HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-28-1969 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
,
MINUTES
TIME: Monday, 28·April· 1969, 7:30 PoM.
PLACE: City COuncil Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue, saratoga, california
TYPE: Regular· Meeting
··
··
'I ~ ROUT INE ORGANIZAT !ON
A. ROLL CALL "
Present: commissioners Bacon, Crisp, Kraus, Metcalf, Norton, and Smith.
Absent: Commissioner Lively.
·
B. ·MINUTES
Commissioner Smith moved, seconde, by Commissioner Metcalf, that the reading
of the minutes of the 14 April 1969 meeting be waived and they be approved
as distributed to the Commission Subject to the following changes:
·
page 5..' ~under. III. B. SDR-806.. .de!e.t_.e
page 5.·..under III. B. SDR-806.. .change paragraph 5 to read as
follows:
"The Secretary stated th~t"Lot'2 is the worst· 10t with the
· . steepest slope of 25%j""'i ..........
page 6. .under IiI. B. SDR-806.. .paragraph 7. . -.change lines.3 and 4
to read· as ·follows: ;
..
"what the average lot slopes are; motion carried unanimously.";
page 10. . .under VIII. B.. .paragr.--.Dh 1. . .line 2. . .change the first
"the" in the Sentence to "that" and .li~e 4. .change "apratment" to
"apartment"; motion carried unanimously.
II PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.· C-123 - Laszlo Sipos, Allendale Av'enUe - Request for Change of Zoning from
'i'~R-i-40,000" (Sing].e Family Residential)' to "R-I-20,000" ~Single
17amily Residential) - Contlnue,d' from 14 April 1969
. ~,... . .
The hearing relative to C-123' w~s'~e-o~ed at 7:~37 P.M.'~'The S~Cretary stated
r.~.at n,~:~i'i.~ing new had been added '~zo' the file."
The applicant ~ms not present.
!i,"o one in the audience offered any comments~
· .:.=e Secretary read the Staff Report dated 28 April 1969 reconm~ending that
~:~.e su'~.~i~2ct c~:ange of zoning (C-!23) b-~ recommended 'to the City Council for
~.: p pr ova '~: ~
Cc,~mis~r~]_L',n,~!r Smith moved~ seconded by Cor,~.missioner l~acon, to ci.::=~ t~e hearing
re!ati~..= to C-123 at 7:40 PoM.; motion carried unanir~;ot~sly.
Cornmiss, loner Sraith moved, seconded.by Commissioner Baco~.z., t~-:a.z t~.c Staff Report
,~f 28 ~:tl~.~ril 1969 be adopted and ti'~t ~l~.e ~ubject reouest fc, r ci~.ange of zoning
~C-123) be reco~ended to the City ~Council for a~'~.~ sn ~t~ ~iasis that the
~pplication is compatible wit~ a~tion zaken on similar properti~ in the area
and the request is in conformancc~ with the 1968 General Plan; mc::~ion carried
u~nimc, u sly. ' '
PlanninS Commission s - 28 April 1969 - Cont
II. B. V-325 - Pacific Telephone and Telegraph, Congress Spring Road'- Request
· - for Variance in ConnectiOn with Overhead Power Lines and Poles -
.. 'Continued from 14. April 1969
The hearing relative to V-325 wag resumed at 7:42 P.M. The Secretary stated
that a. letter had.been received from Mr. J. Bo Watson, Assistant District
Engineer for the Division of Highways, stated that. l) they intend to rebuild
two existing bridges over Saratoga Creek 2) it would be impractical,.at
this time, to. install the PT&T C0mpany's.cable within the existing two bridges
that are to be reconstructed and' 3) the PT&T lines should be permitted to
cross the two bridge locations on a temporary overhead line with the understand-
ing that the line would.be located within the new bridges at the time of
'.'construction.
Mr.' Nick Roden, PT&T representative, was ~resent and stated he had no
· ~...further comments.'.
No on~ else present wished to comment.
Commissioner Crisp advised that 1) the Variance Committee did not consult
with the City Attorney relative to this matter in view of the letter received
from the State Hi'ghway Department and 2) the Committee did meet with the
'representaive of PT&T, Mr. Roden, and he is in accord with the decision
reached by the Variance Committee.
Commissioner Crisp read the Variance Committee Report dated 28 April 1969
recommending that 1)' a Variance. be granted (for a period not exceeding the
end of the 1970-71 fiscal year) in the case of the two bridges' to be reconstructed
since the.findings'required by Ordinance NS-3, Section 17.6.can be made and
2) approval of the the Variance'request for the third bridge not be granted
since it will not be rebuilt
commissioner Sx,~ith stated .that in paragraph 2. .line 61 . .of the subject
report....."8 miles" should be changed to read ".8 miles".
.At 7:48P.Mo.'. Commissioner Crisp. moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith, to
close the'hearing in connection with V-325; motion. carried'~,Unanimously.
Commissioner' Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the Variance
Committee'Report dated 28 April 1969. be adopted, as amended-,~nd the subject
request for Variance in connection'w~th two bridges be,,,'g/rante~ since the
findings required b~ Ordinance NS-3, Section 18.6 can b~'ma'd~ an.d. the request
for Variance relative. to the third b~idg~ not be approved; motion carried unani-
mously.
C. V-327 - Ditz-'Crane, Cox Avenue -iRequest fo~ Variance in Connection with
12-KV Transmission Lines'and Poles - Continued from 14 April 1969
Chair..~an 'Norton re-opene~ the hearing in connection with V-327 at 7:50 P.M.
The Secretary briefly reviewed this application and stated nothing new had
been added to the file.
~. Bob Crane, present to represent the applicant, stated that 1) high voltage
lines (60-KV and 12-KV) are on the same side of Cox Avenue where Ditz-Crane
is subdividing.3) there will be no lots from the applicant's subdivision
facing Cox AvenUe 4) the subject poles must be r'e-located only because the
applicant is required to widen Cox Avenue 5) the new underground ordinance
required that power lines of 34-KV and less must go underground 6) the poles
will carry 60-KV in addition to 12-KV. lines 7) .the ordinance requires that
12-KV lines go underground whereas 60-KV lines may go overhead 8) the appli-
cant fails.to see any reason why!12-KV lines cannot hang on the same pole
9) even if the applicant complies with the ordinance there will still be
some other power lines overhead on Cox 10) this is the same Situation that
exists in front of City Hall 11). if the applicant is required to install
· the 12-KV line underground it would seem he is spending money without any
benefit to'anyone 12) the applicant wishes to cooperate in beautifying the
city and in fact installed underground utilities in the City before they had
an ordinance requiring' same.13) the subject line really has nothing to do
with the subdivision involved 14) while the applicant appreciates the desire
-2-
Pianning_Conmnission Minutes - 28 April 1969 - Continued
II. 'C.i V-327 '- Continued
.'of 'the City to some day hav~ complete underground facilities he does
" not feel that people buying. his homes should bear the burden of the
additional cost ·15) . if complying with the proposed requirement would
eliminate all poles and wi~es along this area the· applicant could see
.. spending the $8,000 in costS, but after. all it would do no good except
raise the price of the homeg in the subdivision.
The Secretary read. the Staff Report dated 28 April 1969 reconnmending
.. that the subject request for Variance in connection. with V-327 be
denied ·
Commissioner Smith stated 5hat 1) he agreed with the subject report
2) 'he has driven by this area and there are a great number of undesirable'
wires there and 3) if this ~ariance is granted it will se~ an undesirable
precedent relative .to the underground utilities ordinance.
Commissioner Crisp stated· that the City may as well not ha'9'e.an ordinance
if it is not going to be enforced.
CoL.~missioner Kraus advised that this particular area involves a difficult
decision because there are e.xisting overhead wires and poles all over the
area.
i.
'Chairman Norton stated that l) the applicant should' not feel that the
City is not concerned with the cost of development; however, the Planning
Commission cannot base its opinion on cost and 2) the comments of the
other Con~missioners indicate that the fewer lines overhead in. that area
the better. .'
Comanissioner Crisp advised zhat, he felt, anyone inspecting the subject
area would agree that enforcing the underground ordinance in this case
would'be a distinct improvem6nt.
Commissioner ·Smith moved, se;ionded by Coraraissioner KraUs, ~o close the
hearing for V-327 at 8:01 P.M.; motion earri'ed unanimodsiy.
Con'Jnissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner Kzau's, that the Staff
Report dated 28 April 1969 b~ ad.opted and that the subject Variance be
fd%/n'~ed since the findings required under Section 17.6 of Ordinance NS-3
cannot be made for the reasons s.t~te.d in said report; motion carried
unanimous ly. , ,.
D. V-328 - Pacific Gas and Electric, Kittt'idge Road - Request f'of Variance in Connection with Unde~r~rpund Electric Faci!ies ,
Chairman Norton opened the hearing relative to V-328 at 8:02 P.Mo The
Secretary stated that the Not:ices of Hearing had been mailed and explained
· ~hat the Variance is needed t!o provide power facilities for the water tanks
located in this area. :
The SeCretary, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that·
if an easement from the property o~mer could be obtained a Variance would
not be needed and the new wire could be put on the old pole.
I~z. Cowan·, present to represent PG&E, stated that 1) the applicant has
~=n requested by the propertyZ,owaer in this area (Dr. Quickerr) *~o waive
underground utilities for the'. 3-phase line which is needed ·rto serve
the 3-phase line on the ridgei 2) Dr. Quickerr advised that he felt the
roadway is Unstable due to slides and he does not want any excavation
along this road 3) there is an existing pole which could serve as an
· anchor if the lines were put across the Quickert property but Dr. Quickerr
does 'not wish to grant the needed right-of-way across his property and
4) the only alternative. was [o apply for the subject Variance.
-3-
Planning Com~nission Minutes - 28 April 1969.- Continued
ii. D 'V-328 - Continued
· ..'.. ~. 'Stiles, Saratoga resident, inquired if PG&E had expressed an
opinion relative to undergrQun~ utilities.
Chairman Norton advised that PG&E has been. in favor of installing
'. '.. .underground utilities, but there has been some discussion in this
~ area as t'o who is really re~ponsible'.for-lthe existing condition
"....'.. and there may even be litigation between Ire. Quickerr and his
' ""' ' ." · 'ne ighb or s
.: " · Con~nissioner Crisp, 'on'.'.bebalf of the Variance. Committee, arranged
'. ... for an on,site inspection of the property with Mr. Cowan for 9:00 A.M.
.. on Saturday,' 3 May 1969.
"Chairman Norton (8:09 P.M.) closed the hearing for the evening,
.. l'.' referred V-328 to the Variance Committee and directed same continued
". '. to the next regular meeting~
E. 'I~YOR~v~L HEARING - Request ~0 Add Glass and Screen ShoP' as a'Permitted
Use in the "C-V" (Visitor-Commercial) Zonin~ District
.. The Secretary stated the Notices of Informal Hearing had been published
· '-.". andno new communications were received.
' ' :" M~.'StevenSon, one of the applicants, was present and stated that he
would be selling auto'glass~ exterior screens, aluminum and wooden
window frames, etc.
No. one else present wished ~o comment. : ....; ..:.:
.. The Secretary read the Staff Report dated 28 April i969 recommending
that Glass and Screen Shop be added to the list. Of conditional uses
· ..in the ;"C-V" (Visitor-Commercial) Zoning District.
After discussion, Chairman Norton closed ',the...InformaI~Rearing'
' Commissioner Smith moved, se'conded by Commissioner Bacon, that the
.. Staff Report dated 28 April ;1969 be adopted and that'Glass and Screen
.'.' Shop be added to the list of Conditional uses in the "C-V":(Vig'ft'g~" ....
Commercial) Zoning District ifor the reasons stated in'said ~report;
motion carried unanimously. ~
.... F. SLOPE DENSITY ORDINANCE - R~visig~ to ,Ordinance NS'~5.8,.i~h'e',Subdivision
:' .... .. " Ordinance of"the City of Saratoga'a'nd Ordinance
.' ' NS-3, Section 4.2 and Section 4.5d, Zoning Ordi-
'..' nance of the City of Saratoga Relative to Slope
· . .. Density Regulations for Hillside Residential
.. Development
ChairF~n Norton opened the hearing at 8:16 P.M. The Secretary stated
that the Notices of Hearing had been published and a communication
· . relative to slope density and dated 21 April 1969 had been received
fromthe City.~ttorney. :
..
.. Chairman Norton'explained that the slope density ordinance in reality
means that the steeper the land the bigger the lot that would be
required and the ordinance w6uld apply to property where a slope is
· . more. than .10% and if the slope is more than. 40% it will not be possible
to b'uild'in that lot ~~lng the aize of 'the'property.
Commissioner Smith stated that, he felt, this matter needed further study
and recommended that the matter be continued and referred to Committee.
'7.'
.:
Planning Commission Minutes - 28 April 1969 - Continued
!I.. F...SLOPE DENSITY ORDINANCE - Continued
}~..Bill Heiss,. Saratoga property o~mer, stated that he wondered about
.the necessity for this type of ordinance.
Chairman Norton answered'that th~ City will endeavor to protect the hillsides
.from excessive development.through.enforcement of the subject ordinance.
}~. Heiss stated that 1) he bui~lt on his own'hillside lot without any
difficulty and 2) the proposed. ordinance would have added 20,000 square
feet to his lot .without adding to the use of his property.
Chair'man Norton explained that the prime purpose for the ordinance is to
protect the hillsides from excessive cutting and grading and will not affect
existing 'home owners in the hillside areas.
~. Heiss stated that he agreed With the p~inciple of the proposed ordinance
· but he wondered if the method proposed.would be a workable one and' 2) the
developer of hillside lots must already submit a site devel0pment..plan under
the existing ordinance.
.. Commissioner Smith= stated that the existing ordinance regulates hillside
subdivisions; whereas, the.prOposed ordinance would Sis0 regulate single hill-
"side lots.
l~s..Ottenberg~.League of Women V6ters, read a communication stating that
the' League. supported the proposed amendment relating to permissable lot size
in connection with the slope of the land.,
Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at '8:25~zre~erred the
ma~te~ to the Subdivision Committee for study and directed'the proposed
ordinance amendment Continued to'the next regular meeting.
III BUILDiNG/SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS
· . A./.SDR-801 -"Harry Leonard, Saratoga,Los Gatos Road .,i'-Buil~ing~'Site Approval
- 1 Lot - Continued from 14 ~pril 1969
· 'The Secretary read aIletter submit.ted for Mr. DempSeyby Mr. M~ynard requesting
that'~action on SDR-801 be tem~orariiy.postponed...The Secretary further stated
that via a telephone conversation with Mr.~Dempsey he understood .t.hat Mr. Dempsey
..wished to withdraw the subject app~lic~,~ion~
... .. .The .Secretary, in answer to an inquiry~ ~rom.~omm{ssioner'~Smith'~..'s~ated that
' 1).'SDR-80I will have to be denied!unless a ietter granting an ex~e'nsion or
requesting a withdra~ml is received and 2) he felt, that Mr. Dempsey would
rather request'a withdrawal.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded2by Commissioner Bacon, that SDR-801 be
'denied unless a'letter of withdrawal or a letter granting an extension of time
is received prior to 9 May 1969; m6tion carried Unanimously.
· . B. SDR-806 - Ed Williams, Ten Acres Road - Building Site Approval - 3 Lots -
Continued from 14 April 1969
Connmissioner Smith stated that 1) .the City Attorney submitted an opinion
stating that the proposed slope density ordinance cannot be enforced relative to
$DR-806 Since a proposed.ordinance ~is'in no manner enforceable prior to its
effective date 2) the Subdivision .Committee has already considered the subject
application on the basis of the existing ordinance and 3) Commissioner Bacon
has been involved in long hours of ~study in order to .report'possible application
of".the proposed slope density ordinance.
"Commissioner Bacon, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that
"'the.subject three lots have a slope: of 3.1.'3%; therefore, the lots have a slope
.' ~ .. of less'than 40% which is the maximum allowable.
Planning Commission -23'April 1969 - Continued
Iilo B. SDRiS06 - Continue~'
The Secretary, in answer to an i~'quiry from Commissioner Metcalf, stated
that there is more available property in this area, but it is not owned
by the applicant.
Commissioner Smith, in answer to 'an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated
that 1) the Subdivision Ordinande clearly stated what can be required of
an applicant 2) the Subdivision'Committee has approved a great many lots
based on th'e existing ordinance 3) some of the approved lots have .had
greater slopes than the ones in ~uestion and.4) the subject lots should be
approved rather than deprive the prop. erty owner of rights enjoyed by similar
property Owners in the City.
The Secretary,, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Metcalf, stated that
1) only three of the.fourteen lots shown on the tentative map belong to the
applicant 2) the remaining eleven lots are residual property not belonging
to the applicant. and 3) the Subdivision Committee .requested ~. Williams
(applicant) to submit a tentative map 'showing possible development Of the
.surrounding property. '
Commissioner'Metcalf stated' that l')'apparently the subject three lots have
the steepest"slope of the'fourtee.n lots shown on the tentative map and 2) the
subject lo~do not seem to be as ~large as they should be.
". .... .. Chairman NOrton stated that he ho~ed that the proposed slope density ordinance
.... =" would be in written form by the m~eeting of 12 May 1969 since, he felt, it
could then be applied.
· '/ '... '. Commissioner Smith stated that he. did not feel the proposed ord. inance could
be. enforced until it is adopted.:
Commissioner ICraus~ stated'that, he felt, he must agree with the Subdivision
Con~nittee'and recommend that only the existing ordinanoe be enforced until'
Such.time asL the proposed slope density ordinance is approved.
Commissioner Crisp stated that the Planning Commission 'ShoUld not act on
an ordinance that has not been passed.
-Commissioner Smith moved, seconde~ by Commissioner Bacon, that the Building
Site Committee Report dated 28 April 1969 be adopted and that the tentative
· .~p'(Exhibit "A-I", filed 8 April 1969) be. approved subject to tb~ conditions
set forth in said report; motion carried with.Commissioner Metcalf abstaining.
C. SD-808'- C~ L. Longson, Michaels 'Drive7 i Sub~ivi§ion App~0val..~,'·10 Lots -
Continued from 14 April 1969
Commissioner Smith explained that~l) this is a subdivision in the foothills
.and some .lots are barely 40,000 square feet in size 2) a tentative map for
this'property was given tentative'approval a few years back and the approval
waS'.allowed.to expire 3) the.ordinance has not been changed since the original
approval and. 4) the Subdivision Committee has suggested approval as stated in
their Subdivision Committee Report dated 28 April 1969.,
Chairman Norton stated that 1) prior approval (that has expired) does not
insure re-approval at a later date 2) new conditions have been imposed on
other similar applications and 3) ithere is no set policy relative to re-approving
· '. an application'that has expired.
Commissioner Bacon explained that z1) the subject subdivision involves ten lots
'which have average slopes of 35.9 .and 2) three of the lots. exceed the'maximum
40%Slope;.however, these lots have a;reas0na5l'e"slope"a~ the building area.
planning Commission Minutes 28 April 1969 - Continued
IiI. C. SD-808 - Continued
The Secretary explained that 1) there are some lots in this subdivision
which will have split level construction and··2) the Co~ission must act
on ·SD-808 at this meeting· or it will expire.
Chairman Norton 1) stated that the subject lots appear· to be quite steep
· 2) suggested· that SD-808 be denied unless an extension·is· submitted and
3) requested the Subdivision Committee to consult with the developer
relative to reducing ~he number o:f lots.
Commissioner Metcalf stated he was in favor of the.reCOmmendation made by
Chairnun Nortonl
Chairman Norton·mOved, seconded by Commissioner Metcalf, that SD-808 be
denied unless the applicant subm{ts an extension·by 3 May 1969 and if an
appropriate extension is submitted the Subdivision Committee will consult
with the developer relative to reducing the number of lots; motion carried
unan imou sly. ·
· D. SDR-811 - Donald Barnett, Via Regina - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot -
Continued from 14 Aprii 1969
Commissioner Smith recommended that this matter be continued to allow time
for the applicant·to revise the tentative map in connection with the driveway.
The applicant was present and stated that he understood that the driveway
would be approved as described at the meeting ·held earlier with the Subdivision
Committee.
The Secretary·stated· that the driveway shown on the tentatlv~ map will have
to be revised.·
In·view of the foregoing, Chairm~n Norton directed SDR-811 continued to the
next regular·meeting and referred same to the Subdivision COmmittee for study.
E. SD-812 - Franklin Homes, SevillalLane and Sarahills Road - Subdivision Approval - 6 Lots - Continued from 14 April 1·969 '
Commissioner Smith recommended t~at' [his application be continued to the next
regular meeting'to allow the applicant time to ~ork out a street. return require-
ment and storm drainage facilityzwith'%he~ ·Department of Public Works.
Chairman Norton so directed. ." "' ,t ~ '~' ~"'
F. SDR-813 - Ned·RichmOnd, Hume DriVe - Building Site Approval - 3 Lots - Continued from 14 April 1969
The Secretary stated that the applicant has reviewed the proposed conditions
of approval and expressed .satisfaction of same.
Coranissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the Building
Site Co;~ittee Report dated 28 April 1969. be adopted and that the tentative
map (Exhibit"'A", filed 3.April 1969) be approved subject 'to the conditions
set forth in said report; motion; carried unanimously.
G.' SDR-814 '- Richard Ballin, Glen Una Drive - Buildin~ Site Approval - ! Lot
Commissioner Smith recommended that this matter be continued to the next
.. regular meeting. ; . ..
The·Secretary explained ·that theZ' Health Department requested that approval
relative to SDR-814 be' detained'iin order to allow time to resolve a septic
tank situation in connection with'this lot.
Mr. Ballin ~as present and stated that he will provide a separate septic tank
for the subject lot~
PlanninS ·Commission Minutes - 28 April 1969 - Continued
Iii. G. SDR-814 - Continued
After discussion, Chairman Nortop directed SDR-814 continued to the next
regular meeting.
H. SDR-815 - J~ames· C. Sanders, Vall~ Vista Drive - BuildinS Site ADDroYal - 1 Lot
The Secretary explained that the subject application is for an existing
home that is being remodeled over 50%.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the Building
Site Committee Report dated 28 April 1969 be adopted and that the .tentative
map (Exhibit "A", filed 21 Aprill 1969) be approved subject to the conditions
· · stated in said report; motion carried unanimously.
IV. DESIGN REVIEW
A. A-300 - Brown and ICauffmann, Cox'.Avenue - Final Design Review - Landscaping
of Model Home Complex and Cox Garage - Continued from 14 April 1969
COmmissioner Metcalf stated he had been absent at the Design Review Committee
meeting and referred the Design Review matters to Commissioner Kraus.
Commissioner Kraus 'stated that a: Staff Report had been prepared relative to
A-300.
· · The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 28 April. 1969 recommending.
that Final Design Approval be granted for A-300 on the basis of Exhibits "F",
"G", and "H".
Commissioner ICraus moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, ~'hat the Staff Report
dated 28 April 1969 be adopted and that Final Design Approval be granted for
A-300 on the basis 0f Exhibits "F", "G", and "H'; and subject to the conditions
stated in said. report; motion carried unanimously.
B.' A-302 -·MoV.S. Company, SaratOga Avenue - Final Design'ReVieW - Apartment
Complex
The Assistant Planner read the Staff .Report dated 28 April 1969 reconLmending
that Final Design Approval be granted. as shown on Exhibits "A-2" and "B".
He· then stated that in condition. "e" of the ·subject report.. .the words
"for carports" should be inserted bet.w'een. the words "material" and "to".
:
CommiSsioner Metcalf stated that 'the ~$~rds ;!for 'approvai~'l shon~.ld 'be inserted
between the words "Submit". and "color" in condition "f"o
Dr. Abrams, applicant, was present and expressed approval of the subject report·
Commissioner Kraus moved, seconded by 'Commissioner Bacon, that ~the 'Staff Report
dated 28 April 196'9 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be
granted for A-302 on the basis. of Exhibits "A-2''· and "B" and subject to the
conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously.
C. A-312 - Odd Fellows Home, Fruitvale Avenue - Final Design Review - Idendification
" Con~ni·ssioner Kraus stated that 1) a Staff Report was prepared in connection
with this application and 2) th~ application is for a new sign to replace
the ones that were knocked down.
The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 28 April 1969 recommending
that Final Design ApprOval be gr~nted for A-312 as shown on· Exhibit "A".
Con~nissioner Kraus moved, seconde~d·by Commissioner Bacon, that the Staff Report
dated·' 28 April 1969 be adopted and that A-312 be granted Final Design Approval
· on· the basis Of Exhibits "A"; motion carried unanimously
,,
planning Commission Minutes - 28 April 1969 - Continue
IV. 'D~ A-269 - Abel M. Carreia, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Reconsideration of " Roofin5 Materials to be Used
The'Secretary 'stated that 1) several monthS'ago the Planning Commission
approved a wood shake roof for a b~ilding located on Saratoga-Sunnyvale
Road and 2) ~. Carreia (applicant) now requests that he be permitted
to use a'comp0sition "' shingle roof in lieu of the wood shake roof
since. it would be much cheaper.
The Assistant Planner stated that 2the newly proposed.material is fire proof.
The Secretary stated that the appl:icant iS ready. to ~roceed with. immediate
installation of the new roof and is remiss that he did. not make the Commission
aware of the proposed changed earlier.
Commissioner Metcalf stated that he felt the Design Review Committee would be
disinclined to reconsider the typ~ of roofing materials to be used.
Chairman Norton directed the matter continued to the next regular meeting and
referred same to the Design Review Committee for study.
V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT :
Commissioner.KraUs gave a summary of ~tems reviewed and action 'taken at the
City Council meeting of 16 April 1969 with emphasis on topics of particular
interest tO the Commfssion.
PLANNING POLICY CObLMITTEE REPORT
Conunissioner Kraus gave a summary of items discussed at the Planning Policy
emphasis on the following
Committee meeting of 27 9 with: .
1) A study to be conducted!relative to'the feasibility of
a Convention .Sports Are~. The County Counsel asks that
"all Cities affirm theirlacceptance of the pr0p~Sed~'finai~'_
s~udy in 'a'f~r~l written statement, enclosing a check to
cover 'their proportionate share of the Study.
2) The presentation of thelproposal for'a Bayside Park by Mr.
Pott, Director of County Public Works Department, to create
marshland wildlife islands' (~ithout people access) relaxed
recreation uses such as!bicyCl&.paths, hiking trails, picnic
areas, fishing piers, e~C. ~t' a.cost of approximately
15 million dollars over:a period of about'ten years
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. SDR-807 - John D. Johnson, 'Three ZOaks Way - Request for Exception of Conditions · . - Continued from 14 Apr. il 1969
Connnissioner 'Smith stated that the S~bdivision Committee did go out and look
at the existing driveway and found i~ to be substantially i.n conformance with
the ordinance.
Comr~issioneri'Smith read the SubdiviSion Committee R'~po~t dated"28 Ap~ii' 1969 recommendi
that Condition II-J of the Building Site Committee Report dated. 24 March
19'69 be amended to read as .follows:
II..' J. Corridor to existingihome to be improved'to 18-foot minimum
· ' access road standard'as approved by Public Works Director.
Commissioner Smith moved~ seconded b~ Commissioner Bacon, that .S~b."'Connnitte~'R~por~7'77
dated 28 April 1969'be adopted and Condition II-J of the Building' Site Committee
· RepOrt dated 24 'M~rch 1969 be 'amended t'o read as designated in said report; motion
cart ied unanimous ly.
.... . .~..
...................... :.- ..............
Planning COmmission Minutes - 28 April 1969 - Continued
VII. NEW BUSt~ESS
A. SDR-701 - George Thayer, Pierce ;Road - Request for Extension
'The Secretary read a con~nunication received from Mr. Thayer requesting an
extension 'of one (1) year in connection with SDR-701.
ConLmissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, to grant a
one (1) year extension for SDR-701 and thereby' making 1! March 1970
the new expiration date' and subjlect tO th~ additional condition of payment
of a park and recreation .fee; motion carried unanimously.
B. SARATOC~ PLAN LINE :
The Secretary read a memo received from Fir. James R. Huff, City Administrator,
stating that the City CounCil adthorized the Planning Commission to proceed
· with public hearing on the Saratoga Plan .Line prepared by the Director of
Pub lic Works.
The 'Secretary, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman NOrton, stated that the
Saratoga Plan Line would be an appropriate matter to bring up on the same
agenda as the.General Plan since it is in conformance with the General Plan.
Chairnmn Norton referred the matter to the General Plan Committee, directed
the Secretary tO publish a Notice of Hearing relative to the Saratoga Plan
Line at the earliest satisfactory date.
C. SARATOGA FOOTHILLS APARTmeNT ENTRANCE
The Secretary, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Metcalf, .stated
that the Public Works Departmen.t and .the Saratoga Foothills people are.z.
still working on a feasible plan for the subject entrance.'
D.. SARATOGA FOOTHILLS -'PARK AND RECREATION FEE
The Secretary stated that the City Council has reqqested the Planning
COmmission to make a reconunendation relative"to .the Sarato'.g.a Foothills
o~aer's request to credit their: provide~ open space against their park
and recreation fees. :
"' Chairman Norton referred the matter to the Subdivisio~ Committee for study
and directed same Continued to ~he next regular meeting.
'VIII. CO~FONCIATIONS ',' i ~' · ,'. ~ '~..
A. ~ ITT E N
1. "C-V" (Visitor-Commercial) Zonin5 - Bi5 Basin Way
Chairman..N.orton read a communication received from M~. Sam Hernandez,
merchant on Big Basin Way,~requesting that the Planning Commission
initiate' rezoning as soon ~s .possible to rezone his land back to its
former "P-A" (ProfessionalSAdministrative) Zoning.
M~. Hernandez was present and stated that 1) when he signed the
application submitted by Fir. John Irwin, "et al (C-121) he was under
the impression that each ahd every property 'on both sides of Big Basin
Way'from Fifth Street to tha southerly turn and extension of Big Basin
Way would be rezoned 2) h~ was amazed when he received a comn~anication
from the City Council stat%ng that the aformentioned was not the case
3) his only..purpose for. s.~gning the said application was to enablet
the property owner next dobr to obtain "C-V" Zoning for his property
and 4) he did not want ."C~V" Zoning for 'his property unless everyone
in the described area changes' their .zoning to "C-V",
-10 -
'Plannin~ Commission 'Minutes - 28 April 1969 M- Continued
VIII'. .A. 1~'. '.'C-V" ~ Continued
i ...'
... ~.. Hernandez, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated
. ..".'~ that 1) if his property is rezoned his property tax will increase
2) if the rezoning were for the betterment of the commaunity he
· .....'. would .pay the additional tak, but under the circumstances he did
not' feel. it was right.
Chairman Norton advised that the Planning Commission does have the
.power to initia'te change ofi Zoning proceedings on their o~m if
they feel it is essential t~ do so.
.Mr. Hernandez'stated that the "C-V" Zoning will be effective
thirty (30) days after the date of.approval for C-12~ by the City
Council.
'Chairman Norton referred th~ matter. to the Subdivision Committee
· " for consideration and direcited the matter continued to the next
regular meeting. :
2.'. .~SPEECH BY DR. ARV!N JOHNSON=
.... . .7 Chairman Norton read a communication received from the County of
Santa Clara planning'Department'in~iting the Planning Commission to
"' attend an inf0~'n{ativ~°'presehtation by Dr. Arvin Johnson (Associate
· .. '.= professor,.Schooi of. Earth 'Sciences, Stanford UniverSity) on geological
.factors in development and 'planning and touch on earthquakes~to'be held
_'. " at 11:15 A.M. on 7 May 1969io'
.3°" SEMINAR ON SOILS z
· . Chairman Norton stated that the Santa Clara Association of Planning
Officials is offering a Seminar on Soils in Room. 238, Benson Center
(Student Union)'at the UniVersity of Santa Clara on 14 and 15 May
1969 for any of the CommisSioners interested in attending.
4.' C~SA FoundatiOn, Inc. i Request.for HoUsinS' for Low Idcome Families
Chairman. Norton.advised that a. communiCation.had been received from
CASA FoundatiOn, Inc.. urgihg 'the City to make provisions for adequate
housing for low income families. ~
· After a brief discussion, Chairman Norton r~ferre~the matter to the
General Plan Committee fori'stud~j .,,
B. ORAL
'1. '. GOOD WISHES FOR A SUCCESSFUL TRIR
Commissioner S~ith, on behalf of the entire Commission, wished Chairman
Norton 'smooth flying and a ~estful vacation on his trip to Europe.
Chairman Norton'thanked the!Commission ..... for their good wishes and
stated that he would leave the planning'Commission in the capable
hands of Acting-Chairman'Commissioner Lively'.
-11-
Planning COmmission Minutes - 28 April 1969 - Continued
,
2. GUESTS
· · Chairman Norton acknowl. edged,.with pleasure, the presence of
~trs. Stark of the Good 'Government Group, Mr. Martin of the Prides
-· Crossing Homeowner's ASsociation, Mrs. Ottenberg of the League of
Women Voters. He, also, thanked Mrs. Stark for the coffee served
at recess.
IX. ADJOIrR~rMENT
· The Chairman·declared the meeting ·adjourned at 10:05 P.M.
~ . "' ...' Respectfully submitted,
, Secretary
Saratoga Planning Commission