The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-12-1971 Planning Commission Minutes (2) CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COI~ISSION MINUTES TIME: Monday, 12 July 1971, 7:30 P.M. . PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 FruitVale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070 TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION : The meeting was called to'order by Chairman Lively at 7:30 PoM. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Kraus, LiVely, Marshall, Martin, Metcalf, and Smith. Absent: Commissioner Fagan. B. MINUTES Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the readir~ of the minutes of the 28 June 1971 meeting be waived and they be approved as distributed with the following change: page 5.. .paragraph 8.. .line 3.. .correct the spelling of the word "study"; motion carried unanimously. 1I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. C-139 - Malachy J. Moran, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Change of Zoning from '~-1-20,000" (Single-Family Residential) to '~-l-15,000".(Single-Fami~y Residential) - Continued from 28 June 1971 Chairman=Lively reopened the hearing at 7:39 P.M. The Secretary read a letter filed~by Mr. Zerboni on behalf of several property owners on Lannoy Court in opposition to the proposed change of zoning. (The said letter contained signatures of seven (7) residents of Lannoy-Court and was published~ in the Saratoga News.) Marcia Lunde, 13805 Saratoga Avenue, read a letter (containing fifteen (15) signatures of residents~ of Saratoga Avenue and Howen Drive) pro- testing the rezoning in connection with C-139. Judith Hertsens, 13805 Saratoga Avenue, stated that 1) she has lived in Saratoga all her life 2) her visitors and acquaintances are always telling her what a unique place the City of Saratoga is 3) if the "subject change of zoning is passed Saratoga will no longer be unique and 4) it is a beautiful City and it is everyone's responsibility to keep it that way. Mr. Moran, applicant, was present' and stated that discussion relative to C-139 should be continued until the next regular meeting to allow discussion of Item "A" under Old Business on the agenda prior to any decision.relative'to C-139. He further stated that C-139 could be opened for discussion at the same time as Item "A" under Old Business. Commissioner Smith recommended that C-139 be continued to the'~.next regular meeting in order to allow. some action relative to the General Plan revision as requested by the~applicant. Chairman Lively closed the heari~ for the evening at 7:47 P.M., directed C-139 continued to then. next regular meeting and referred same to the Sub- division Committee. Plannin~ Commission Minutes - 12 July 1971 - Continued II. B. C-145 - B. T. Galeb, Ted Avenue ~ Request for Change of Zoning from '~-1-10,000" (Single-Famkly Residential) to '~-M-5,000!~ ~ulti-Family Residential) - Continued from 28 June 1971 Commissioner ~Smith recommended that C-145 be continued since the applicant \ ap~ developer are working on revised plans. Chairman Lively did not open the hearing relative to C-145, directed the subject request for change of zoning continued to the 9 August 1971 meeting and referred the matter to the Subdivision Committee. C. C-147 - Clifford C. Beck~ Saratoga Avenue and Cox Avenue - Request for Change of Zoning from '~1-10,000" (Single-Family Residential) . to '~-A" (Professional-Administrative).- Continued from 24 Nay 1971 Chairman Lively reopened the heaping relative to C-147 at 7:50 P.M. The Secretary stated that the applicant has requested that C-147 be continued because he has made a ~equest to the City Council under the General Plan Review to change the land use of the subject property. Commissioner Natcalf stated.that, he felt, the Planning Commission should deny the request for change of zoning in connection with C-147 since, in effect, the applicant proposes tO by-pass the General Plan Committee and Planning Commission by going directly to the City Council with the reque~ for change in land use. The applicant is asking that the Planning Commission continue C-147 until his appeal ~or a General Plan revision is considered by the City CounCil. The Secretary explained that 1) the. City Council has not acted on the General Plan for 1971; therefore~, the request of the applicant to the City Council is appropriate 2) the City Council referred the said request to the Planning Committee of the Council 3) he feels sure that the Planning Committee will meet with the General'Plan Committee of the Planning Commission to discuss this matter and 4) he is of the opinion the City Council feels rather negative about the applicant's current request relative to the land-use change. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 7:55 P.M., directed ~-147 continued to the meeting o~ 9 August 1971, referred same to the Sub- division Committee and requested the General Plan Committee to meet with the Planning Committee of the CoUncil to discuss the applicant's request to the Council for change in lan~ use under the General Plan Review. D. C-148 - George W. Day, Fruitvale' Avenue and Douglas Avenue - Request for Change.of Zoning from '~" (Agricultural) to '~-1-40,000" (Single,Family Residential) - Continued from 28 June 1971 The hearing relative to C-148 was reopened at 7:56 P.M. Fir. Lou Leto, General Manager for George Day and company, stated that at request of the Subdivision Committee and Planning Department Staff the applicant has submitted a map showing a '~-1-40,000" "P-C" (Planned- Community) Development for the seventeen.(17) acres-along.Fruitvale _Avenue owned by the applicant an~, also, including the adjacent eighty (80) acres of land. Fir. Victor A. Chargin, attorney representing the Ljepava family, stated that 1) he voiced objections to the proposed "R-1-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) Zoning at the meeting of 28 June 1971 2) he.has not seen the proposed plan for a "P-C" development.submitted by the applicant; therefore, he is not able to.connnent on same and 3) his client is opposed to the '~-1-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) zoning since it might set a precedent contrary to his cliepts plans for his property. -2- Planfxing Commission Minutes - 12 July 1971 - Continued II. D. 8-148 - Continued Dolly Gay, 234 Marshall Street, Redwood City, a realtor representing the Ljepava and Novakavich famifies, stated that 1) at the 28 June 1971 meeting she voiced her clients' objections to the proposed '~-1-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) zoning request and th~se objections still stand as stated. and 2) her clients feel that neither a straight "R-I-40,000" ~or a '~-C" development would be .econcomically feasible for the subject area.. Chairman Lively explained that the official request for change of zoning to '~-1-40,000" (Single-Familly Residential) remains the same; however, the applicant has submitted, merely for consideration, a plan for '~-1-40,000" '~-C" (Planned-Community). Commissioner Smith read the Subdivision Committee Report dated 12 July 1971 relative to C-148 recommendiing that the present George Day rezoning application (C-148) be continued until an overall development-plan is adopted by the Planning CommissiOn or the application is amended to conform with the "P-C" (Planned-COmmunity) concept. Commissioner Marshall stated 1) Mr. Beck, Park Consultant for the City, has recommended this area be .used as a Central Park site 2) it is his (Commissioner Marshall) opinion .that the entire area should be developed as one parcel and 3) he Would like to get the City Council's attitude relative to a park proposal as opposed to a '~-C" development for this property before making a decision. Chairman Lively advised that the 1971 General Plan Report recommends that the subject property be dropped as a Central Park site. Commissiener Marshall stated 1). h~ would like to see the Staff arrange for some compromise between the Beck recommendation and the Subdivision Committee Report of 12 July 1971. and 2) he does not feel that a firm recommendation for '~-1-40,000" "'P-C" should be made for the subject property at this time. . :.. Commissioner Martin stated that i) he agrees the Staff should participate in a study with the developer ini reaching a decision relative to this property ~ndtT? 2) the City has paid Mr. Beck a considerable amount for his recommend- ation and it.e.should be given carieful consideration in making a decision for the development of the subject property and the adjoining area. Commissioner Metcalf stated that, 1) he too would like to see the 7D~y, Ljepava, land N6~k~vich properties treated as a whole rather than as separate parcels and 2) he feels that the entire matter should be given further study by the Planning Commission, and Planni~g'D~partment Staff together with the applicant. Chairman Lively stated t) he is opposed to the '~-C" concept for develop- ment of the subject property since the developer has not arrived at a satisfactory solution for policing and maintaining the common-green area and because he '(Chairman Lively):. dislikes the visual aspect of a "P-C" development 2)'while the "P-C" concept is well intended it may play havoc with the character originally planned for Saratoga 3) he would like to see an imaginative plan showing the property as a straight '~-1-40,000" .(Single'Family Resi.dential) development and 4) he would like to see a plan showing all the homes located toward the center of the property with a common green area all around the edge of the property. Commissioner Kraus stated that there were a number of different lay-outs. submitted to the Subdivision Committee by the developer and the "P-C" lay-out presented by the applicaht this evening is the best of all the plans. -3- Planning Co_r~_!ssion Minutes - 12 July 1971 - Continued II. D. C-14~ - Continued : Comiss~oner Smith stated that with a "P-C" development you gain open-space that you would not gain with a ~-1-40,000" (Single- Family Residential) zoned development. Commissioner Kraus stated that he preferred not to have homes all along Fruitvale Avenue and this could be prevented if the property were developed~.under the "P-C" concept. Commissioner Marshall stated that 1) he does not like the idea of houses ~long Fruitvale Avenue 2): Mr. Beck ha~ a plan for the property which is quiteel slanted toward parks and the'applicant.has another plan and now a study should be conducted to reach a compromise. Commissioner Martin suggested that, perhaps, instead of 20,000 square-foot lots as proposed under the present '~-C" concept larger lots per dwelling could be used with a smaller common green oreopen- space area. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 8:25 P.M., directed C-148 continued to the meeting o'~'9'AUgust 1971, and referred the matter to the Subdivision Committee and requested the Staff to conduct a ~tj~y_in conjunction with the developmentm'of the entire a~a_considering/'~l-40,000" zoning in contrast to the '~-1-40,000" '~-C" concept. III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SD-904 - George W. Day, Fruitvale Avenue and Douglas Avenue - Subdivision ~pproval - 15 Lots - Continued from 28 June 19Z1' Commissioner Smith recommended that this application be continued to the meeting of 9 August 1971 in order to allow time for some decision to be made relative to C-148. Chairman Lively so directed. B. .SDR-907 - Donald Comer, Pierce R6ad - Building Site Approval - 4 Lots - Continued from 28 June· 1971 . Commissioner Smith stated that the applicant has requested that SDR-907 be continued to the next regulari meeting. Chairman Lively so directed. C. SDR-910 - Terry J. Bowmans Pierce Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 28 JuneZ 1971 The applicant was present and stated he had reviewed the proposed conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Krauss that the Building Site Committee Report dated 12 July 1971 relative to SDR-910 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit.~", filed 9 June 1971) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said r~port; motion carried unanimously. D. SDR-912 - Russell Reed~ Saratoga~Sunnyvale Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from' 28 June 1971 The applicant was present and stated he did review the proposed conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same. Commissioner Smith moved~ seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the Building Site Committee Report dated 12 Jply 1971 relative to SDR-912 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit."~", filed 17 June 1971) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. -4~ plannin~ Commission Minutes - 12 July 1971 - Continued III. E. SDR-913 - Clayton F. Thomas, Allendale Avenue - Buildin~ Site Approval - 1 Lot The Secretary explained that the applicant did review the proposed conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same. Chairman Lively recommended that the Buildin~ Site Con~nittee Report dated 12 July be amended by adding the following condition: '~. Approval o£ the tentative map does not constitute approval of setbacks shown for pool or other accessory structures." Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Connnissioner Eraus, that the Building Site Committee Report dated 12 July 1971 relative to SDR-913 be adopted, as amended, and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 22 June 1971) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimoussly. F. SDR=914 - Gill Schaper, .Hilltop'Way - Buildinn Site Approval - 1 Lot The Secretary stated that 1) the applicant ~as present 2) this application is for a proposed ultimate remadelin~ of over 50% of an existing residence 3) the subject application was-originally intended for this agenda of 12 July 1971 but due to a~.PubliC Works Department requirement was left__ off of the agenda and 4) the matter should be continued to the next ~egular meeting. ., ~Ch~inn~n Lively continued SDR-9i~ to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee. IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-156 - United Presbyterian Church, Herriman Avenue and Highway 85 - Final Design Review - Revised Parking Lot Layout - Continued from 28 June 1971 Commissioner Metcalf explained that ~) the seating capacity of the church is 3~0; therefore, 136 parking.spaces are required ~' 2) an extra rows at n r existing parking lot and a third space can be obtained by using one (1) parallel-parking space at the parking~ lot entrance. Commissioner Metcalf theu introduced the Staff Report dated 12 July 1971 recommending that the newly submitted and revised parking-lot layout as shown on Exhibit "A" filed in A-156 be granted Final Design Approval. Commissioner Eraus inquired if the Design Review Con~nittee ~ould consider adding a condition to the subject Staff Report relative to prohibitin~ parking on the street in front of the church. Chai~n~n Lively recommended tha~ the pa~king problem referred to by ~ Commissioner Kraus be postponed. to the New Business section of the agenda o Connnissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner M~rtin, that the Staff Report dated 12 July 1971:be adopted and that Final Design Approval be granted for the revised parking lot layout as sho~n on Exhibit '~" and subject to the conditions se~ forth in said report; motion carried ~.un~nimously. Plannin~ Commission Minutes - 12 July 197i - Continued IV. B. A-377 - Reedts Carpets, Saratoga~Sunnyvale Road - Preliminary Design Review - Commercial Buildir~ The Staff Report dated 12 Jhly 1971 relative to A-377 recommends that Pre- · . limina.ry . Design Approval be granted for the commercial building in connection with A-377. : Commissioner Metcalf recommendedithat the subject report be amended by adding the following conditions to the report: "(e) Any outside waste-areas to be~properl9 screened from any public view And adjacent property-owners." "(f) Roofing material to be approved by Fire Marshal." Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Staff Report dated 12 July 1971 be adopted, as amended, and'that P~eliminary Design Approval be granted for the commercial building as shown on Exhibit "A" in file A-377 and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. C. A-378 - Monk's~Retreat, Saratoga~Sunnyvale Road - Final Design Review - Identification Signs Commissioner Metcalf read the Staff Report dated 12 July 1971 recommending that the identification sign for A-378 (Monk's Retreat) be granted Final Design Approval. Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Staff Report dated 12 July 1971 be adopted and that Final Design Approval be granted for the identification signs as shown on Exhibit "A" in file A-378 and subject to the co~ditiqn stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. D. A~379 - Landscape Design and AssOciates, Inc., Quito Road - Final Design Review - Identification Sign CommissionerMetcalf stated that the applicant propose~ an identification sign at the Quito Food Center to advertise three (3) businesses. Commissioner Kraus noted that the proposed sign will be thirteen (13) feet in height. The Assistant Planner stated that in a commercial zone the maximum sign-height '/of twenty (20) feet is allowed and the proposed sign will replace all existing signs in the center. He then read a letter received from the applicant stating that he (the applicant) agreed not to place any building signs on his property or buildings other than those for which a permit has been obtained. Co~nissioner Metcalf stated that~the Design Review Committee could require that the o~%rall'~eight of the sign be reduced to te~ ~) feet. Chairman Lively stated that the.flood lights located at the subject shopping center are quite brightZand should be eliminated. The Secretary stated that the use of the property for a nursery is a permitted use in this area and it was thought, originally, that a buildiing-site approval could be required; however, the applicant did submit a certified appraisal stating that all improvements did not amount to one-third of the overall worth of the entire property. The Secretary further stated that the City is still working with the owner of the property (Mr. Costa) to obtain right-'~f-way dedication from him. Chairman Lively directed that A-379 be continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Design Review Committee for further study. -6- Plannin~ Connnission Minutes - 12 July 1971 - Continued RECESS AND RECONVENE V. CITY COUNCIL'REPORT Con~nissioner Kraus gave a summary of items reviewed and action taken at the City Council meeting of 7 July 1971, with emphasis on items of particular interest to the Commission. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Malachy J. Moran, Saratoga Avenue!- Request for General Plan Adjustment - Continued from 28 June 1971 Commissioner Metcalf stated that 1) the Planning Department was asked bY the City Council to conduct a study of the transition areas in the City and 2) the study of all the areas has not been completed but the Moran study.has been completed; therefores the General Plan Committee had the benefit of this study in writing ~he report relative to the subject request. Commissioner Metcalf then read the General Plan Report dated 12 July 1971 reiterating the Con~nitteems previous recommendation that no chan~e be made to the General Plan land-use designation in this area and that the boundary between quarter-acre and half-acre zoning remain as presently located in this area~ Mr. }bran, the applicant, stated that 1) in order to make a proper decision relative to this request it is necessary to walk the property 2) it would not be ec'db~i[~ll~'f6asible to develop the subject property with the'three (3) lots presently allolgdsince it would bring the cost of each improved lot up to about $50,000. and with a house on the lot it would be approximately $75s000. 3). the lots will be difficult to sell at this price because of the variety of zoning adjacent toithis property 4) the report states that the change would benefit Only himself, but an adjacent property owner would also, gain an additional lot and ~omathing could be done with the cottages now located on adjacent property 5) if he lost his job at Lockheed it would most certainly affect more people'than just himself and this request would alsos benefit other people 6) the report states that if the request were granted it would set an undesirable precedent 9)' ~he first amendment to the Constitution of the United States set a precedent and it has not led to any destruction and 8) he has studied the General Plan Committee Report and does not feel it is fair. Chairman Lively advised Mr. Moran]to make further comments relative to the subject property at the meeting of 26 July 1971 since it might be more appropriate at the time when the public hearing relative to C-139 is reopened and since the General Plan covers land use only and does not involve change of zoning applications. Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Marsha11~ that the General Plan Committee Report dated 12 July 1971 be adopted and the request for General Plan adjustment be recommended to the City Council for denial for the reasons stated in said reportl motion carried nani- mously. B. Aesthetic Gradin~ Standards - Continued from 28 June 1971 The Secretary explained that thi~ matter should be continued to the next regular meeting since the Subdivision Con~nit~ee and Staff are in ~he~jprocess of preparing a report relative to Aesthetic Grading Standards. ~Chairn~n Lively so directed. -7- PlanninM Coxmaission Minutes - 12 July 1971 - Continued VI. C. Review of West Valley Junior College Buildin~ re Humanities and Fine Arts Cormnissioner Metcalf stated that21) the bids for the Fine Arts and Humanities Buildings for West Valley Junior College were opened but not awarded and it.~new appears they will not be awarded at all 2) the Plannin~ Commission reluctantly approved a variance for the height of these buildings because of the urgency expressed by the college officials of going out to bid and of letting a construction contract~ 3) it seems the situation has now changed since the West Valley Junior College does not now plan to conclude a contract for construction of these buildings because the bid Spread was more than $400,000. above the authorized level for state support. Commissioner Metcalf intro- duced a memo recommending to thefCity Council that a revision of plans for the auditorium buildin~ to cgmply with the City of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance be negotiated with the,college ~fficials. Commissioner Martin recommended ~hat paragr~aph 4.. lof the subject memo be deleted from the report.. Coummissioner Lively explained that there is no way to rescind a variance unless the recipient agrees to same. The Secretary explained that if the recipient of the variance does not build within a year the variance lapses. Mr. Chester Roots architect for the West Valley Junior College, stated that 1) bids were opened on 29 June 1971 and 2). the college officials have nOt yet acted on the bids; So, this discussion is a bit premature. Commissioner Smith advised that ~ome decision ~n connection with the bids must be reached in sixty (60) days. Commissioner Marshall stated that one of the reasons for the bids being high was the number of options that were requested. Fir. Root, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Lively, stated that any redesign of the buildings would be difficult. Chairman Lively directed the matter continued to the first meeting in September (since the final decision on the bids will be sometime at the end of August) and stated that the City of Saratoga Planning Commission will watch with interest the action of the West Valley Junior College' Board relative to this matter and if the bids are not accepted the Commission will ask the City Council to review and revise the height of the subject building. VII. NEW BUSINESS ' Galeb PropertX ' The Secretary stated that the Code Enforcement Officer did submit a memo relative to an inspection he made of. the Galeb property. Chairman Lively referred the matter to the Subdivision Committee for consider- ation and directed that the subject memo be filed for consideration in connec- -tion ~ith C-145. VIII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN None' Plannin~ Commission Minutes - 12 July 197'1 - Continued VIII, B, ORAL United Presbyterian Church - P'arkin~ Chairman. Lively stated that he h_ad..postponed_._to__this_p.a. rt of the _a._genda --a-.ma.t.ter brought up by Commissioner Kraus under A-156 relative to church members parking their cars in front of the church instead of the parking lot, Commissioner Kraus recommended: that the Secretary be asked to write a letter to the City Council requesting that they post a '~qo Parking" at the street curb in front of. the church to discourage parking in this area, Chairman Lively requested the Secretary to forward said letter to the City Council. Guests Chairman Lively noted, with regret, the absence of a Councilman at this meeting and then acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Mrs. Belang..e.,r of the Good Government Group. He, also,. thanked Mrs. Belanger for the coffee she served at recess. IX. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Lively adjourned the meeting at 10:00 P.M. Resp&ctfuliy. submitted, Stanley M./Walker, Saratoga Planning Commission -9- CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COliI~SSION ~C'. ~''' :: '~' ' ACENDA TINE: lionday, 12 July 1971 - 7:30 PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Frui~vale Avenue, Saratoga, California ..~..*'070 TYPE: Regular lleeting I, ROUTINE ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL B, MINUTES II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A, .C-139 - Malachy J, Moran, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Change of Zoning from' 'R"-l-20,O00" (Single-Family Residential) to 'R-l-15,000" (Single-Family Residential) - Continued from 28 June 1971 B. C-145 - B o .T, Caleb, Ted Avenue - Request for Change of Zoning from / " 'R-I-IO,O00' (Single~Family Residential) to "R-~i-5,000" "~ _(liulti-Family Residential} - Contin..ued from 28. June 1971 . . . C, - C-147 - Clifford Co Beck, Saratoga Avenue and Cox Avenue - Request for Change of Zoning from 'R-I-IO,O00' (Single-Family Residential) to "P-A" (Professional.Administrative.) . Continued from .24_ Nay 1971 D, .C.-148 - George W. Day, Fruitvale Avenue and Douglas Avenue - Request ,' for Change of Zoning from 'A' (Agricultural) to 'R-i-40,000" ~, (S. tngle-Fa. mil7. R. esiden.~ia. 1) - Continued f.r. om .28 June 1~..1 . .. ~.~ III. BUILDINGS ..SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS' A, S.D-904 - Ceorge ~.-.~, Day, FrUitVale Avenue and Douglas Avenue - Subdivi~ ~' ~sion Approval - 15 Lots - Continued from 28 June 1971 j' .j ........... / tff' / - B. _SDR-907 - Donald Comer, PierCe Road - Building Site Approval - 4 Lots -~ Continued from .28 J..u~...e 1971 ..- ,/.. ~., ~" .9' C° SDR-910 - Terry J, Bowman, Pierae Road ~ Building Site Approval - 1 Lot ;[ ._.____. "L~- ' ..-. Continued. from. 28 June 197.1 ....... / D, SDR-912 - Russell Reed, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Buildin~ Site Approval{ ~l ' " - 1 Lot - Continued from 28 June 1971 :. 1 ~ ' .. ~ E, SDR-913 - Clayton F, Thomas, Allendale Avenue - Building Site Approval / L,, - .. / IV, DESIGN REVI~4 ~ / A, A.-156 - United Presbyterian Church, Herriman Avenue and Highway 85 - '.~ Final Design Review * Revised Parking Lot layout - Continued fran 28 June 197.1 ... . B. A-377 - Reedss'Carpets, Sarat'oga-Sunnyvale Road - Preliminary Design Review - Connaercial Building C, A-378 - Monk's Retreat, Saretoga-Sunnyvale Road - Final Design Review - .I...den~ifi.ea. tton SiRn D, A.t.3.79 - landscape Design and Associates, Inc,, Quito Road - Final Design Review - Identification Sign V, CITY COUNCIL REPORT VI.. OLD BUSINE. SS A, Malachy J, Moran, Saratoga Avenue .. Reques= for General Plan Adjustment - Continued from 28 Jtme 1971 B, Aesthetic GradinR S..~andards - Continued from 28 June 1971 C, Review of West Valley Junior Col'lege Building re Humanities and Fine Arts '- -..]..~ Planning Commission A~enda - 1z ..';u17 1971 - Continued VII. NEW BUSINESS ; IX. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN B. ORAL X. ADJOURNMENT -2-