HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-08-1968 Planning Commission Minutes SU~v~j{Y OF MINUTES
CITY OF SARATOGA PLA~rNING CO~IISSION
TIME: Monday, 8 April 1968, 7:30 P.M.
PLACE: City Council Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ROL~INE ORGANIZATION
A. ROLL CALL
Presenti Commissioners Crisp, Johnson, Kasner, Lively, Norton and Smith.
Absent: None.
B. MINUTES
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, that the reading
of the minutes of the 25 March 1968 meeting be waived and that they be approved
as distributed to the Commission subject to the following deletion:
page 1. .delete paragraph 3. .under !' ~- COMiMITTEES; motion carried
unanimously.
C. COmmISSIONER MCFALL
Chairman Norton stated that 1) after the Planning Commission meeting of
25 March 1968 he received, from Commissioner McFall, a copy of the letter
of resignation he submitted to the Mayor and 2) Commissioner McFall was
a diligent and hard-working member of the Planning Commission and would be
missed by everyone.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. V-315 - Atlantic Richfield Company, Cox Avenue and Paseo Presada - Request
for Variance in Connection with Sign Requirements - Continued from'
25 March 1968
Chair~n Norton.reopened the public hearing relative to V-315 at 7:36 P.M.
The Secretary briefly reviewed said application and stated no further
communications had been received.
Mm. Malpas, present to represent the applicant, stated he had no further
comments.
No one else present wished to comment.
The Secretary, at the request of Commissioner Crisp, read the Staff Report
recommending that V-315 be denied.
At'. ~:39:'.P.M. ,'.., Commissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith
to close the hearing for V-315; motion carried unanimously.
It was moved.by' Commissioner Crisp, seconded by Commissioner Smith, that the
Staff Report of 8 April 1968, relative to V-315, be adopted and the Variance
denied since the findings required by Section 17.6 of Ordinance NS-3 cannot
be made; motion carried unanimously.
-1-
P!annin~ Co:nmission Minutes - 8 April 1968 - Continued
II. B. V-316 - L. B. Nelson, Prospect Road - Request for Variance in Connection
with Sign Requirements - Continued from 25 March 1968
The public hearing for V-316 was re-opened at 7:40 P.M.
~. Jerry Gurley, present to represent the applicant, stated t) he met
with the Variance Coranittee and explained to them why this Variance is
necessary 2) a Variance should be allowed when unusual circumstances
exist 3) this property borders a San jose Commercial area where large
signs are permitted 4) in order for the Car Wash signs to catch the eye of the
passer-by a larger sign than the one permitted by the Ordinance is needed
5) the sign proposed is smaller than the one at the Big Tree Shopping
Center which ~ms granted a Variance for several signs and 6) studies show
that a business of this kind (Car Wash) is an impulse business; thereby,
m~king an easy to see sign a vital part of the business. He then submitted
exhibits displaying the colors to be used for the proposed signs.
Commissioner Johnson explained that 1) it should be considered that the
Big Tree Sign Variance was granted for Multiple Uses located in the Shopping
Center and 2) the type of signs used across the street (San Jose side)
are not pertinent to the Saratoga Zoning Ordinance.
Chairman Norton stated that this Commercial area along Prospect has been
a sign-problem to the Planning Commission ever since its development and
some flexibility has to be expected.
Corm~..issioner Crisp stated a Variance would allow a sign of the same size
as for the main sign at the Big Tree Shopping Center (See's Candi,es).
The Secretary read the Staff Report of 8 April 1968 recommending that all
stated items of the requested Variance be denied except Item No. 3 with '~'~':~
letters limited to 18-inches.
Conmissioner Kasner moved, seconded by Commission Johnson, at 7:48 P.M.
to close the hearing relative to V-316; motion carried unanimously.
Comm~issioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, that the
Staff Report of 8 April 1968 be adopted and the Variance denied except
Item No. 3 of the subject report which allows an additional 17.5-square
foot sign as shown on Exhibit "A" with the letters for the sign limited
to 18-inches since the findings required by Section 17.6 of Ordinance NS-3_.
can be made for Item 3 oniy~.~tion carried unanimously.
C. 'C-!04 - Roy Kosich, Saratoga Avenue and Radoyka Drive - Request for Change
of Zoning from "R-l-10,000" (Single Family Residential) to "C-N"
(Neighborhood Commercial) and from "R-l-10,000" (Single Family
Residential) to "R-M-.4,000" (Multi-Family Residential) - Continued
from 25 M~rch 1968
The hearing for C-i04 ~,ms re-opened at 7:51 P.M. The Secretary briefly
reviewed this application and called attention to the brochure submitted
by the Saratoga Park Woods Homeo~mers Association, Inc. opposing the pro-
posed application and stating they did not want apartments in the neighbor-
hood.
Commissioner Smith advised that a letter requesting withdrawal of the subject
application was submitted by the applicant after meeting with the Subdivision
Co~aittee.
P!anninS Commission Minutes - 8 April 1968 - Continued
II. C. C-104 - Continued
The Secretary read a letter filed by F~. Roy Kosich requesting approval
to withdraw C-104.
At 7:53 P.M. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, to
close the public hearing relative to C-104; motion carried unanimously.
Co~nissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Kasner, that the request
for withdrawal be approved; motion carried unanimously.
D. S~LL PET ORDINANCE - Proposed Amendment to Ordinance No. NS-3 Relating
to the Keeping of Certain Birds and Small }~mmals
as Pets in "R" Districts - Continued from 25 March 1968
The Chairman opened the hearing relative to this matter at 7:54 P.M.
The Secretary read"a communication submitted by John G. Jorgensen, 13631
Saratoga Avenue, suggesting that some local legislation be enacted to control
barking dogs. The Secretary then advised that 1) Mr. Haines, Santa Clara
County Health Officer has requested an appointment to meet with the General
Plan Committee to discuss the proposed Small Animal Ordinance 2) he inform-
ed M~. Haines that the proposed Ordinance would be revised again and that it
would be possible to meet with the Committee at that time and 3) it would
probably be a matter of explaining to Mr. Haines what is to be'included in
the proposed Ordinance.
Com~missioner Johnson advised that 1) the General Plan Committee could meet
with M~. Haines some Saturday morning between now and the Planning Commission
meeting of 13 F~y 1968 and 2) the sooner a meeting can be arranged the more
advantageous it would be.
Mr. Allen Reems, attorney representing Foothill 4-H Club, stated that 1) he
would like to arrange an a appointment with the General Plan Committee to
discuss the problems, requirements, and standards relative to 4-H Projects
and 2) he worked at Juvenille Hall and if 4-H Projects could be expanded .'
and encouraged the Juvenille Authorities might not be so busy.
Chairman Norton explained that 1). the Planning Commission is aware of
problems relative to 4-H Projects 2) there is already an Ordinance in
effect governing 4-H Projects and 3) 'an appointment could be made with
the General Plan Committee by Contacting the Planning Commission Secretary,
Mr. Stanley Walker.
.Chairman Norton took this opportunity to extend a welcome to visiting Girl
Scout Troop 606.
~s. Edmundson, resident of Saratoga, stated that 1) her Mother assisted
in the preparation of the Animal Ordinance adopted by Santa Cruz 2) animals
should be kept in an enclosure at all times 3) the proposed Ordinance limits
the number of cats permitted to three 4) she has more than'three cats and
wondered if the Ordinance would be retro-active 5) she could not comply
with the Ordinance if it required her to dispose of some of her cats especially
since her cats are always kept in the house and 6) if the Ordinance is
adopted, as proposed, problems will arise relative to enforcing same.
Virginia McClain, local resident, stated that 1) there are quite a number
of cat anddog hobbyists in the area and these people take good care of ~
their animals 2) she felt it was unfair to limit the number of animals
these hobbyists could keep especially if their property is large enough to
accomodate more animals and 3) the showing and grooming of cats and dogs
is a very constructive past-time for young people.
-3-
Planning Commission Minutes - 8 April 1968 - Continued
II. D. S~LL PET ORDINANCE - Continued
Chairman Norton explained that the commercial raising of dogs and cats
is not permitted in the residential areas of the City.
A resident of Quito Oaks Way stated that each of his four sons own a
guinea pig; therefore, the Ordinance as now proposed would not be practical
for his family.
Com~nissioner Johnson explained that the General Plan Committee is trying
to exercise control for the number of pets permitted as well as the condi-
tion in which the pets are kept.
The Troop Leader for visiting Girl Scout.Troop No. 606 stated that regula-
tions regarding enclosure of animals should be closely studied since some
of the larger animals in her neighborhood have been harmful to small children
and small animals.
Chairman Norton agreed that the' animals should be under the control of the
owner at all times.
~. Elwin Farrington, 19201Portos Drive, stated that 1) he was a cat
owner and complimented Commissioner Johnson and the General Plan Committee
on the fine work already accomplished on the Small Animal Ordinance and
2) he felt the restrictions for enclosing animals should be emphasized .·
rather than the number of animals permitted.
~. Bob Ryder, 20610 Lomita Avenue, stated 1) he felt the Ordinance as
proposed, would be unenforceable since someone could have twenty hamsters
in their home and no one would know the difference 2) one rabbit kept
under unclean conditions could be worse than five rabbits kept under
sanitary conditions and 3) the General Plan.Committee should meet with
various citizens to discuss a workable Ordinance.
Commissioner Johnson advised that the Committee will direct their efforts
toward an Ordinance that will include firm recommendations for control.
After discussion, Chairman Norton (8:18 P.M.) closed the hearing for the
evening relative to the Small Pet Ordinan:~ directed the matter continued
to the meeting of 13 May 1968 and r'eferred same to the General Plan Committee
for study and a report at that time.
E. C-111 - Wayne F. Pendergraft, Calabazas Creek and Foothill Lane - Request
for Change of Zoning from "R-I-40,000" (Single Family Residential)
to "R-I-~0,000" ~Sin~le Family Residential)
The hearing relative to C-ill was opened at 8:19 P.M. The Secretary stated
that a Notice of Hearing was' published and copies mailed.
Mr. Jack Fairbanks, present to represent the applicant, stated that 1) the
applicant was denied a Variance for Lot sixty-five 2) Lot sixty-four is the
only lot which conforms to the R-I-40,000 zoning required in the area and
3) the subject property is surrounded by property developed with lots small-
er than those required by the zoning in the area.
The Secretary, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Johnson, stated
that 1) Mr. Pendergraft has now sold Lot sixty-four 2) the sale of subject
lot resulted in a tai!~like piece of property being left behind Lot sixty-foUr,
but belonging to Lot sixty-five and 3) when Dr~.Silberman (purchaser of
Lot sixty-four) discovered this he bought this' additional property.
Chairman Norton observed that the applicant had only .72 acres of land left
and the only reason for the Change of Zoning is that this property is surround-
ed.'by 'smaller lots.
-4-
Flannin~ Conm~ission Minutes - 8 April 1968 - Continued
II. E. C-Ill - Continued
~. Fairbanks stated that the applicant informed him that ~faen the
property was purchased the zoning was for quarter acre lots.
M~s. George Chamberlin, 12909 Foothill Lane, stated that he and his
wife were opposed to the Change of Zoning.
~o Charles Ovaland, 12901 Foothill Lane, stated that he and his wife
ware opposed to the proposed Change of Zoning and recommended that a
Variance be granted instead.
Chairman Norton explained that, in accordance with the State Law, the
Planning Commission cannot grant a Variance for the sake of convenience...
Commissioner Crisp explained that the property does have a means. of
legal access.
Mr. Oveland stated that Mrs. Morgan (owner 0f a acre lot in the area)
has canvassed the neighborhood with a petition to support a Change of
Zoning for her property from R-i-40,000 to R-i-20,000.
>~s. Morgan stated 1) she had asked some of her neighbors if they would
be willing to support such a proposal and 2) she contacted fourteen people
and they were all agreeable to subject Change of Zoning.
Chairman Norton, in answer to an inquiry from Mrs. Garrett, Foothill Lane,
stated that the'proposed Change of Zoning (C-ill), if approved, would not
affect any'other property in the vicinity, but would present a problem as
'far as setting a precedent for future applications of this type.
Commissioner Smith advised that there existed quite a number of lots in
the City that were a little under one (1) acre that the owners would like
to develop but cannot because they are located in the acre zoning.
At 8:33 P.M. Chairman Norton closed the hearing relative to C-Ill, directed
the matter continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the
Subdivision Committee for study.
F. ELSIE PA_~T~.~ICK,' Prospect Road - Informal Hearing - Request to Add "Auto
Parts Store"' to the List of Conditional Uses in the "C-N"
(Neighborhood Commercial ZoninS District)
The informal discussion was opened by the Chairman. The Secretary stated
1) a letter was .submitted by the applicant stating her request and 2) the
Notice of Hearing has not been.published, but will be in the next issue of
the Saratoga News.
Mr. Rick Anderson, Realtor, representing the applicant, stated that the
"Auto Parts Store" will also include the sale of appliances.
!~. Anderson, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that
1) the store would not include repair of autos o~ the sale of gasoline
2) 'the Goodrich Company will be ready to submit plans within two weeks
and 3) the proposed store will resemble the Goodyear Store across the
street from the subject property in San Jose.
After discussion,- Chairman Norton closed the informal hearing for the
evening, referred the subject request to the Subdivision Committee for
study and directed same continued to the next regular meeting.
RECESS AND RECONVENE
-5-'
Planning Com~.,ission Minutes - 8 April 1968 - Continued
III. BUILDI~G SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS
A. SDR-732 - Franklin Homes Company, Fourth Street and Saratoga Creek -
Buii~inS Site ApproVal - 1 Lot - Continued from 25 F~rch 1968
Co~issioner Smith stated that the applicant submitted a letter granting
'the Planning Con~nission a thirty (30) day extension. tie then recommended
that SDR-732 be continued to the next regular meeting to allow the appli-
cant time to resolve problems relative to Flood Control requirements.
Chairman Norton so directed.
B. SDRi740 - S. L. Tyler and G. S. Kocher, Fourth'Street - Building Site
. Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 25 ~rch 1968
Co~n~issioner Smith recom_mended that this matter be continued since the
applicant needed time to work out various problems with Flood Control.
Chairm~n Norton so directed.
C. SD-743 - Claude T. Lindsay, Arroyo De Arguello - Subdivision Approval
- 63 Lots
After reviewing the Subdivision Committee Report containing the proposed
ond t
conditions of approval, Chairxr~n Norton stated that the word "C i =ons"
should be added to Condition 1 of the subject report.
M~. Larry Schott, engineer for the applicant, and Mr. Bob Nap, of the
Claude T. Lindsay Eirm, were present and Mr. Schott stated that 1) Condi-
tions 10, !1, and 12 of the Subdivision Committee Report will present
some complications and they had .understood, after meeting with the Sub-
division Coranittee, that another meeting would be held to work out these
three conditions'and 2)' they'would like to request that opportunity be
left available to the applicant.
Chairman Norton explained that 1) "as approved by Director of Public Works
and/or Planning Director" as stated in the report indicates that the appli-
cant will have further opportunity to discuss this matter and 2) if the
applicant desires reconsideration by the Planning Connnission he will have
to submit_a request within thirty days.
Commissioner Crisp advised that the high school, adjacent to this property,
has only one means of access and this subdivision will.provide a secondary
means of achessat the southwest corner of the school property that fits
into the street pattern of the school. in addition there is also provided
a pathway between this subdivision and the school site which will permit
pedestrian access.
~. Schott, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Lively~ stated that
i) they did not have a complete field topography m~p available to determine
the exact condition of the creek and its development relative.to Flood Control
requirements and 2) no trees of any great number are to be cut down.
Comf~issioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner ~sner, that the Subdivi-
sion Committee Report of 8 April 1968 relative to SD-743 be adopted, as
amended, and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 25 ~rch 1968) be
approved subject to the conditions set forth in.said report; motion carrie~'
unanimously.
_P_!anning CoF,~ission Mi~.~utes - 8 April 1968 - Continued
IV. DESIGN REVIEW
A. A-275 - Atlantic Richfield Company, Cox Avenue and Paseo Presada -
Final Design Review - Identification Sign - Continued from
25 March 1968
Co~aissioner Kasner explained that since the Variance relative to this
application was denied no action could be taken for A-275 at this time.
Chairman Norton, in answer to an inquiry from F~. Malpas, stated that it
would be necessary for the applicant to consider a smaller sign that would
conform with the Zoning Ordinance.
Comanissioner Kasner explained that exhibits will have to be submitted
showing the kind and size of sign the applicant will use as an alternate
to the.one presently proposed and 2) if the exhibits are submitted prior
to the meeting of 22 April 1968 approval could conceivably be granted at
that meeting.
The Secretary recomnended that this matter be continued to such time as the
requested exhibits are submitted by the applicant.
Chairman Norton so directed.
B. A-276 - Wells Fargo Bank, Saratoga-Los Gatos Road - Preliminary Design
Review - Bank Building
~'. Bonfig!io~ Assistant PlannerS,read the S~aff RepOrt of 8 April 1968
recon~ending that Preliminary Design Review be granted for A-276.
After discussion, Con~aissioner Kasner moved, seconded by Commissioner
Lively, to adopt the Staff Report of 8 April 1968 recommending that
Preliminary Design Review Approval be granted A-276 as shown on Exhibit ."A-I"
and subject to ~he condition listed in said report; motion carried unanimously.
C. A-278 - Ann Valk, Big Basin Way - Final Design Review - Commercial Building
- Continued from 25 M~rch 1968
Mr. Bonfiglio, Assistant Planner, read the Staff Report of 8 April 1968
recommending that Final.Design Review Approval be granted for A-278.
Mrs. Valk stated that she did not object to providing the planting for
the west wall of the proposed building as specified in the Staff Report.
M~. Dale Paape, architect, in answer to an inquiry from Connnissioner Kasner,
stated that the west wall will be of brick-block made out of clay material
and painted.
Conm~issioner Lively' inquired if the brick-block with rake joints could be
be used on this wall as was discussed at the Design Review Committee meet-
ings.
Con~issioner Smith stated that a sketch should have been submitted showing
wall finished in the materials mentioned by Commissioner Lively.
Mrs. Va!k stated that 1) it is important to the general effect of this ~
area to achieve the best looking appearance possible for this side of the
building,and 2) she, M~. Herring, and ~. Flanagan (o~mers of properties
~'c'~9ining one anothers) have agreed to make and keep this area attractive
-7-
P!annin~ Com:nission Minutes - 8 A',~ri! 1'968 - Continued
IV. C. A-278 - Continued
After discussion, Chairman Norton recommended that the condition
included in the Staff Report of 8 April 1968 be deleted and the
following inserted in its place:
"~terial for west wall to be slump stone brick with
deep rake joint and m~sked planting as approved by
Planning Director."
Comz-~issioner Kasner moved, seconded by Com~m-issioner Lively, to adopt,
as amended, the Staff Report of 8 April 1968 reco~nending that Final
Design Review be granted A-278 as shown on Exhibits '~A-!" "B" and
"C" and subject to conditions Stated in said report; motion carried
unanimously.
D. A-279 - Federal American Management Enterprises, inc., Cox Avenue -
Final Design Review - Remodeling the Exterior of Existing
Co~m~ercial Buildin%
~.~z. Bonfiglio read the Staff Report of 8 April 1968 'recomz~ending that
Final Design Review be granted for A-279.
Comznissioner Kasner explained that at the Design Review Co~.ittee
meeting the applicant indicated that the colors shown on the exhibits
were not really indicative of the colors to be used.
The applicant was present and submitted exhibits showing different shades
of the color.. they wanted to use.
Commissioner Kasner, after the applicant indicated he had no preference
.as to any one of the three e~chibits submitted, reconm~ended that the subject
exhibits be labeled "B-i" "B 9- and ';B ~" and placed in the file.
After discussion, Chairm~n Norton directed that Condition a)
of the subject report be changed to read as follows:
"a) The bright orange color indicated on E:~hibit "A" shall
be replaced by one of the non-reflective colors designated
as E>:hibits "B-i" ':B-2" and "B-3" so as to be compatible
with other colors in the shopping center in general."
and Co~dition d) be added to read as follows:
"d)Design Review for identification signs will be considered
under separate application."
Comn~.issioner Kasner moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, to adopt,
az amended, the Staff Report of 8 April 1968 recommending that Final
Design Review be granted A-279 as shown on Exhibit "A" and subject to
the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously.
.f:L.l~-_8_q0 Cable Car Restaurant, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Final Design
.'..' :~Lsner stated that problems existed relative to the application
tha'c prevented a .favorable recon~-nendation at this time.
Mr. Bonfiglio explained that the applicant has signs up that have not been
approved and is now proposing pern~anent illuminated signs. He then recon~ended
that this matter be continued.to the next regular meeting.
Chairxr~n Norton s. 9. directed.
-8-
Planning Commission Minutes - 8 April 19'68 - Continued
V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT
Commissioner Smith explained that he had been unable to attend the City
Council meeting of 3 April 1968 and asked the Secretary to report.
The Secretary gave a sum.mary of items reviewed at the City Council meeting
of 3 April 1968. He then stated that the Public Hearing relative to the
General Plan was opened but that Mr.z Livingston, Planning Consultant, was
not present but would be attending the meeting of 1~ April 1968.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. A-156 - Saratoga United Presbyterian Church, Herriman Avenue - Request
' for Extension for Completion of Parking Requirements - Continued
from 25 }~rch 1968
The Secretary explained that the bond covering additional parking'has
'. expired and the church is requesting that a two-year extension be granted
b~ the Planning Commission for the required completion of fifty-two addi-
tional parking spaces; thereby making it possible for the applicant to
request an extension (from. the City Council) of the bond covering same.
Mr. Bonfiglio read the Staff Report of 8 April'1968 recommending that a
two-year extension be granted for the parking requirements or until the
proposed new parish hall is completed.
Commissioner Kasner stated that the Design Review Committee reviewed this
request and they did agree that the present parking is sufficient for the
~ime being.
Commissioner Kasner moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith, that the Staff
Report of 8 April 1968 be adopted and that A-156, Saratoga United Presbyterian
Church, be granted an extension for completion of parking requirements as
8rated in said report and that this recommendation be forwarded to the City
Council for extension of the bond; motion carried unanimously.
B. UP-88 - George Day,. Cumberland Drive - Request for Extension
The Secretary stated there have been no problems with the subject Use Permit
and then recommended that an extension of two-months (to 15 June 1968) be
granted for the model home sales office.
· - Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that an extension
of two-months be granted for UP-88; motion carried unanimously.
C. C-86 - Neil K. Chase, Saratoga Avenue - Relating to Submittal of Required
Documents
Commissioner Smith explained that 1) the Planning Con{mission granted the
appliCadt a one-year extension 'to 22 January 1.969 subject to submittal of
certain documents prior"to the old.expiration date of 10 April 1968 and 2) the
documents have not been received and some action must be taken soon.
The Secretary stated that I) the Saratoga Foothills Development Company
will complete purchase of this property and they will soon submit a request
for extension in order to allow time to come up with the required documents.
D. GENERAL PlAN - Revision No. 1 - Report of General Plan Committee Stating
Clarification of Certain Items as Requested by the City Council
.... .. The Secretary stated that i) the General Plan Committee has prepared a
-'=. report stating the clarifications requested by the citycouncil 2) the
....... Planning. Committee of the City Council is working on the possibility of
an elongated'park in lieu of a larger community park with comparatively
even boundary lines and they would like the Planning Commission to study.
and review this as an alternate and 3) he had a diagram available show-
" ... the proposed elongated. park.
~9-
Planning Com,.nission Minutes - 8 April 1968 - Continued
Vi. D. GENERAL PLAN - Continue~
Chairman Norton inquired if the diagram was just for information or
did the City Council want the Planning Commission to take some sort
of action relative to same.
The Secretary answered that it was just to make the Planning Commission
aware of what was proposed and no action was required. He then advised
that the Planning Consultant has not stated his position on the park
idea under study by the Planning Committee of the City Council.
Commissioner johnson stated that the General Plan Committee has studied
this diagram and they do not find sufficient reason to change their
present recon~mendation (stated in the General Plan Committee Report)
relative to parks.
Chairman Norton explained that the large, centrally located, park seemed
more practical than the proposed alternate.
Commissioner johnson read Revision No. 1 dated 8 April 1968 of the General
Plan Committee Report and then pointed.out three changes in the report:
1) cover page. .Item No. 2. .should be reworded to read as
follows:
"2) In making this recommendation, all proposals
concerning land use changes, whether by individuals
or groups, were given serious consideration by
this Comraittee.'u
2) page !. Item II!. Commercial a).. .should be changed
to read as follows:
"a)Reconunend that east end of Saratoga Inn
Property retain existing zoning."
3) page 2. .Item V. Trafficways a). .should be changed
to read as follows:
"a) Widening Saratoga Avenue from Herriman Avenue
to the Village should be postponed."
Commissioner johnson then explained that in recommending that Herriman
Avenue be extended and connected with Allendale it was considered that
the property to be used is already owned by the City.
The Secretary read a com~munication from'Mr. Thomas B. Fryer calling
attention to an inconsistency, in the location of the dividing line
between medium density and low density development as shown on the
General Plan Map.
Chair~n Norton stated that since the Planning Commission had closed
its hearings relative to the General Plan this letter was out of order
and should be brought up before the City Council.
.Co~ission'er JOhnson moved, seconded by Com~issioner Kasner, that the
General Plan Committee Report ~ Revision No. 1 - dated 8 April 1968
be adopted, as amended, and for~.mrded to the City Council as the recommend-
ation of the Planning Comnission; motion carried unanimously.
Vii. NEW Bi~S!NESS
SDR-6i2 - William Schoenhard~ Montalvo Road - Request for Extension
The Secretary stated that this matter was inadvertently placed on the
agenda.
-10-
· Planning Commission Minutes - 8 April 196'8 - Continued
VII. B. POLLARD ROAD AND QUITO ROAD - R'emoval of Trees by FloOd Control
Chairman Norton stated that the' sugject of trees being removed by
Flood Control in the Pollard Road-Quito Road area is a matter of
concern for Saratoga and inquired what the City has done in the past
to prevent this type of occurrence.. '·
The Secretary stated that for some years the City had, or thought
they had, an understanding with Flood Control that before any trees
of any substantial size were removed they would.notify the City. He
further stated that the City Council is in the process of trying to re-
· ..establish this agreement with Flood Control.
Commissioner Lively, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton,
stated that the subject trees were removed from the Flood Control
Easement in order to make in possible to re-align the San Tomas Creek
Channel. He further stated'that the subject creek is the dividing
.'boundary line between Saratoga and Campbell.
Chairman Norton read a hand bill given to him stressing the need for
saving all trees and inviting everyone to appear and bring their children
to a meeting at the Rinconada I~ter Works on 13 April 1968. He then
stated that the City will use all its efforts to encourage the saving
of trees.
VIII. CO}[MUNICATIONS
A. WRITTEN
None
B. ORAL
Chairman Norton acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of CoUncilman
Robbins, Mrs. Ruth Owen. of the.Good Government Group, }~s. Ottenberg of
the League of Women Voters. He, also, thanked Mrs. Owen for the coffee
served at the recess.
IX. ADJOUR~RiENT
The Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 10:35 P.M.
~RespeC. tfully submitted,
, · J
· .~3~ ~ . ~ ,':' .....
Stanley M. Walker, Secretary
Saratoga Planning Con~nission
-11,