Russell. ~ne would deEr'to~ landscaping .provided ""-" ..' ..... ; . . Chairmn. Norton.'Stated that the 10-foot right-of-~y beio~ged to the ' /....-': .'. City and they can do ~at they ~nt to with it even .though 'it has been :' ..:' .: '.'...': -'~',:'.,..-'--.'.~L: landscaped. He adde~ .that he does not blame the residents of Russell' ':.: : . .:.-..'....'. ' ... .. ':..'.~ne for 'being upset about losing some of their landscaping but the' "". Z':... ~:.~ . :'. ". did not feel' that widening Russell Mne.~8 a logical .solution since It " · ' .. ~uld not provide ~he' area with a good collector street and the.bridge '~":' .. :: .."3) Verde Vista should be considered for a collector' street since it.~ ..'~?.. ~...;"...... · -: .."' seems to Serve in that capacity now especially'with the'.poSs'ibility ' ,. "' over Verde Vista the residents 'would 'not be burdened' with .the'.up-keep .~: · : .... "" logical to go do~ Verde Vista rather than.Russell Mne'. · ... ', . ~' ~ '...~ 'the only reason Verde Vista ~'s not considered .zig because the City ':. [L :.....~.:'j..: ........ ~.'....'. ~. Unsera suggeste~ that a street be put thr~gh. the orchard to take . '~. ~:...~'~ L~:'?:'.~.2....." ~. '~fer angered that this is'a possibility but it would not do the ': Job near as ~11~ ..... ....... ;.:. Chairmn Norton explained that 1) these are difficult· Judgements to .' ' ': ....... ' .... mke but there is traffic and it has to go sMe~ere' and 2)' ~ratoga ' "' "' "" has gro~ frM its former 'population of about 16,000 "peopl'e and is " .... is anticipated for' Russell ~ne?.' ' ' :' · ....... . area of Saratoga and thus requires a Wider s'treet at' the ·connection. " ".~ .'j.'......' ..': ~s. Miller pointed out that~ their homes ~re located onL'large hillside ~::"~ . ':.': ".. ~iCh resulted in low'density~ thereby reducing traffic. ....,.~ .: '..'. · ~. ~nce stated that 1) very few of the people' in the hills' ~re .... · .. ~ :".~ ··favor of ·Russell ~ne.becoming a collector street and 2')~ Verde Vista .... - -.. " couldn't possibily ~ost any more to develop as a 'collector street than .. Planning CommisSion Meet inS -. 22 Januar3z 1968 -. Continued· .. ', II. A.. GENERAL PLAN REVIEW - CONTINUED .... . . '..' ~ . '. .. Chairnmn Norton 1)' directed the Planning Director to study· the the matter of comparative costs and produce some figures by the · next regular· meeting and 2) :stated that if the available .property · '. ' ' in the area is developed theh the sUbdiVider will be required to · " pay the for =the'cost of the ·bridge. ... " Mr. Charles Macledn stated t~at 1). the people On Verde Vista groan .' ..... everytime they are asked to pay for improvements 2) he.fdlt a lot of' ' ." : .. .. these·people would be happy to give this ·street to the City and 3) he ""' '.~..' .. wondered if it was the policy of 'the Planning CommissiOn and City Council '- not to ·spend monies to get a 'street that would be more suitable for ... . .. for their requirements. ... : .Mr. Jerry Loher, Saratoga Footliill. s Development, explained that people · '. ' on Russell Lane might wait fdr approval of' SD-729 since· some improve- :" "' ". ". ments will be made on Russell Lane as part of the subdivision.' .. .. . ,. .. "" ' ::" ... Mr. DrewL'ance inquired (in view of the subdivision) if the Planning ' ;..., ....' =: . ., Commission could prevent Russell .Lane from. becoming a collector street.; ":' · Z.=' .... Mr. Corer, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton,' .stated that: i"~': i .. [ .. 7... he was not aware of the propdsed subdivision at 'th~ 'time'.~he lGeneral .~':!:"i] ...... .. .: Chairman Norton suggested that the City Admini.strator 'providt: .=s'0me~.i! ..' !l['~i..]'~:~:"i: :' =" figures showing the difference, in cost for developing Verde. V.i..stal!!.....,,.l.. ;.!. .. '...': """:: =' "' Mr. M. G. 'Lee, Har.leigh .DriVe',' stated that· if the right'-0f-way .on '+:' !]":""' " :' ": Russell. Lane..as.. wellZ as 'the 'pavement is.widened ·some' people will lose .. '. " ':":'.' "'~ ~f "' """ The Secretary explained that :the new section of Russell Lane' would be ;....'..: '.'. Chairman Norton advised that the City does not plan [o take 'any more · "' "'.."' ~.'.. · . .': right-of-way from property owners' on Russell ..... . . ' · .. · . ..~ .. ' "!.' ".'" Mr. Unsera, inquired if he could be assured (if"'Verde Vista were···. ~." .'. ;.'.. . . .:.,....i... developed as a street wi. th a l50'foot right,of-way).Russell Lane would .'i · .... - ...' .. Chairman ·Norton answered that the Planning Commission could no['.make' l'.i.='. · - . - . .. ..{ · '.' '.' ':.. The SeCretary, in answer to an inquiry.from'Mrs. 'Miller, stated. ~hat , ""'. ;'."..~ .. ".! '.the improvements on Russell Lane.would not necessarily be .paid for.by.'..' "..,." "": ""' ' .." an assessment district as stated in the General Plan Report,..but would ~.. ;:~. ,.. .. . . he was' speaking on' behalf !' ...'~x.., '.. .] '......' of' the residents"on Herriman. Avenue .and 2). the residents 'of Herriman · .: .., did not ·understand what benef.its they would .receive from.."the .extension"~. ~ 'f . .... . . ... . ;. ~ .'. · .. .~ . . .. . . ..... '... .." .'. .' .; ';.. · . .. . .. :.... . .' . . · . .. . ! . .. ..... .'... ; .. . . · .. . Planning' Commission Meetins - 22 January '1968 - Continued ;.'. .... Chairran. Norton explained if<at 'they would ben,zfit by ..or. 3a=vi~g 'Lto '~ · ....= .= .=. .. use. the overcro~ed Saratoga 'and .'Fruitvale Avenue' intersectionl'.' ='~"." ' "l~]ij..~''7 .i.1'..= ~'. Merlet inquired 1) ': if there will be evening College traffic ..... · ....... 2)' ~ere the information' peitaining to revenue' ~'s' .obtained and .= 3). ~y Fruitvale Avenue is not Considered for improvement rather + ..~.,.'.7'~ 'f.."...... .. '..' 'are being discohraged, but traffic dll still be heavy .at peak hours ~. '...] '.... = "~ ': .... and 2) FrultVale Avenue is scheduled for i~rovement .... .'~' ~ " ~. C.ofer furthe~ explained 'that 1) the peak hours .will be between · '.= ...':=.:...'.... '. 8:30 and 9:00 A.M. and 2) the 'revenue estimte' ~s based .on population. ' .' .....= ... ' .... .. of the City in future years and '.on past records.' . = . . ' · =' ~. 'Charles ~dlean stated=lthat 1). the Sai'atoga High School student's { "ll"="'C""" .... "' Will go speeding do~ Herri~n even more it the extension becomes a · "=. ~"'L~. :.=:.'l ~.' .'7..'.'."' reality 2) the people.will soon realize that they can cut. do~ Herri~ "'~ .' f "7] ='l.I./'.: 'f' to reach Mountain View and CUpertino. and. 3). he felt' Allendale Avenue.. [ ...~' .=i-="...'' "' '."'· .l'..should be extended through property already' o~ed .by the City. '... ';. ' ' ~ Cofer advised that Herrich Avenue 'would not 'service the 'propoSed '.~.= ~Ciean stated that'these' students really' did not need. a s'ervice : = '.. i" = road since they did' not drive. '.. ... ... .... · . '.. "'...... ~.. C~fer agreed that the children' did' not' drive but pointed 'out that .... '..r ..r .'..m "the parents bringing. the children to school did.driVel. =. "..' ' ? ""'-"' .. ~. Gil 'Albertson 'stated that '1) if H~rrimn .Avenue is 'ex~end'ed s' ': '.:.f'.'7' '.r'. ,'... 'signal light should be provide'd tO prevent actidents' 2) . crossing the ]~ .;.~.'.'.. '~"'..'7. '.:l" bridge is difficult now and will be more difficult a'fter the extension' =~":."."='?' '."~' '.' .'v "..: is constructed and 3) another five minute mit. will not inconvenience · '.'.-l;..:'~] '~.. ~s'. Woody ~atley, suggested; that all that was necessary .to.: handle ~he traffic. for the proposed grade school and =he existing junior high school was a '~lk~y and not a service road .of the'type ~ha~ would,be provided by . ... ..~. · ... . .; ~..'- ~. ~clean'stated that a solution. would.be for' the City '~o increase i~s ~'...'~:.'..~. '. :'.'l'l'.. .. traffic control by hiringldepu. ties.at Herriron Avenue d~ing the peak ..~".'~"' ~.".l"""".". .:.. · Chairran NOrton.advised that this would be.an increased expense for ~ ... "."' ~. Robert 'Van.Der Toorren, Planning ConsUltant, 'stated 1) he represented :"..":;"~.."':..~."'':: .'. several residents of.Saratoga 2)',. perhaps. next time Mr."LiVingston ~s in i i'...'.' .,."',.l."'. '. .the area they could meet and.deal in generalsties 3) one of the real """ :"' "'::; problems facing the merchants'in the .village is'parking 'and the miter ' · '."". :" ..... should be considered as part .of. the General'Pla'n and 4) 'he would like. .....:'. ' .... 'The SeCretary explained .'tha~ :due'.to a miter: of 'eConomicS.'~.' Livingston .. .... '.'~': """' has never been asked ..to'study"'the parking 'sitUa't'ion in'the Village. . .... ... .. . . . . . .. . . . ': ""."' .' ' " "· ': · '~5' ' " ~ ' '" " ' · ""' ' "' "' " .':"'."'l' ': .... : " ' . .: '..... ':. .,. ..... . . . ' ' , i .'... "..' ..... . . . '... ... ~ . '.' ~ .. .. . .... . .... .. .... . . 5.'. . . .. .~lannin.~ Commis'sion Meeting .- 22 January 1968 - Continued II. A. GENERAL PLAN RF. VIEW- CONTINUED : Mr..Van Der Toorren' further stated that 1) the City had an obligation :."" :' .' to help the-merchants increase' their business and one way to do this ': ," would be to solve the parking .problem 2). the Quite area needs up-grading · ..:" .and expansion 3) the Quite area offers a nice quality of service but the .... . .... shops are all too small 4). some of. the Professional Zoning in the area .'..' .. should be changed to Commercial' 5) the students of the West Valley .' Junior COllege wili require some· facilities such as '.ice cream parlors ..,. :.'. .' .. . laundries. and snack shops n~arby 6) it is time to consider what ~.......~,~'L: ..' .should be done with the Maggorie property (located on the corner of '! '. ' ".. .. '. Cox and ·Saratoga ·Avenue) and 7) this property would be suitable for?- · ..',';: '.... -..: "' '. 'Commercial Zoning. j'. .." ' '. .. !.. ":'..::.~; '.Z'..' '. Chairman NOrton suggested th:at Mr. 'Van Der Toorren put' his suggestions """:' ":' ." ' into a brief statement and submit it to the Planning Director · :.' .....':.-" . .... Mr. 'Van Der Toorren then stated that 1) he felt the visitor commercial , :.:.'j'~'.::' '....'..:':. · .. .i.s '-a ·good idea 2) ·bowling alleys.· skat.ing. rinks. motels...and antique ".". ,." .~ '.':i'.,""~"",'" ' = shops were not compatible in' the, same Sh~pping center. ' -' "' "' "'. ""'" Mr...John J. Hayes,' Jr , attorney, .Stated that he was concerned about · ~..... .'...' .......: the' Visitor .Commercial Zoning and inquired if all the uses already ...:.:.:..:.:....:.. .... '.. permi~ted in·the C-S Zone· would' be included in the Visitor 'Commercial. ' "":" ..... ". ..... ' The Secretary stated that· the Visitor Commercial uses. would be in addi-' · ".' '...' '." " tion tO .the existing C'-S uses. ... : . .. . ~' """ '." Mr Guenther Machoe. Ronnie Way. inquired how ~ommunity parks would' ....... · ..". affect traffic on Frditvale ~nd Saratoga Avenues? . ""' · ~' f' ""' Mr Gofer answered that .the residents using thiS·. park ·will.· ha're to " L".:.' · " drive down Saratoga or Fruitvale.· · '..' "" ' · .~. . ..: . ]"" "]' Mr. MaChoe inquired· 1)' if a' savings could be realized by locating parks· · 'L"'.." closer to schools. and 2) 'what the projected traffic ..was' for the corner . ...] .~. :'.'..:.. .. of Saratoga and Fruitvale Avenues? . . · : '~ ~""" ' ' ~"" :'" 'Mr. 'Gofer answered ·that it would not be.beneficial to locate parks : .. "' '.' '.". near schools and 2)' the.projected traffic across the Saratoga inter-· " section at the ·peak hour in the peak direction is 900~vehicles and " "' · "':. "" '~ the projection across the FrUitvale-Saratoga ·intersection at the peak . f.. .... .;I ...... .'. hour .in 'the peak direction is 7.70-vehicles. ·, ·;....... . ............ · ........ .., ......... · · . i. · ....... ' .......... '.. !' ~]'.'L..'.' ' .' '.'.. "'Mr. J...'F...Cage. Shadow. Oaks i.~'ay~ 'stated that the 'p:athwayS proposed '.. · for over the P G & E 'ri~ht-o'f~way will cut. across property belonging L .. ' : . to him and wondered' if the p'].anning' COmmission was aware' o.f 'this. · "' :"' ".Chairman Norton explained th'at pathways would not be developed if it. " . '. .. were an infringement on private property. · . " .. :' . :......... '~.... The secretary explained that: tile easement' referred to i§ not the ut]ility · :... ... easement but instead refers to the. easement along· the' !arge.r' tower·· ... '. along the railroad to HighWay.'85 a~d near·· Paul Masson.. · ., .. · '. . ."'.. f.. z...I 'Chairman Norton explained th'at if .there 'is f a FloOd ·'COntrol 'easement '. .... available.these could be ·used 'for .pathways i.. ~,-. :'.~'...... . '. . .-.'.' .: . :.. '.' :" l~r. Machoe stated ·that the General. Plan.indicated 'a.'goif course 'for. .. saratoga and then'.inquired 'aboUt the affect .such. a'. gelf .:course would .. ..... ""' ' ·" have. on ·taxes? ' "" " " · - ' .. · ' .'" : .... l . · ....{.. ' ..- ..:' ! ' . ..' . · · . . .. ...... :... ..:. . ..... . . .' ..... .!.. . . ...... -.. ;' ". ' ' · -6- ' '...'.' "' ' "" "'. ' ' . ' . . .' .. -. · : .! . .. .'. ".... .... ... ... l..:."', ..'.. .. .. · . . . .: . · i' . · " · '. e : ' ! ' .: '.' ' · " """' . .. . .'." ..· · :.: !.- : ,. . ....... ;,. .". i ~ . .... . .: . ..... . . .. · .~ . '.. .. . . . .... . =.i' . .... !~ ... · ... . .. u ..=. . E... .. t'i .. :f :'. =. .. · .... ..'...~ .... . 7' !f . l! ' · ,.... .~ . . .. ...... . ../. ...: · .......:..'.'. '... ;:,..' .:...... '~.., . Plannin~' Copmnisston Meetin~ -, 22 .JanU.ary 1968 - Continued "' II. A. GENERAL' PI.~N REVIEW - CONTINUED · '. . Chairn~n 'Norton advised that' sometimes golf courses are provided , ... by building subdivisions "areund them and in that ~y having the , " . :' Co~issioner Johnson axplained ~hat 'the zoning laws would not need ~. .to be altered too much since' about the same amount of homes will be " ....'."... '.. ~.'. permitted but will be arranged. in such a' ~y that' part of tl)e property' . .'.'.:.: .. will be used for a golf course. "'Z.. '.'."' " Mr. ~leb, Sr. 'stated' that' 1)' the Saratoga residents should. do some-. "' thing about the probl'ems inherited from the past by approaching them ' ':: ::. "..:' with an open-mind and 2) he was community minded and is tryt. ng to .'. . .. improve .his proper~y and has:' improved .to. his financial disaster'. ""'..'.'.~'..' ... .:.. Dr. Abrams requested.'that the 'report'mde by RicheS:.' R~search'relat[ve "" "' ~.. to the Quit'o area be '.incorporated into .the General Plan. '."?'/.Z :'..".' "' " Chair~n 'Norton stated that this request could 'be taken 'into consider-.. ..:'~ '. .... ation by the General Plan' comittee and then closed the hearing (9:20 · ... '.'.'. '.- .' P.M.) and directed the hearing relative' to the General Plan continued " .' to the next regular meeting.~ '. .' · · "}"~'~' '~ ..B....~-143 - Pacific Shore Prope~tie's, via Roncole - Request for' Use Permit .......'. . . '.'. ...... for'Model Home Sales Office "."'..' '~..~" Z.' " The Chair~n opened ~he' hearing at 9:42 P.M. The Secretary stated that · ...'. '....'..'. the Notices of Hearing ~re ~iled and then briefly.reVie~d this file. .. . .~. .. .- . ~ ' ~ 'Glen ~u~e', President of Pacific. Shore PrOperties:, ~s present and . ..".". .' stated that they expected to' Complete this subdivision in .approx!~tely .... · 'twelve months '. . ...... , Co~tsstoner McFall explained 'that 'the" same use has b~en requestea and · ' ' ~" .... approved once previously." ~ .... · · .. .: . . ... ".'... : .... . .. .. .:....., .".....-..".'.. .. : The Secr'etary read. the Staff'Report reco~end~ng 'that the .subject request. "' ':"" ." for model: home sales offi'ce ~e .granted for one year 'subject to' the pro- · "~: """' ~=':" .. hibition of any use as a 'construction yard. .". No one else in' the'audience .wiShed 'to c~ent. .' '. "At '9:48 P.M. Co~issioner JohnSon moved, seconded by Comissioner McFSll, " .". that the hearing relative to. ~-143 be closed; motion carried unanimously. ""'~.. Co~issioner McFall. moved, seconded by .Comissioner Smith, that the ..; ~ ....:. . Staff .RepOrt of 22 january 1968, relative .to p-143, be adopted and the " Use .Permit 'be granted for one year' subject.' to prohibition.of any use .0f sales office as a construCtion.yard in accordance ~th Section 16.6 · '; L' ~ ' C. ~-144' '-' C & I Development Company, Scully Avenue .- Request for Use · ".'.' .. .,. Permit for ModeI HOme Sales Of'fice " "" The hearing for.:~-144 ~s'o ,ened a~' 9:50'.P~M.. The S~retary 'stated '.~.. ~hat the NotiCes of Hearing ~re ~iled.'and then" bri~fly~rev~ia~d:~'~: :.:.' . · .: ...: .'.... ... · .... : .. ... .....~' ..' . . ... . · . ..' ...:. :..','.'.. .. ~ ~.... · ...,. . . .. ... ;-..... -. .:.:...:. Plannin5 Commission Minutes .- 2.2 Jand.a. ry 1968'- Continued · ": ". No one was present to represent the appliCant.and no one from. the . . . audience wished to. comment. .. .. .'. · ! .. :.:... !'.: .~."· ': The .Secretary read 'the Staff Rep'o~t reconnnend ing, with concurrence ' "" '~' :=' ". " of the Subdivision C0rmnittee, that this Use Permit be granted for .. one year subject to prohibit'ion 'of any use as a construction'yard. l!..:.i:!,~!.:,i~..'. '....~ Conmlissioner McFall exp].ained that this is the first request for . ""' a sales office in this devel'opment. "' '~. "After discussion,' CommisSioner Johnson moved, s'econded,'by Commissioner . .' .-':..' ".7' Smith, that the public hearing be closed (9:53 P.M.) relative lto UP-144;" · '......2..... · . · '.'.' '. "." ". It w-as moved' by commissioner' McFall seconded by Commissioner' Smith', :' '..l. .: '.' that' the Staff RepOrt of 22 January 1968 .relative to UP-144', 'be. ":'..'..".'..'.......~ .' -. adopted and. the Use Permit' granted in accordance with Section' 16.'6 .: ~.. ...~ . : ..... ... '.' of Ordinance NS-3; motion Carried unanimously. '-. .'.~ ': .':::" .... D. UP-145 - George W. Day Ranfle Lane and Saratoga' Avenue.- Request 'for ~ · .~..:. ... 'Use Permit for Model Home Sales Office " " ... '..... '.":' c.. The hearing on UP-145 was opened at 9:54 P.M. The Secretary stated ~ ~"" ' . '..... '..:. ,.. . .. . ""'~""'/ " the Notices of Hearing were mailed and briefly .reviewed this file. : Mr. Harris, present to represent the'applicant, stated' that 1) there ' .' ".: are six (6) homes ~rdsently under construction in this subdivision and' .: :: ~....:.... three (3) more lots ~aking a total of nine (9) homes which should be · " ~"~..." ' "' " finished in about one (1) year at 'which time this sales office will be · ..' ',"'.. -.~.. .. sold. He then explained (in' answer to an inquiry from Mrs. John Elliot ""' · '. 'of. Ranfre Lane) that all the' lots were located in the Kentfield subdivi- ~' :' ~' "" . Mrs. Elliot request. that the: subdivision display a more subdued .sales · '."!' ;.."~. ' ...... '. The Secretary read the Staff'Report recommending that' .the request for Z'..?""'!j:Ll' ': "' .'. " model home sales office be granted subject ,to the'conditions stated in .... Chairman NortOn directed that'. th'e report be' amended by adding the ".:.' '.'L' " 3) any use 'in conhection with any other subdivision. . . ... ~ .. . . .'. .... .. :.. . .: ... . ~' ." Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Connuissioner Smith, tb' close .... ..':...'." the hearing for UP-145; motion carried unanimously and' the hearing was · . ~ ......... Commissioner McFall moved', seconded by Conunissioner Crisp, that the .' ...-. .'~ .'Staff Report of 22 January 1968 in 'connection with UP-145 be adopted, .. :" " a,s amended., and the Use Permit be 'granted subject .to 'compliance with · ' all applicable provisions of! Ordinance. NS-3, Section 16.6; motion "' "': .' RECESS AND 'RECONVENE ' planning Con~niSsion Meetin~ - 22 .January~ 1968 - C0ntin~,.ed · '.: III. BUILDING. SITES AND SU-P, DIVISIONS . ';' .. ..,~. A~ ,SD-729 - Saratoga Foothills, Seaton Avenue a'nd' verde Vista - .'.'...... . Subdivision Approval - 39 Lots.- Continued front 8 Jan~,ary 1.9.68 -. Con~nissioner McFall pointed Out that Condition -. 11 of' the Subdivision I. . ' !.],.....j. ~.. Con~nittee Report Qf 22 January 196~ should be revised to read. as follows: !........ .. .. .]..:':' ."' "11. SuBject to additional requirements of Planning Co~m'aission (Design "i. '....'. Review Con~nittce)." , .. .. i..~ and the following .Note be adde~L to th'e subject report: '~IO'Hj:' The C0mittee points o~t that" a portion of the 'area shown .... " · on the curr.ent' tentative map is under consideration by the General Plan Review as a' publi'c park" The' Secretary,, in answer to an [inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that the park 'site would consist of three (3). acres. Connnissioner McFall stated that the Subdivision Conmmittee met with the Pla. nning Comnittee 0f th'e Ci'ty 'iCouncil and it is understood that the develop~nent of this subdivision is agreeable subject to .the .City work- ing .out terms with the subdivider not to start construction innnediately. ..... ' ....'Councilman Hartman. in ansx,~er ~o an i[nquiry from ChairCan 'Nortoi~il stated ... that he had no further con~ncnts relative to this matter since he"felt '. the' approach used by the Planning Connnission.was proper.'. ' ' :" Comnissioner ~risp advised .t~t' Condition - 5 of the Subdivision Corn-"j' " · ' mittee Report did not specify p~ving of the easement. ' " . ....... 1. .. ~e Secretary e>~plaine~t that th'is is covered in the Standard'En'ginee'ring, ..... Conditions referred to in 'Condition - 1 of the subject .repor~i.. .' ..Chaiman Norton then directed that Condit'ion - 7 of the.Tsubject. repdrt. ~.. be amended as follows: ... "7. Improve pedestrian wa!k~.;ay to school along the easter~ 'side 6f LOt '6'," .' ......, .......: ........i..:... as approved by the Director of Public Works. ' .......... : ............. A resident of Malcolm stated that 1) he did not like the. idea of Seaton : .'. .gOing thru to Verde Vista but would rather see a cul-de-sac at the corner .... .. and 2): 'there have been problems (at the corner of Seaton and Malcolm) '... " ' " with motorcycles and speeding and this is not safe for children playing :.. " in. the street. :. ' Chaiman Norton advised' that for safety reasons and emerg&ncv vehicles, ~ . . ... · . . . ~....'~'.':"i' ... ..' it x. ras necessary to connect Verde Vista and .Seaton 2) the City is adverse ...... .'. · to Cresti'ng any more blocked off stree~'thdn is necessary and 3) even "'.. if the 'subdivider suggested construction of 'the road wit'bout connecting .' 1.-.' ....it, the. Planning Comnission would haV.e 'to ask him to change' it. ... comnissi6ner crisp' explained that'the Sul)d.ivisi0n Ordi~nce. requires' a ... subdivision to have two means of .acce. ss. and the Planning Comnission cannot 9hange. thiS. ; ,... .The Secretary, in answer tO '.an' inquiry, sta~ed th;1t the park may provide · a double access road to 'the schOOl. : .,. .... · '. .. Conmissioner Crisp stated 'Uhat.very few cars:.wo~ld use. suCh a road,. · ' '.' . .... ',. "'. .. . · - ': '...l.. 7,1.. ..'. .....:' '.. " .--9~ .. % ~.'.... .' '. P. lannin~ Commission Minutes - 22 January 1968 - Continued. ""'!' Cllairman Norton' inquired if ~here would be double access for. fire " ....; · :. .... ·trucks and would the exit from the·school 'be such that traffic .drainage' from ·-."' the subdiVision-park would be feasible, = . ..~. ... '. .... The Secretary answered ~hat access could be developed at the north east .... =. corner of the school ground but this would not be the ideal way, .., ": Mr Jerry Loher, applicant,. stated ·that 'in a similar Subdivision the !' i .' : .....>~!..:~. ":'...'... prin.cipal of the s'~hool. was not interested in having two (2) access '=; ' . ........... :.. '.' roads because of' controlled· parking and suggested that the....pathway. '. ]'~...=..[~.. : or pedestrian walkway be widened instead, . ' .' . .... '.: · .=l.. ~..'.=. [~ · .."~ '.' .' Chairman Norton indicated that the real problem was one·of s.afe~y. ..'. !. j[ ".'.: .i. · "' " =' and inquired if the ·City had'a policy relative to providing 'more than· '.'..[.: ...i'-i.. The secretary explained that· Zat 'the ·ProspeCt High School. it.h,i~Ci'ty >re-l'. "'..:'. changed fro~ 29 December 1967 'C0' "22 January 1968" .... ,.. L ' · · ' ="".! '. -'Commissioner'..McF~ll mOVed, sdconded by CommiSsi6ner Smith', th'at .the. ".'{'~' " z' 'SD-607 - ·Douglas' P. Hines, 'Pierce .. ROad· - ." SubdiviSion Approval.·- 5 Lots· -' Continued from'8 january.1968'~."'~'.=....'i'i~i. Commi'ssioner McFall recommended that' this matter be continUedZ"t0.the next' =i ' · . ....:.' A, A'262 - Richfield. Station, Cox. and Paseo Presada .- Final'..Design Review ' "=~ ' :"<"" [' ': "'[" "' Commissioner Smith' stated. '.tha't' a' Staff Report had 'been .prepared relative = " . to A-262 and requested the Assistant Planner to read same,. ':'L"""'" ' '; -' The 'Assistant Planner read .tHe Staff Report of 22 January 'i968. recommending ' :.=" ':" subject to the conditions stated therein '. " " .' · C'ommissioner. Smi.th moved, sedonded by Commissioner McFall, that the ..' !!'];'/'["""" "'Z]"'.'...='= .'~' 'Staff. Report .of 22 January 1968 ..be adopted and A-262 .be granted Final'. [ i.z' ....:=-'~1:.. ~'. the'conditions stated in said 'report; motion" carried .unanimously', .. '.= 1" ''= ...:k.. · "'. ' .. . h. '. .. . ' ~.. .~.' IV.. B. A-268 - Kirby M. "Casebolt, .Big Basin'Way. Final Design RevieW'. "' · ;' . . Identification Sign - Continued from 8 january 1968' : '= """ "" ' ~ '. .... :' .. '.' After providing the applicant with a copy of the. Staff RepOrt the ... ".... :.. members of the Commission read the report 'rec~ending that A-268 : ' .:' · '.. subject to' conditions stated in =said report : .... L." ..~ .. .. .' ".. The"applicant.e.xpressed satsifaction with conditions set forth ' " {:~ .'~{; '.r~'.':~. "' ':~'.'.Z" · .'" "'" ' 'Staff' R'eport of 22' JanQary .1968.be adopted and'A-268 be granted Final '~" ].'. "~ j*. : ' "' .... .' Review'- Comercial Service. Buildings (2).' Continued 'from ..... · : ' .... '.' '. .Comissioner Smith stated 1) ;this has b~en revie~d with the client's ' ' .. '~" """"':':"". = architect ~. Menard and 2) this is for preliminary approval only.. ' 2 "' ..;' "',' .'...- ......' .. The members of the Planning C0~ission read, .to ~hemselves, the Staff ~ ':".""'-.. " 2... ... Report'of 22 January 1968' reComn~e~ding that Preliminary Design Review ."- · be'granted for A-269 ." · ' ".j '. "'.' It ~s moved by C~issioner Sm'ith~ seconded .by Comissioner' McFali ,.. .' · : "". "that Staff Report of' 22 January 1968 relative to A-269 be adopted and ':. ':'~" · ... D. A-272 - Dir'ect Realty. Inc., garatoga-Sunnyvale Road - Fill Design '~' ,'. .~' .......... ' · Review- Identification SiSn .. '..: ~2' 7..~. '."-.. , 'Chairran Norton stated that 1)' this is not a tradeturk sign such as ~.". · a Speed~e." ~lrt or .the Richfi~ld .Station 2) the Zoning Ordinance does :...~....:. . not authorize stand-up signs and 3) perhaps the Ordinance should be . ... :... .:. ..Co~issioner Smith agr'eed that the .sign ordinance'needed some.'revision.' ' ~ ..... The SeCretary. in answer' to an inquiry from Chairran Norton. explained' ..! .. .. that 1) they have had similar'. signs in this area. 2) ,just one side .of ". "." the' sign is considered for size 'and '3) the ~dinance permits free-Stand'- .':. ".. ing double faced signs. " .:"2.'L .'j.~.)2' .."...'..~':" The' S~aff RepOrt 0f 22 Januar~ "1968 recon~ending approval of F~nal Desi~ ~" " ' ..." After discussion. Co~i~sioner' Smith moved, seconded by ~issioner Crisp,. ... ..):.: ';" .'. Final Design Approval as sho~ on..Exhibits'."A" 'and "B" and Subject to the ,..:2'....~;. :...... condition stated in said reporSt; motion carried unanimously.. .. ... "' '..'.." '2'.. "" 'Co~ssioner Johnson gave .a su~'ry' on. items. reViewed'and. actio~ taken at' the Chagrin Norton d~rec~ad each', .member o~ ~he CommiSsion ~0 r~ad ~he' ~..: . -~ . , '.... .. ,. .:: i' , · . . .. ...' ,. ,, ' ~. :""'."~' COmm'Lss~oner ~c~a~Z moved seconded bT'Co~ss~oner .Sm~h,"' " · ..:.. ". S~a~ ~epo~ o~ 22 3anua~y ZgG8 be adopted and 0-8G be ~ven ~avorab~e: ".. ." consideration subjec~ ~o subm~a~ o~' accep~abZe pZanS b~ ~he ' '.' .. or h~s representative .~o~ deve~opmen~ o~ '~h~s p~ope~7 prior ~o ~he · .."'. be ~Zed ~o each 'me~e~ o~ ~he.'Comm~ss~on '~Or s~udy prior' ~o ~he "' ". ' .. -hea~n~ a~ ~he ~ex~ re~uZar mee~n~ s~nce .~he aenera~ ~Zan '~ev~e~ ...'... '. undoub~edZ~ ~ake' up.a ~ea'~ deaZ o~ ~ime ~ ~he ~ex~ regular meeting. . .. :. ~ou~d-be ~nc~ned ~o a~ree ~o.subm~ss~oa o~ such a report. ., ~ .'. ~. ::. ""' ...... Design Rev~e~.Com~ee, ~he Cha~r~ o~ ~ha~ Conferee, Cpmi. ss~o~er O.~orke and ':'" "~ ~he ~ann~n~ D~ec~or .recommended EhaC ~. ~oa~Z~o ~a~e s~eps ~o se~ up 8 more .~er be re~erred ~o ~he Subdivision Co~t~ee.a~d. continued' Eo ~he ne~. · . Planning Commission MeetinF~ - 22 January 1968 'ContinUed """" .. ~ ~;... ..." i ~ [ ·. '= . - i .... .. S~[~LL ANIMAL ORDINANCE : .... ,. Chairman Norton. on behalf of th'e Planning Commission.' expressed . .c .... · ..... a ~reciation to the General ,.Plan Committee for produ'cing the Small ' ' "" ' An~ 1 'Ord inance. ' ' .. ' · ' .' . =- . [ .. . ... ' -l:. ' n....... Cha',ir~n Norton mentioned that'a very ~acious letter ~s recieved · .. .= fro~ the Westbrook ImproVement Association thanking the Planning . .. ~ . · ...:. '=. C ~ssion for its .consideration of their'.requ'est for annexation~ . ' · G S .. '. · . . ..' "'=:." l..l =...".'.' ' Cha:ir~n Norton acknowledged, with 'pleas~e. the presence 'of ~.. ... . . [ . · . ."' .~... C uncil~n Hartran, .Council~n Robbins (ear. lier in the evening) and' O . . .' · "'? ', ...... ~[ ~wis and ~.s. Stark'of 'the 'Good Government Groups': He, al~o,' .;1"'.7-" :.'.'" thahked ~s. Stark for .the'~offee served at 'recess" .'= ' ;;' 'f" " :IX.- ~JO~~ ' " . ~ - .... .." ...."'7' '.. ... .' .... '...... ..=',." [ .. . .= ..'.' :,;.:. ~. '.'.. ."....7.'........ . .~ .. .. .... . '. "' ' ' .... [ ..... "Respectfully submitted, ' '::" ' ' ..c.. ..... ... ...... . . .. :. ",.~..'.... · .. . .... ~ ~ · ... · . . · . .. . . . '~'........' . ; . '] . . · · ... 7.' . ? .. :... 'l .. ", l'. . .. "'z · "' ' ' '. ...... .~ "' ." ..... .; lker 'Secretary' "'" · . '. - .... . ~ ... · t.. ..L.. . ~ . . .... . .~ . ., . .". ~.., . .. · = .t.~ .'~. .. ..... [ :.' .] , .. ;..~ · .. ~ .. . .~ . · . :. .. ..' :. .;..".. . . .. · ... ~ = . · .. . . .. · ...':.... '.-'/.'. l' · ':L...'.". l"..." '.',. '. · ~' .. .. '. . .. · .' .' "'. '~ ..... ... ... ' .. '..' . .. ... .. ......' . ~ . ] .... · .~ . : 2.' . .... = ... .. · . . . ... . .... · ' "' · · ." · · 5 " ... . .. . . . .. . ~ ... ......... .....~ ;."...= . · . . . .. . . .,.... .... ... .7. ... .'. . ......' -' . .." .... . . . . . ... .... .~ · , ~. . .':. . . . ', · . . ... 1 · .. · .... . . . "' "" "' .'7 ." '. '.... "' "' ' "' " "' "' """" ......7' ". . ......".. .~. ... I · · .. . · ...... .."..i.. .... · .. ~ · · ]..