Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-11-1970 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SAIbkTOGA PLANNING CO~,ilSSION MINUTES TIME: Monday, 11 }4ay 1970, 7:30 P.M. PL~CE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070 TYPE: Regular Meeting I. I',OUTINE ORGANIZATION The meeting was called to order by Chairman Norton. A o ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Crisp, Kraus, Lively, Martin, Norton, and Smith. Absent: Commissioner Metcalf. B. MINUTES Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, that the reading of the minutes of the 27 April 1970 meeting be ~.:aived and they be approved as distributed to t[~e Com,'nission; motion carried unanimously. C. NEW CO,.'~;N.ISSIONER Chairmz. n Norton extended 'a xgelcor:~e to ne~.:].y appointed Coxr~missioner Norman J. Martin. He noted that Commissioner Martin, Operc-.tions Chief for Pioneer (scientific spacecraft in orbit about the s / ~or i' -' '.. Research Center at Moffett Field, has been a resident of Saratoga ~:...". : ...... and form- .... . . '~k, 2 years erly served as Vice-President and Architectural Co:~.':',_o~ Chairrn~-'n of Prides Crossing Homeox~ners Association. Chairman Norton then stated that it is customary to assign a nexq Comn~issioner to a committee at this time; however, the D. eeting schedule of the Subdivision Corm,qittee 'may conflict with Commissioner Martin's xvorking hours. He further' stated that the Subdivision C0m. n:ittee meets regularly every Monday afternoon and every other Thursday mo~:ning. Commissioner Martin stated that he is very busy at his place of employment at pLesent, bu~ feels he could get a~qs.y to attend the regularly scheduled Subdivision Corbmittee meetings on occasion. Conm:issioner Kraus, in ansx.:er' to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, explained that unless he can arrenge his office hours he would not be able to accept an appointment to the Subdivision Committee at this time. Commissioner Smith advised that the txqo present n:embers of the Subdivision Committee could meet at the regularly scheduled time and arrange the agenda so that the more pron:inent items could be taken. up later in the day; thereby, allov~ing the employed rt~embe~: . of the Committee sufficient time to arrive. }te further stated that night meetings would not be appropriate. since additional overti~.ne by the Staff would be necessary and it would create difficulties relative to efficient preparation of reports, etc. for the Planning Comnmission me e t ins s. · . Chairman Norton stated that the problem of the Subdivision Colmnittee meeting schedule has been brought up several times and has never been .resolved. He further stated that he would not make a conm~ittee appointment at thi-q time and directed that the n3atter of 'con'.mittee appointments be continued to the next regular meeting to allow. time for further study of same. Plannin~ Commission Min'~,tes - I1 ~..~aI 1970 - Continued IIo PUBLIC HEARINGS A. C-128 - Elgin Capital Corporation, Big Basin W-:~y and Sixth Street Request for Change of Zoning from "R-M-3,O00" (M~lti-Family Residential) to "C-V" (Visitor-Commercial) - Continued from 27 April 1970 The Chairman re-op~,ne~ the hearing at 7:44 P.M. The Secretary stated that a communication had been received from the applicant requesting that action on C-128 be postponed in order that it can be taken up at the time of General Plan Review. Mrs. Frank Dutro, 20825 PamelaWay, stated that 1) she ~.Tas speaking for residents of Pamela Way 2) Pamela Way is a peaceful residential street and the residents are concerned that the privacy l~e maintained and 3) it is felt that it would be nndesirable to change the zoning as requested. Mrs. Dutro then submitted a petition ~ith ten signatures stating the reasons for the opposition to the proposed change of zoning. }~. Tom Moore, applicant's representative, was present and stated that he would like to point out to the residents of the area that the subject property ~.~as designated to be used mostly 'for parking. Chairman Norton advised Mrs. Dutro that the p~-oposed elevations for the property are available for review at the City Offices or the offices of Elgin Capital. He then noted that a report by the General Plan Committee dated 11 May 1970 recom~n~ends that this application be continued in order that the matter can be studied as part of the 1970 General Plan Review. Chairman Norton c].oscc] the hearing for the evening at 7:53 P.M., directed that C-128 be continued off the agenda (and re-noticed at the proper time) until such time as the General Plan Revie~,7 for ].970 is completed and a recommendation relative to this matter is prepared. Chairman Norton stated that anyone having a m~-tter to present for consideration for General Plan; Revie~ is invited tO.attend the Stuc]y scheduled for 1 j'(~ne 1970. B. C-129 - James F. Wilson, et al, Pierce Road - Reque.~::t for Change of Zoning from "R-i-40,000" (Single-Family Residentai].~.; Lcz= "R-I-20,000" (Single- ~~nt~a].) - Continued from 27 A~ri]. ].970 The hearing ~.~as re-opened at 7:54 P.M. The Secretary stated nothing new had been added to the file. Co~issioner Lively stated tha~ 1) it is the recommendation of the General Plan Committee that the m.~tter 'be continued and referred to the General Plan Review.; 2) it became apparent ~.~hi].e reviewing the subject proposal that the City Council, after completing..their study, had intended for the entire area (including all the properties involved in the Change of Zoning) to be developed at the same time and 3) th-ere is one obvious so. lution, ~.Thich is not necessarily the only solution and that is to move the boundary line on .the General Plan ~zp to incluc]e only the Wilson ~property in the m'edium density land use area to correspond ~.~ith the property to the North and ~st of the Wilson property and leave the other properties 'involved in the Cf~nge of Zoning in the very low density residential land u~e area. Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evenlug at 7:57 P.M., and directed that C-129 be continued off th~ agenda until after the 1970 General Plan Review after which further notice of hearing x-;i!.R. be pub].ished. -2- Planning Commission Minutes - ll May ].970 - Continued II. C. C-130 - Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Fruitvale Avenue - Req~est for Change of Zoning from "R-i-40,000" (Single-Family Residential to "R-I-40,000" "P--C" (Single-Family Residential Planned CommunityJ- C0ntint~ed from 27 April 1970 Cha'irman Norton re-opened the hearing at 7:58 P.Mo Chairman Norton then stated that Commissioner'Metcalf (in lieu of hispresence) submitted a letter stating he considered the site development plan and tentative map unsatisfactory as presently proposed. Mr. Jerry Lohr, President of Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, stated that 1) the plan that' was originally submitted has been altered slightly in that the number of individual lots proposed have been reduced 2) the best plan is to utilize the flatter area of the property for homes and allow the hilly area to remain as open space 3) the subject development corporation has been building. in the area for five years and prefers to build in areas where it is not necessary to pad the lots 4) areas have been observed where major grading had been done and the applicant finds this undesirable 5) the subject property has been thoroughly studied by the applicant and his representatives and it is felt that "P-C" (Planned Community) is the best method. of development 6) the statement that the developer will have a great fin~ncial gain as the result of the develop- ment of this property is not accurate since the property is not owned by the developer 7) the o~.rner will merely break even ~.:hen you consider the interest he has paid on the loan nmde to purchase the property, taxes, etc. and 8) the development Will not decrease ~:he value of the surrounding properties since all the homes will be individually designed and will sell anywhere from $65,000 to $.100,000. Chairman Norton inquired about the number of years that will be required to complete development of the subject property? Mr. Lohr stated that 1) it w'.ould be about three to 'four years to complete the project or as fast as the market will absorb the loans necessary for the houses 2) after study of. some existing stables similar to the one proposed by the applicant there is one major change that is desire~d and that is elimination of the stable proposed for the subject dev.'.'~.opment 'and 3) it has been suggested that instead of a stable a putti · .:. or golf course be provided; therefore, it is recommended at this ~:.' ..;.,=~t the stable be deleted from the proposed plans because of lack of demand. Commissioner Crisp inquired if any other area ~.7ill remain available for development of said stable in case it becomes desirable in the future. Mr. Lohr stated that 1) an area will be left available for this use should it become desirable 2) another question that was raised ~.:as the matter of the fence which would be along a portion of Fruitvale Avenue should the proposed homes be built 3) the fence could be treated in such a way that 'it would be an asset to the community and 4) a grape stake or split rail fence with plantings may be one ~.;ay of handling the matter. Chairman Norton explained that the DeSign Review .Cormre|tree will have to pass judgement on the proposed fence. Mr. Bernie Turgeon, Vice-President of Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, stated that afte'r hearing the objections raised by the residents of the Fruitvale Avenue area at the meeting of 27 April 1970 relative to the subject fence t:he plans have been changed and the fence has been moved back (off of Fruitvale Avenue) another .10-feet; thereby, a~riving at a total of 20-feet from the road. Chairman Norton expressed the appreciation of the Planning Commission for the applicants willingness to be cooperative. -3- Planning Commission Minutes - 11 .F.~L! 1970 - Continued IIo C. C-130 - Continued Far. Lohr, in answer to an inquiry from Co~ranissioner Martin, stated that the needed landscaping will be provided and some of. the orchard will be left in its natural state in order to establish an easily nkaintained area. F~. Turgeon explained that a full time gardener plus two students will probably be able to supply the manpower needed to maintain the landscaping and open space area. Mr. Henry F. Miller, 19646 Vi.a Grande Drive, stated that the traffic down Fruitvale Avenue resulting fro.:n this proposed development will cause serious traffic hazardsland if the street must be widened the property owners on the opposite side of the street would be opposed to dedicating any more of their property. Chairn~n Norton explained that a certain amount of road widening will be accomplish~.~d by the developer.- at the time of constru. ction. The Secretary explained that i) there are two sets of plans for the widening of Fruitvale Avenue and the City Council j..'-~ studying the feasibility of four lanes versus two lanes for Fruitvale and 2) the residents that have already dedicated property for the widening of Fruitvale will not be required to dedicate additional property. Mr. Miller stated that, he felt, a divider will be necessary on Fruitvale Avenue in the near future and if the street is widened to four lanes there will be insufficient ].and left for the divider strip. The Secretar'y explained that ~) the East side of Fruitvale Avenue ~.:ill be widened and 2) the current feeling is that two lanes will be adequate. Mr. Miller asked how the proposed development differed from permitting the entire property being developed under one-half acre zoning. Cbairman Norton e>:plained that 1) developing the property under "R-i-o20,000" zoning ~:,ould be in opposition to the General Plan ~nd it could not be accomoplished 2) developing the property under th.' '~'ll~.'.'~.'..:ed "P-C" method would cause little cutting and grading compared to ..~i':.~:.~. would occur under the regular "R-i-4.0,000" zonipg and 3) the "P-.C" development would not reduce the zoning to "R-I.-20.000" for this property. Mr. Miller stated that he bought is the subject area because he felt the subject property would be developed at a very lo~,: density because of the steep terrain. Chairman Norton advised that i) property that may be considered undevelopab!e by the la)~en does not appear that way to an engineer with a bulldozer and 2) the purpose of a "P-C" development for this property is to prevent excessive cutting and grading.' ~tr. Lohr stated that this type of development is occuring all over the country for the reasons mentioned by Chairman Nor'ton. Mr. Miller explained that the open space ~.;ould pot benefit him because all he will be able to see fro:n his property (if the proposed develop,'.nent is realized) is the buildings. F~s. Miller stated that 1) she agreed with the statements n:ade by her husband and 2) she is opposed to the subject proposal. Co:'..~a~issioner Crisp stated that in an "R-1-40,O00" Zoning District the houses are 40-feet apart and on the proposed "P-.C" development the houses will be 30-feet apart and he doubts tb. at anyone will really notice that there is a difference. Fir. Lohr, in answer to an inquiry from Commissic, ner Lively, Stated that if the slope density formula were applied to this property and deve].oped as straight "~-1-4.0,000" 'i~ ~-7ould reduce the number of lots allo:,Ted. -4- · Plan~ning Commission Minutes - 11 May 1970 - Continued II. C. C-130 - Continued : Commissioner Lively stated that if thirty-eight· lots would be allowed under straight "R-I-40,000" z~ning then the prol-~osed development should be limited to that number as Well. / Commissioner Smith explained that 1) the City has only a slope density resolution and not a slope density ordinance 2) it is felt the application of the slope density resolutiBn would not be adequate since it would only require that some unimproved 21and be left unused and as a result would crea~ a sight hazard because of lack of maintenance. The Secretary stated that one of the ~in purposes of "P-C" zoning is to utilize the property that is less than 107~ of grade. CoEissioner Lively stated that 1) it appeared to him that the slope density resolution would appl~ and he feels that the proposed development with the fencing would result. in causing a tunnel like approach do~ Fruitvale Avenue 2) the subject developer [~as made a fine attempt to beautify this property and 3) he is against the particular development as it is presently proposed. The Secretary, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Martin, stated that the applicant will be required to dedicate the same amount of property as the other residents in the area have already done. Comn~issioner Martin stated that 1) in the ease of the' applicant the setback for the fence would be greater than is required and 2) the planting in front of the fence would obscure the fence almost completely. ~. Turgeon explained that a very strong maintenanc~i, contract would be arranged (between the City and property o~mers) le~"~i~g the residents of this proposed development responsible for maintenance of the landscaped areas. ~. Charles Christianson of 19251 Valle Vista Drive stated that mny residents of the area living. on acre lots are opposed to the "P-C'~ concept for the subject property. Co~issioner Smith reco~ended that the mtter be continued to allow time for further study. Chair~n Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 8:50 P.M., directed C-130 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Sub- division Committee for further study. D. C-131' - Ernest T. Barco, Jr., Allendale Avenue - Request for Change of- Zoning from "R-1-40,O00" (Single-Family Residential) to "R-M-3,000" "P-C" (Multi-Family residential Planned Community) - Continued from 27 April 1970 The hearing was re-opened at 8:51 P.M. The Secretary read a copy of a letter sent to Mr. Barco by the Lomas and Nettleton Comz~.a.~y, .Mortgage Bankers and Insurors, stating the proposed project if~ .... ..~ worthwhile and that they are willing to process a loan for the z~plicant if the Change· of Zoning is approved 'BY the City. The applicant was present and stated that 1) in accordance with the latest available census figures there are one-thousand-nine-hundred-and t~enty citizens in Saratoga over sixty years of age 2) the suggestion that Saratoga already has an adequate number of apartments does not really affect this proposal since not one of the units available are designed to serve senior citizens 3) his complex inc]~udes amenities designed primarily for the senior citizen 4) the uDits in the proposed complex will cost considerably less per month than the apartments now available and will be more in keeping with the senior citizen income and 5) Mr. Wentier of the Lomas and Nettleton Company is present and will answer any questions. -5- Planning Commission Minutes - 11 May 1970 Contint~ed II. D. C-131 Continued Fir. Wender stated that 1) alj. the land really suitable for this type of development has been built 6n or is otlnerwise .conm~itteed 2) the subject projec-t is a mt~ch needed service in Saratoga and 3) he has discussed the proposed developxnent with the representatives of FHA and .they feel the area is appr6priate for the subject use. Firs. Braden of Athos Place stalted that 1) she ~-~ondered why the applicant feels this area 'is appropriate for this type of development 2) if the proposed project were realized it would increase the neighborhood population by about eighty to one-hundred people and 3) senior citizens would not necessarily appreciate the noise and traffic caused by the college located in the area and 4) she preferred to see the property developed as private residential homes. Commissioner Smith read the Subdivision Coxnmittee Report dated 11 May 1970 recommending that the subject request for Change of Zoning be denied. Mr. Jerry Monroe ,~;Saratoga citizen, inquired if the City had any intention of allowing development of a senior citizen-community at any time? Chairman Norton explained that it was quite 'desirable at one time but the City has not received a suitable proposal for same to date. Mr. Monroe stated that he feels this type of develo[Dment should be seriously considered since he would like some place to move to in the City when he can no longer keep up his own home and property. Mrs. Ruth Owen of Victor Place was present and stated that 1) she is considered a senior citizen 2) she intends to remai:k ~=', h"'r home for as long as she can and when she must move she wants to ~.~::. c'!o~t to services she needs such as grocery stores. cleaners, .etc. and 3) she feels that 'transportation is a problem for many senior citizens and would become an acute problem for the resident. s of the proposed development because of its isolated location. Commissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, to close the hearing relative to C-131 at 9.:11 P.M.; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, to adopt the Subdivision Committee Report dated 11 ~y 1970 recommending that the requested change of zoning be 'recommended to the City Council for"d~f~.l- for the reasons stated in said report and since the findings required by Section 18.6 of Ordinance NS-3 and by Section 4A.6d of Ordinance NS-3.6 cannot be made; motion carried unanimously. E. UP-185 - Katherine Cain, Ads tin Way Request for Use Permit tf Allow a Montessori Pre-School - Continued from 27 April 1970 The hearing was resumed at 9:12 P.M. The Secretary stated a communication was received from Mr. and Firs. John Minker of 19099 Austin Way stating their opposition to the subject application. -The applicant was present and stated-that 1) the proposed location is ideal for a Montessori School 2) car pools will be formed to drive the children; thereby, limiting the t'raffic and 3) the school will not disturb anyone and it will be an asset to the City as well as the neighbor- hood. Mr. Daniel Krag of 15705 Lancaster stated that 1) he was asked by some of the neighbors to appear and speak in opposition to the application 2) he did have a petition signed by thirteen residents of the area in opposition to the proposed school 3) it is felt that the subject location is inappropriat for the suggested use since it would disrupt a quiet, low density neighborhood 4) Austin Way is a narrow street and any' increase .in traffic would most definitely be a problem 5) the.proposed use would not be in keeping with the general development of the area 6) the subject bt~ilding is very old -6- 'Pianning Commission i"l. xnut:es - ii Na~, i9>"0 - COL1Einut~d II. E. UP-185 Continued and does not comp].y with the Cit:y's setback requirements 7) if the .subject application is approved the re. sidents of 'the area would request that the number of students be .limited 8) there are no small children in the area so the students wi]~l have to be brought in and 9) the entiTe site. is about one-third '.of an acre and there exists on it the the building currently under discussion and two rental units to the rear of the property. Chairman Norton explained that the rental units are not involved with the subject. application; therefore, cannot be considered. Commissioner Smith advised 1) that the City Attorney states the proposed use is permitted in the "R-i" zoning. district 2) there is a question relative to the fence for the la, yard 3) since the people in the rental P units to the rear of the property 'would be unable to get in and out since the play yard fence would block their access and 4) the Use Permit could be contingent upon the owner g~ving up the two rental uf~its. Chairman Norton suggested that: the Subdivxs~0n Committee meet with the owner of the subject [~roperty and discuss the matter with him. Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 9:27 P.M.~ directed UP-185 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for furti~er study. F. UP-186 - Lawrence E. Fordyce, Saratoga Avenue - Request.for Use Permit to Allow a Convalescent Hospital - Continued from 27 April 1970 The Chairman re-opened the hearing at 9:22 P.M. The secretary stated nothing new had been added to the file. Mr. Stan Elliott~ applicant's architect} was present and stated that 1) the hospital will have approximately one-hundre~-.and-fifty p~tients 2) the property is bordered b~ Fruitvale and Sarato,,.:: ~v.:.'~=~.~cs, the City Hall property, and the church across the street r',2, ,'..i~'~ building itself would be similar to the. design of the City Hall and would be about thirteen to fourteen fee't high and'4) the site plan has been laid out to preserve the natur'al landscaping and to avoid any ingress or egress at the corner of Fruitvale and Saratoga Avenues. No member of the audience wished to comment. Comissioner Smith stated that. 1) a written report was not prepared relative to this matter but the Subdivision Committee has discussed the proposal and would recommend that the matter be continued pending eventual development or non-development of an approved application (UP-151) for a convalescent hospital and 2) the particular piece of property (Fordyce) currently under discussion has been designated as a park site on the General Plan. The Secretary explained that the applicant for UP-151 has submittted a request for extension. 'Chairman Norton stated that the upcoming Genera]. Plan Review and the expiration or denial of request for extension for UP-151 will both have .... ~" a major effect. on the subject .application. Chairman Norton closed the he. aring for the evening at 9:36 P.M., directed . UP-186 continued off the agenda pending action on UP-15i request for extension and the recommendation of the.General Plan Review Committee relative to the property' related to application UP-186. -7- P'lanning_Cormnission Minu'tes - l]. May 1970 - t;ontinueci II. G. V-3Z~4 - Th. omas W. Fuel_ling, Bohlman Road - Request for Variance to Allow Overhead Uti]_itjes - Co~tinued from 27 April 1970 Chairman Norton re-opened the hearing at 9:37 P.ML The Secretary read the Staff' Report: dated 11 May 1970 ~-ecomrnencting that the subject request for Variance be denied. / No one present w~,shed to comment. Coxnmissioner Kraus moved, secon. ded by Commissioner Crisp, to close the hearing relative to V-344 at 9:89 P.M.; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Kraus moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Staff Report dated 11 May 1970 be adopted and the subject request for Variance be~denie.d. on the basis the findings required under Section 17.6 of Zoning Ord%~ce N -3 canno ' be made and for the reasons stated in S t said report; motion carried unanimously. H. V-347 - Edwin Stafford, Jr., W0odside Drive Request for Variance to Allow a Reduction in Si.de Yard Setback Requirements The hearing was opened' at 9:40 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notices of Hearing were ma~led and briefly reviewed the subject application. The Secretary further stated that the applicant did submit a Statement of Reason. The applicant was present and stated he had no further comments to offer. Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 9:49 P.M.~ directed the matter continued to the next regula~ meeting and referred V-347 to the Variance Committee. Commissioner Kraus, on beha'lf of the Variance Committee, arranged for an on-site inspection with the applicant for 9:00 A.M. on Saturday, 16 F~y 1970. I. INFORMAL tIEARING Request to Add Swimming P8ol Supplies and Repair to the List of Permitted or Condition,~] U~'..~s in the "C-C" Zoning District - Continued from 2/ ': 1 1970 Chairman Norton opened the matter for discussion. The Secretary stated. that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that. the subject request be withdrawn for the present. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the request for withdrawal be approved; motion carried unanimously. RECESS AND RECONVENE III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SDR-849 - Thomas L. Dashiell, .Bohlman Road - Building Site Approval - 3 Lots Continued from 27 April 1970 Commissioner Smith stated that this application ~equires ~urther study and reconm~ended that the matter be continued to the next regular meeting. Chairman Norton so directed. B. SDR-850 - Osterlund Enterprises, Loma Rio Drive Building Site Approval - 1 Lot The Secretary stated that the" applicant has reviewed the proposed conditic;ns of approval and expressed satisfaction with same. Planning Commission ~ll!.nuues - ii May 1970 - Coublnut:d III. B. SDR-850 Continued Commissione{' Smith' moved, seconded l~y Commissioner Crisp, that the Building Site Committee Report dated 11 ~y 1970 relative to SDR-850 .be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 1 May ].970) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. IV. DESIGN REVIEW ~one V. CI'f~ COUNCIL REPORT Commissioner Smith gave a summary of items reviewed and action taken at tbe City Council meeting of 6 May 1970 with emphasis on matters of particular interest to the Commission. VI. OLD BUSINESS None VII. NEW BUSINESS A. The Secretary read a conm~unication received from Mr. Nick Miljevich requesting permission to use his property for a golf driving range. The Secretary then suggested that the matter be referred to the Subdivision Committee for study. Chairman Norton stated that l) it may be a better.policy to refer requests of this type first to the Committee and upon.their recommendation schedule an Informal Hearing and 2) while the Planning Commission has the power to add uses it seems that a great nnmber of the~.:'.'. <~quests have been submitted of late. Chairman Norton, after discussion and agreement with the other Commissioners, referred this particular request to the Subdivision Committee and if they felt (after meeting with the applicant) that the idea had any merit an Informal Hearing could be scheduled. VIII. CODIUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN A. UP-151 James R. Davi, Souza Lane Request for Extension The Secretary stated that 1) a request for extension for UP-151 was received from James R..Davi 2) Mr. Davi stated in his letter that the lending instit'htions had denied him mortgage financing since the money picture was still very tight and 3) the applicant, also, submitted a letter from the Lomas and Nettleton Company stating that they do not have an investor interested in this type of development at t~is time. The Secretary stated that this application has been in effect since 1968 and the applicant had a similar application prior to that which subsequently expired. Chairman Norton stated that, he felt, this request for extension should be given thorough consideration and referred the request for extension of UP-151 to. the Subdivision Committee for study. B. UP-149 Jim Day Company, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Extension The Secretary read a letter submitted by James W. Day requesting a,-six month extension for the model home sales office on 13351 Saratoga Avenue. Chairman Norton directed the subject request continued to the next regular meeting and referred same'.[o the Subdivision Committee for study. -9- P].anning Commission Minutes - 11 May 1970 - Continved V I I I. B. ORAL Chairman Norton acknowledgcd,.with pleasure, t~.,.e presence of Councilman Sanders, Mr. Lewis and Mrs. Owen of .the Good Government Group, and Mrs. Ottenberg of the League of Women Voters. He, also, thanked Mrs. Owen for the coffee served during recess. IX. ADJ OURNMEN T ¢ Chairman Norton adjourned the meeting at 10:30 P.~i. Respectfully submitted, Stanley M. ~,]%lker, Secretary Saratoga nning Commi. s'on -10-