Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-14-1969 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SAPSTOGA PIANNING COI.~.~ISSION MINUTES TIME: Tuesday, 14 October-1969, 7:30 P.M. PLACE: City Council Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070 TYPE: Regular Meeting ***********~*~'~**** I. ROFI'INE ORGANIZATION The meeting was called to order by Chairman Norton. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bacon, Krausz, Lively, Metcalf, Norton, and Smith. Absent: Commissioner Crisp. Chairman Norton stated that Commissioner Crisp has missed few meetings in the many years he has served on the ,Planning Commission and is absent this evening to celebrate his wife's birthday and their wedding anniversary. B o MINUTES Commissioner' Smith moved, seconded b~ Commissioner Lively, that the reading of the minutes of the 22 September 1969 meeting be waived and they be approved as distributed to the Commission; motion carried unanimously. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. UP-170 - Saratoga Tennis Club, Komina Avenue - Request for Use Permit to Allow Expansion of Tennis Club - Continued from 22 Septem_b_er 1969 Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee did meet with the applicant to discuss this matter, but further study is necessary; therefore, UP-170 is recommended for continuance. In view of the foregoing, Chairman Norton did not open the hearing at thiS~ time and directed UP-170 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Com~nittee for further study. B. UP-176 - Ditz-Crane, Yuba Court - Request for Use Permit to A!.low a Model Home Sales Office Planning Conmission took action relative to this matter on 8 September 1969. C. C-124 - City of Saratoga, Big Basin Way - Request for Change of-Zoning· from "P-A" (Professtional-Administrative) to "C-V" (Visitor-Commerc. ial) - Continued from 9 June 1969 Chairman Norton re-opened the hearing for C-124 at 7:39 P°M. The Secretary explained that the subject change of· zoning was initiated by the Planning Connnission for those properties on both sides of Big Basin Way that were not re-zoned from "P-A" to "C-V" under the John W. Irwin application C-121~ because the ovfaers of the subject properties "y-did not sign the Irwin application. -1- Planning Commission Minutes 14 October 1969 - Continued II. C. C-124 - Continued The Secretary further explained tha.t a public hearing was held on 9 June 1969 and some of the o~;mers of the.properties involved in the subject Change of Zoning were out of to~.~a; therefore, the matter was continued to this meeting. He ..then read a communication received from ~. Sam Hernandez explaining that he no longer wished to be included in the subject Change of Zoning. Chairman Norton stated that Mr. Hernandez originally felt that either all of the properties involved should be rezoned or none of them should be rezoned to commercial. Barbara Caldwell, 14605 Big Basin Way, was present and stated that 1) she o~,ned the property across t.he street from ~. Hernandez 2) her property consisted of a two-story house with several garden apartments 3) twelve years ago when she remodeled her house Big Basin Way was in a bad state and everyone thought she was peculiar because she felt the · Village ·showed great promise and she did improve her property; subsequently, all the neighbors became interested. and started to improve their properties on Big Basin Way 4) she built the 'garden apartments with the hope that they could provide her with income ~in future years 5) the tax assessor has stated that if the zoning on th'e property is changed to commercial the taxes will go up and probably double by 1970 or 1971 6) in the event the taxes should double her income fro~ her property would be approximately $100.00 a year and she would be for'.ced to sell; therefore, she requests that her property retain its existi~ng "P-A" (Professional-Administrative) and 7) she discussed the matter wi2th Dr. Fitzsimmons (property o~<~er on Big Basin Way) and she~ also, intends to request that her property not be included in the "C-V" (Visitor-Commercial) rezoning. Chairman Norton stated that if Dr. Fitzsi~ons would submit a letter stating her views on this matter the Planning Commission would be glad to consider them. He then closed the hearing (.7:50 P.M.) for the evening, directed C-124 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for study. D. V-338 - San Jose Water Works, Pike Road - Request for Var'~: .... ~n Connection with Installation of a New Power Pole The hearing was opened at 7:51 P.M, The Secretary stated the Notices of Hearing were mailed and briefly reviewed this application. There was no one present to represent the applicant. No one in the audience wished to comment. · Chairman Norton closed the hearing at 7:53 P,M~, directed V-338 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Co~ittee for study. Chairman Norton requested the Secretary to contact Con~issioner Crisp (Chairman of the Variance Committee) to arran'ge for an on-site inspection of the property with the applicant, III, BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SDR-824 - John B. Walsh, Herriman Avenue Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 22 September 1~.69 Commissioner Smith explained that this matter was continued to allow the applicant time to change the entran'ce to his property which involved the location of a bridge. He further s~ated that a favorable' report has been received .from the Flood Control District relative to the proposed entrance. -2- planning Con~nission Minutes - 14 October 1969 - Continued III. A. SDR-824 - Continued The applicant was present and stated he had reviewed the proposed conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction of same. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded .by Commissioner Bacon, that the Building Site Committee Report of 14 October 1969 relative to SDR-824 be adopted and that the tentative map' (Exhibit "A", filed 28 September 1969) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Metcalf asked if the bridge would be subject to design review, emphasizing that it would be in full view. The Secretary advised that it would not~ but that it would require an encroachment permit. At Conmissioner Metcalf's suggestion, it was agreed to ask the Public Works Department not to issue the encroachment permit until the Commission has reviewed the plans. B. SDR-828 - Dr. John Cox, Jacks Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 22 September 1969 Con~missioner Smith stated that the Fire Department Report relative to the access road in connection with.· SDR-828 had not been received; therefore, it is suggested that this matter b~ continued. Chairman Norton so directed. C. SDR-829 - Edwa~_d .T.~ Wild, Fruitvale Avenue - Building~ Site Approval - 1 Lot The applicant ~.:as present and questioned Condition II-C of the Building Site Co~mnittee Report dated 14 October 1969 relative to widening Fruitvale Avenue. He further' stated that he understood that Fruitvale Avenue would be widened on the opposite side. The Secretary stated. that it is the intention of the Public Works Department to obtain the widening of Fruitvale Avenue wherever possih?.' Chairman Norton explained, to the ~pplicant, that he is being asked to pave 8-feet of road until the City. is in a position to widen Fruitvale Avenue. : Chairman Norton explained that the applicant can file a letter with the Planning Commission requesting rec0nsideration or exception .of Condition II-C of the Building Site Committee RepOrt dated 14 October 1969. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the BUilding Site Committee Report of 14 October 1969 relative to SDR-829 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A' 1" filed 10 October 1969) be a.p~ subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried~{~ously. D. SD-830 - GJo~ge W. Day, Toll ~te Road - Subdivision Approval - 15 Lots Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee has met with the applicant to review preliminary maps as well as tentative mps and there are still problems with the access road; therefore, it is recommended that SD-830 be continued. Commissioner Bacon explained that the slope of the property reduced the number of building sites in this subdivision. Chairman Norton directed SD-830 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision C~mmittee for study. E. 'SDR-831 - Rjlph Anderson.~ Quito Road - Building Site Approval - 2 Lots Commissioner Smith stated that 1) . this is actually a five lot parcel, but application has been made for. only two lots 2) a problem does exist in connection with entrance onto the property and 3) the matter should be dis- cussed with the City Attorney and the Director of Public Works. Planning Commission Minutes - 14 October 1969 - Continued III. Eo SDR-831 - Continued The applicant was present and stated that he has tried to save as many of the trees on 'the property.as possible 'and that he is anxious for approval of some of the lots. Chairman Norton explained that until the matter of access is resOlVed · SDR-831 is referred to the Subdivision Committee for further study and Continued to the next regular meeting. IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-331 - Dr. John Oliver, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Final Design Approval - Identification Sign ConLmissioner Metcalf read the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 recommend- ing that Final Design Approval be ]granted for A-331 and then recommended that the report be amended as follows:: paragraph 1. . .line 1. . .change ~ "is proposing" to "proposes" and in line 8. . .delete the word "withid" and insert "already allocated to" and add the word "individual" after t}~e word "Said" ' Commissioner Smith stated that th~ sign reads "Saratoga Center" and this is not accurate since the subject Zbusiness is not located in tb!'--..c..'.lpter of Saratoga and, he felt, the wordino~ should be controlled in .'~,'!~'~c way. Chairman Norton stated that he did not see Lanything part C. uuiarly objectionable in the wording and did not think the Planning Commission could really dictate what could be said on a sign. The Secretary stated that according to the City Attorney it is not possible to tell the applicant ~fnat he can or cannot say on a sign. Commissioner Kraus suggested that the color of the pole to be used for the proposed sign should be stated in.the subject Staff Report. Commissioner Metcalf reconnnended that Condition (e) be added to the Staff Report as follows: "(e) Color of pole to be bro~.m." Com=~issioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be granted for"'A-331 as sho~.~rn on Exhibits "A" and "B" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. B. A-332 - Immanuel Lutheran Church, Saratoga Avenue - Final Design Ap.proval - Classroom Addition }[r. Don Gerth, present to represent the applicant, stated, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Metcalf~ that the method for installing the shake roof will be one approved by the Fire Department and will provide a one-hour fire barrier. After the reading of the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 which recommended that Final Design Approval be grabted for A-332, Commissioner Metcalf reco~m~ended that in paragraph 2. . .line 5. . .the word "facilitate" be replaced by the word "create". -4- pI.anninE Commission Minutes - 14 October ].969 - Continued IV. B. A-332 - Continued Con~nissioner Metcalf moved, seconded b); Con~missioner Bacon, that the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 be ad6pted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be granted for A-332 as sho~,zn on Exhibits "~" "B" "C" and "D" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. C. A-333 - Saratoga Village Shopping Center, Big Basin Way - Final Design Approval - Replacement of Individual Identification Signs. Commissioner Metcalf reconm~ended that A-333 be continued to allow time to meet with the applicant for further discussion in connection with this application. Chairnmn Norton so directed. D. SS-63 - Utah Homes, Inc., Cox and. Dehavilland Avenue - Final Design Approval - Temporary S. ubdivision Sign - Continued from 22 September 1969 Con~nissioner Metcalf stat6d that the proposed sign will replace an existing unauthorized sign. The Planning Commission read the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 recommend- ing that Final Design Approval be granted for SS-63. Commissioner Metcalf ·recommended t.hat Condition "f" of the subject report be changed to read as follows: "(f) Overall height of sign not to exceed g-feet above grade; sign to conform to sight distance and setback requirements." Conm~issioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be granted for SS-63 as sho~.rn on Exhibits "A" and "C" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. E. SS-64 - Pacific Shore Properties, Glen Brae Drive and Cox Avenue -. Final DesiJn Approval ~ Temporary Subdivision Sign Commissioner Metcalf stated that the location of the prc~-.. ..... .i z~f.~jn is actually on State of California right-of-way and the applicant has been informed that he must obtain an' Encroachment Permit or place the sign on his own property. The Assistant Planner stated that the applicant did call and state that he is in the process of obtaining the required Encroachment Permit. Connnissioner Metcalf read the Staf.:f Report dated 14 October 1969 recormnending that Final Design Approval be granted for SS-64o He then recommended that the subject Staff Report be amended as follows: "Co ' nd~tion (a) Obtain Encroachment Permit for State of California Division of ttighways before erection of said sign; otherwise, sign must be located on subdivision property." · "i~·'_~0ndition (c) Overall height' of sign not to exceed eight S-feet above grade; sign to conform to sight distance and setback requirements. Comnissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Con~nissioner Kraus, that the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be granted for SS-64 as sho~..m on Exhibits "A" and "B" subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. P'lanninB Comnission biinutes - 14 October 1969 - Continued IV. F. SS--65 - Kunkel-Thomas Co., Sobey Road and Old Wood Way - Final Design Approval - Teraporary Subdivision Sign Conunissioner Metcalf stated that tb.e Design Review Committee did meet with the applicant and established some conditions relative to this app 1 icat ion. The Assistant Planner stated that the applicant has requested that SS-65 be continued. Chairman Norton so directed. V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT -Commissioner Smith ga. vea summary of items reviewed and action taken at the City Council meeting of 1 October 1969'. ~.zith emphasis on matters of particular interest to the Co~issiono VI. PLA~ING POLICY CO~R.'IITTEE REPORT No .report. VII. OLD BUSINESS Ao ACCESSORY STRUCTURES - An Ordinance Amending Article 3 of Zoning Ordinance NS-3, Pertaining to Setback Requirements for Accessory Structures in Rear Yards of Single Family Residential Zoning Districts - Referral by City Council - Continued from 22 September 1969 Con~issioner Smith stated that 1) .the Subdivision Committee did meet with the Planning Committee of the City iCouncil to discuss th.,'~: ~.r..~ -..~=,.~ ordinance relative to accessory structures 2) the Planning Commit: .... ~.::.~.':c] to be in sympathy with the Planning Commission acting on the prop.~.,~ed ordinance at this time and forwarding sam. e to the' City Attorney for final draft and 3) the following changes should be made in the subject ordinance amendment: Section l:. ~i(d). . .line 1. . .change line to read as follows: "Except as prohibited by Section 3.7:' Section 2: . .change to read "The next to the last paragraph of Section 3.7 is re,pealed." .~ Section 3: .(b). .delete the fo. llowing: "but in no case closer than the 25-foot required rear yard."' Section 3: . (c) . . . line 6. . . in.sort the words "may be" between the wor~s "and" and "conStructed".i Section 3. . .(d). . .delete last sentence and instea=d insert the following: "Cabanas shall not be closer than 6-feet from the rear or side property line." Planning Commission Minutes - 14 October 1969 Continued VII. A. ACESSORY STRUCTURES - Continued Chairman Norton pointed out that 1) a. large volume of public hearings will occur if a Use Permit must be~obtained' for every garage, cabanas, etc. and he wondered' if there is a way. to eliminate some of this 2) he could not go along with the $30.00 fee which', the ~p~licant will be required to pay for each Use Permit in order to build ~n accessory structure on his property and 3) he did not see any harm in someone building a green house or tool shed even if it is up against the fence. The Secretary explained that the r~ason for this proposed ordinance came about as a result of the Kerner variance (V-326) where the applicant did b~ild one of the many cabanas that~ overwhelmed the adjoining properties.' Chairman Norton stated that he fel'.t that an applicant wishing to construct an 8-~oot high building, not exceeding :250-square feet, should not be required ~0 apply for a Use Permit since he: did not see the need for such rigid control. Mr. Norman'~[qrtin, Prides Crossing. Homeowner's Association, stated that if a building were constructed with a~ gable roof it would probably exceed 8-feet · in 'height. Chairman Norton replied that even ~then it would be a fairly small building and would not spoil anyone~s view.~ Mr. Martin stated that he did have photographs illustrating where such a structure overwhelmed his property and certainly did ruin the.view and invade his privacy. Chairman Norton explained that this sort of thing must be expected on a small lot in a settled area. Mr. Martin stated that he objected to accessory buildings constructed close 'to the property line and would like to be assured of adequate air circulation, light and privacy as stated in his deed restrictions. Chairman Norton explained that the City does not enforc~ deed restrictions. Mr. ~rtin stated that he did not expect the City to en~"c~..'~'t ~n~.cd restrictions,. but he would like the City to adopt an ordinance to prohibit ...,=-~tghtly accessory structures; thereby, eliminating the necessity of lengthy and costly court cases in order to enforce deed restrictions regulating these matter. Chairman Norton explained that 1) Saratoga has become a thickly settled area and is really no longer a rural co~mnunity and 2) a property owner should have some right to use his property and the proposed ordinance would place some restrictions on property rights. Mr. ~rtin explained that 1) he did not feel that a rear yard accessory structure should be higher than 8-feet and 2) perhaps a 14-foot height could be allowed in the areas zoned for acre lots as suggested at one time by Councilman Robbins and Sanders. Councilman Robbins was present and stated, in answer to an inquiry frGm Chairman Norton, that it might be better to allow a higher structure in the rear yard on the acre lots; however, in order to get an ordinance established he would recommend that the proposed ordinance be adopted at this time. -7- Planning Commission Minutes 14 October 1969 - Continued VII. A. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES - Continued Mr. James Naugle, Prides Crossing Homeowner ' s Association, recommended that the following be added in Section 1. . (d) between the words "structure" and "including". ."16. cated on the same site with a permitted use"; "ard" " and in Section 3. . (d) between the words y and shall" insert. "except as stated in condition Section 3. .(c); and in Section 3. . (e) delete the following from the end of the paragr'aph. "but no exceptions shall be made tO the height, area or setback requirements specified in paragraph (c)." Commissioner Smith stated that if Use Permits are to be required then regu- lations are needed; therefore, the· deletion in Section 3. .(e) reco~mnended by Mr. Naugle is not practical. Chairman Norton stated that in order to avoid the necessity of a Use Permit in all cases there should be some flexibility and he supposed that any Use Permit could be granted subject to certain conditions. Mr. Naugle stated that a conditional Use Permit would cover cases that would justify those structures outlined in Section 3. .(c). Commissioner Smith advised that SeCtion 3. . (c) would regulate the building of cabanas, gardening sheds, etc. Mr. Naugle stated that he felt Section 3. .(c) would better be left Out to allow more flexibility. Chairman Nort'on stated that Section 3. . (c) allows the Planning Commission some flexibility and yet sets limits. He further stated that there seemed to be three major points of difference 1) his own objecti-c;!·'· r~.!ative to depriving people of the right to u~e their property and '·".·· .cessity of applying for a Use Permit for all rear yard structures z~d 2) the suggestion that some height distinction be made between smaller lots and the areas zoned for acre lots and 3) the suggestion made by Mr. Naugle that more flexibility be allowed than would be permitted by the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee and the Planning Committee· of the City Council have discussed this matter and feel that the proposed ordinance should be adopted at ·the earliest possible time even if it is proven later that some items must be changed. Mr Naugle stated that he felt, it would be better to make sure the ordinance · is in final form prior to adoption.·. Chairman Norton·stated he is willihg to accept Commissioner Smith's suggestion that the Planning Commission take action at this time relative to the proposed ordinance and accept the burden of~ changing same later. · Commissioner Kraus stated that he objected to allowing the placement of pool equipment on the property line. Commissioner Lively suggested that: the pool equipment could be required to be·sound proofed· Chairman Norton stated that the question still remains whether Use Permits should be issued or if the Use Permit requirement should be eliminated. Planning~ Commission Minutes 14 October 196.'9 - Continued VII. A. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES - Continued Commissioner Smith sta['ed that at 'the meeting with the Subdivision Committee and Planning Committee it was deci:ded that the Use Permits should be required and he assumed that this decision iremains unchanged. Commissioner Lively stated that apZplication can be made for a Use Permit to locate a cabana in the side yard 6-feet from the property line and have a lO-foot high building in any R-1 district. Chairman Norton stated that the wa~ the proposed ordinance reads the setback for cabanas is more than is presently required for side yard setbacks. RECESS AND RECONVENE Chairman Norton stated that at an informal discussion during the recess the following amendment to Section· 3. .(c) was proposed: Section 3 .... (c). .the last sen'tence be changed to read. ."The size of a cabana shall not exceed 250-slquare feet in area nor 8-feet in overall height at a setback of 6-feet plus' one additional foot of height for each additional 3-feet of setback up tol a maximum of lO~feet in height ." Commissioner Lively moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith, ·to approve the aforementioned amendment to the proposed ordinance; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded'. by Commissioner Bacon, that the accessory structure ordinance be adopted, as[ amended, and sent to the City Attorney for drafting of a final form and forwarding to the City Council as the recommendation of the Planning Conm~ission; motion· carried unanimously. B. C-i06 - M.V.S. Company, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Extension - Continued from 22 September 1969 The Secretary read the Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 recommending that a six (6) month extension be granted for C-106. Commissioner Lively reco.mmended that in paragraph 1. .line 4. ·.the word "reasonable" be deleted. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded' by Commissioner Bacor~·~ Staff Report dated 14 October 1969 be adopted, as amend~.·~?, ~.,...'·! forwarded to thd City Council as the recommendation of the Planning Conunission; motion carried unanimously. C. SDR-669 - Frank Pringle, Canyon View Drive Request for F. xtension - Continued from 22 September 1969 · The Secretary b. riefly reviewed this application and recommended that'a six (6) month extension be granted for SDR:-669. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that a six (6) month extension be granted for SDR-669 from the present date of expiration; motion carried unanimously. D_: .....Maintenance of Landscaped Areas The Commission read the Design Review Committee Report dated 14 October 1969 recomraending that the Planning Com~nission require, as a condition of tentative map approval, formation of a Landscape Maintenance Assessment District for maintenance of land areas planted in conjunction with subdivision development. -9- --Plan~ Commission Minutes - 14 October '.1969 - Continued VII. D. Maintenance - Continued Commissioner Metcalf recoma~ended that the following changes be made in the subject report. . .'paragraph 1. . .insert a '='~.~... ~'.'= between.~ the words "development" and "thb"; paragraph 2. . .be changed to r~ad as follo~,.~s: "The Planning Co~n~ission wil]. require formation of a Landscape Maintenance Assessment District for such areas as a condition o~ tentative map approval." Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the Design Review Committee Report dated 1.~- October 1969 be adopted, as amended, and transmitted to the City Council as the recomm~endation of the Planning Commission; motion carried unanimously. E. Park Element - Sarato~%a General2 Plan The Secretary introduced a report dated 8 October 1969 submitted by the City Manager for review by the Planning' Commission relative to the Park Element of the General Plan. Co~nissioner Smith explained that the General Plan Conm~ittee did meet with the Planning Committee of the City Council and it was agreed at that time tb. at the Planning Commission would not consider' the referrals (such as the one submitted by the City Ma-'nager). piece~meal but would, instead, waits'until the City Council finished all their hearii~gs and submit their fin~;1 comments~ on the matter and then consider and study the matter in its completed form. In ~iew of the foreooing Chairman Norton referred the matter to the General Plan Committee for study and a report. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. SDR-825 - Z. Clyde Standard, Monte Vista Drive and Via Colina - Request for Reconsideration of Conditions The Secretary read a communication received from ti~e ."~. 'r r~'nt requesting that the Planning Commission reconsider Conditions ':C!~, :'~,_j'~ .~-;.~.d "H" as stated in the B~,ilding Site Committee Report dated 22 September 1969 re].a-- tive to SDR-825. The applicant was present and stated that 1) .no ~..~ter problem exists on Via Colina 2) he had pictures .taken in 1957 illustrating that the water problem does not ~mrrant the beam as required in Condition "C" of the Building Site Committee Report ~) under no circumstances could he accept Conditions. "C" "G" and "H" as stated in the Building Site Com~nittee Report , , and 4) he would be very happy if the condition requiring the ber'm were e liminated. Chairman Norton explained that the Planning Commission will give due consideration to the subject request, but it is unlikely that the' recormmend- ation of the Building Site Committee will be changed since the Public Works Department did recommend that the berm be required. He then directed that this request be referred to the .Subdivision Commi'ttee for study and directed SDR-825 continued to the next regular meeting. planning_Commission Minutes - 14 October 1969 - Continued VIII, Bo SDR-826 - Elgin Capital, Big B~sin Way - Request for Reconsideration of Conditions The secretary read a letter submitted by the applicant's representative requesting reconsideration of the condition requiring underground utilities as stated in the Building Site Committee Report dated 22 September 11969. The Secretary then state'd that the applicant feels that underground =..utilities would serve no purpose at this time. Chairman Norton stated that the subject building site is located across the street from a future development area. Commissioner Smith stated that .he understood the applicant will be involved in a bigger development in this area. Connnissioner Metcalf stated that if the proposed building site is the first step of future development the underground utilities should be required at this time. Chairman Norton directed SDR-826 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the SubdiVision Committee for study. IX o COFR.~ICATIONS A, WRITTEN Invitation Chairman Norton stated that 1) ;he received an invitation from the Santa Clara County Home Build~r.s Association for dinnc-? ~,!~ 22 October 1969 at the Bold Knight in Sunn'yvale and he will not b~ a['~].e to attend and 2) Chairman Lively, as Vice-Chairman of the Commission, has the right of first refusal and if he cannot attend perhaps someone else can go to represent the Planning Commission. B. OP~.L Permanent Subdivision Sign - BrO~ and Kauffmann M~. Naugle, Prides Crossing Homeo~.~aer's Association, stated that 1) at the public hearing on 23 June 1969 we (Prides Crossing Homeo~...~er's Association) indicated our feelings relative to the Brown an~ Kauffmann subdivision sign (entrance) located at Cox Avenue 2) one of the? conditions of approval for their Design Review Approval A-316 was that a letter be submitted by Bro~ and Kauffmann to the City and the Association acknowledging agreement of maintenance and the required easement to make the sign permanent and 3) to this date this agreement has not been received, The Secretary stated that Bro~...~'and Kauffmann has had a change in personnel recently and he would check into the matter. Chairre. an Norton requested the Sgcretary. contact the Bro~.m and Kauffmann representative relative to the subject letter si~'ee it is a condition of approval for A-316, Guests Chairm~n Norton acknowledged, ~ith pleasure, the presence of Councilnmn Robbins, Drs. Newcomer and Overacker of the League of Women Voters, Mrs. Parker of the Good Governme. nt Group, and ~. I,lartin and }lr. Naugle of the Prides Cpessing Homeox.fner's Association. He, also, thanked Mrs. Parker for the coffee served at 'recess. Planning Corn. mission Minutes - 14 October 1969 - Continued X, ADJOURN~ENf Chairman I,!orton declared the meeting adjourned at 10:55 P.M, Respectfully submitted -12-