Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-27-1971 Planning Commission Minutes (2) CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TIME: Monday, 27 December 1971 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: 'City Council Chambers - 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting **********~******** I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION · The meeting was called to order by Chairman Lively at 7:30 P.M. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Belanger,Z Lively, Marshall, Martin, and Smith. Absent: Commissioners Bacon and Metcalf. B. MINUTES Commissioner Smith·~-'.moved, seconded by Commissioner Martin, that the reading of the minutes of 13 December 1971 meeting be waived and tha~ they be approved as distributed to the Commission with· the following change :. page 6. .change subject title to read "STOP SIGN AT BROCKTON"; motion carried unanimously, II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. C-129 - James F. Wilson,. Pierce Road·- Request for Change of Zoning from "R-i-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) to "R-i-20,000" (Single-Family Residential) - Continued from 13 December 1971 Chairman Lively reopened the hearing relative to C-129 at 7:35 P.M. The Secretary stated nothing new had been added to the file. Chairman Lively explained that the General Plan was amended to designate this property as two (2) lots in order to create a buffer property between the "R-1-12,500" zoning distirct and the "R-I-40,000" zoning district. Commissi'oner Smith read the SubdiVision Committee Report dated 27 December 1971 recommending that the subject request for change of zoning be approved. Th·e:-~app~i~ant was not present and no~.one in the audience wished to comment. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, to close the hearing relative to C-129 at .7i40 P.M.; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith m6ved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall,·_.t·R. ~dqpt the Subdivision Committee RepOrt dated 27 December 1971 and ~ecommend to the City Council for a~proval.!~of C-129 to allow a. change ~ '·\.~ '\~ zoning f~om "R-I-40,000" (Single'Family Residential) to "R-i-20,000" (Single- Family Residential) on the basis the application is in accord with Section 18.6 of City of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance NS-3 and the 1971 Saratoga General Plan and subject to the condition stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. B. C-140 - Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, Saratoga and Cox Avenues - Request for Change of Zoning from '~" (Agricultural) to "P-A" (Professional- Administrative) - Continued from 13 December 1971 Chairman Lively reopened the hearing relative to C-140 at 7:42 P.M. The Secretary stated nothing new had been added to the file. Chairman Lively explained that the church· requested this change of zoning and the matter was taken under study as part of the General Plan Review and the land use was changed to "P-A" (Professional-Administrative) on the General Plan Map and the request now is ~to change the zoning to conform with the General plan.· -1- Planning Commission Mindtes - 27 December~1971 - Continued II. B. C-140 - Continued The Secretary read the Staff RepOrt dated 27 December 1971 recommending that request for change of zoning from "A" (Agricultural) to "P-A" (Professional-Administrative) be. approved. The applicant was not present'and no one in the audience wished to comment. 7.·~Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by·Commissioner Marshall, to close the hearing relative to C-140 at 7:45 P.M.; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, to adopt the Staff Report dated 27 December 1971 and recommend to the City Council that the subject application for change of zoning from "A" (Agricultural) to "P-A" (Professional-Administrative) be approved on the basis the objectives of Section 1.1 of Zoning Ordinance NS-3 can be met and for the reason stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. C. C-150 - Kunkel-Thomas, Sobey Road - Request for Change of Zoning from "R-I-40,000" (Single-Family·Residential) to "R-I-40,000" "P-C" (Single-Family Residential Planned-Community) Chairman Lively opened the hearing relative to C-150 at 7:46 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notice of Hearing was mailed and published. Chairman Lively explained that this is the old Leonard Coates Nursery property. The Secretary read a Statement o'f Reason filed by the applicant. Mr. Kunkel, the applic~nt,~z~was present and stated that 1) the "P-C" development would provide a buffer for the school and unique landscaping in the subdivision 2) the normal setbacks for the regular "R-I-40,000" zoning district will be maintained 3) there will be no actual:increase , in density 4) pathways are so dlesigned so the children could reach school without crossing streets ·5) he met with the Homeowners Associa- tion in the area and explained the "~-C" approach to them and pointed out that this development would be of high ·quality residential construc- tion similar to the applicant's lother development in the City and 6) the property can be developed eithe~ as a straight "R-I-40,000" or "R-i-40,000" "P-C", but it is felt that a "~-iC" development would allow for a more desirable co~mf~nity. ~ Mr. Clyde D. Duffy, 18666 Ravenwood Drive, stated he was present to represent the Homeowners in the isubject area and to submit a petition containing one hundred (100) signatures in opposition to the proposed "P-C" development on the basis that the density will exceed that which is shown on the General Plan. Commissioner Martin explained that the density of this parcel will be no different than it would be if it were developed under the regular "R-I-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) zoning. Mr. Duffy observed that if the owner of a lot in the proposed development were to request permission to keep a horse the request would have to be denied because he did not have the necessary one-acre required to keep a horse; therefore, residents of the "P-C" zone will not be able to do certain things that are available to people living in a straight "R-i-40,000" zoning district. Commissioner Martin emphasized that there will be a great many restrictions placed on this development if it is developed under "~-C" zoning. Mr. Duffy stated that the residents of the area were invited to review the plans for the proposed "P-C" deyelopment and after doing so a petition, against the proposed "P-C" development ~·z·~w~s drafted and signed by the residents of the area. z Planning Commission Minutes - 27 December' 1971 - Continued II. C. C-150 - Continued Dr. James F. Barrett, 20675 Woodward Court, stated that the area is now zoned "R-I-40,000" and the adjacent property owners would like it to stay that way. Chairman Lively explained that even if it is developed under regular "R-I-40,000" zoning there can still be twelve (12) homes on thi~ site. Dr. Barrett stated that 1) the ~bjections related only to the "P-C" development 2) most of the people owning property around the subject parcel actually have more than the required 40,000 square foot lots and 3) if a "P-C" development is allowed then other people in the'neighbor- 'hood will try to subdivide their~ lots. Commissioner Martin stated the City could not allow anyone to divide one acre lots - one reason being that a subdivided lot of that size would not provide any open-space. Commissioner Smith stated that it appeared the residents of the area were ignoring the whole idea of 'the "P-C" concept.~ Chairman Lively stated that 1) :a proposal is currently under study that he feels will satisfy everyone and 2) it i~ a proposal which is d~fferent than the one proposed by the applicantland is very close to straight "R-I-40,000" zoning. Mr. Delaptain McDaniel, 14253 H~lltop Way, stated that 1) 'he felt the subject location was poor for the type of development proposed 2) a twelve (12) acre parcel is too small for "P-C" and it would simply end up as a subdivision with a swim zclub 3) the area would appear as a ~e'n'~'~l~'~opulated area under a "P-C" development and 4) the open-space will give the appearance of a flat little park. Mrs. Douglas Hines, 14137 Sobey ,Road, stated 1) she lived on a hill overlooking this property 2) she objectsto the proposed "P-C" develop- ment because she will be looking directly onto this development and if the homes are clustered together as proposed it will give the appearance of a '~'~ly~populated area and 3) 'this proposal does not go along with the rural atmosphere of the Sobey R6ad.area. Mrs. ~eraldine~Barrett, 20675 WOodward Court, stated there really should not be any controversy since the people have stated they are opposed to the "P-C" concept.~Why not lea~elit at the "R-I-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) zoning? Chairman Lively explained that anyone interested in discussing th!~_matter with the Subdivision Committee Can call 'and arrange for an appointment.. Mrs. Sue Jennings, 14955 Sobey Road, stated that 1) she is in favor of leaving the size of the lots just as they are 2) there will not be that much open-space left after the road improXements are completed and 3) she moved into this area because it.is in an equestrian zone and because of the rural atmosphere. Mr. 'ShilI~'WiIi%~S~ 11915 Brook Ridge Drive, Realtor, stated that 1) he represented the sellers of the ~roperty and the developer Kunkel-Thomas 2) this is a long narrow.piece'of land which is difficult to develop 3) a "P-C" development has many appealing features and would enhance the property 4) tennis courts will Be provided as part of the open-space and 5) he wondered if the people objecting had looked at the renderings submitted for the development of this parcel. Mr. Clark, 14057 Arcadia Palms,~stated he signed the petition objecting to the proposed "P-C" development 2) even if the density is not changed the lot sizes will be decreased and 3) the fact still remains that the residents of the area would be looking on a subdivision with smaller lot sizes and he objects to that arrangement. -3- Planning Commission Minutes - 27 Decembe~ 1971 - Continued II. C. C-150 - Continued Mr. Bill Christiansen, 18510 Sob"ey Road, stated he 1) objects to the use of this property for a "P-C" development 2) he feels the proposed tennis courts are just something to make the development more palatable and 3) he has noi~ objections tO the general development of the property just as long as it conforms to the General.Plan of the City. Commissioner Smith stated that 1'2) '~pecial requirements can be impUsed on a "P-C" development by the Planning Commission 2) the houses in a "P-C" development can be spaced as far' apart as they are in a regular "R-I-40,000" zoning district 3) to the residents looking down on this area the houses would appear to be. closer together but the!' opposition t~'~S not mad~ '\a careful study of. the ordinance to see what requirements must be 'fullilled t'o have a "P-C" approved by the Planning' Commission and 4) if the people objecting did study the ordinance some of ;the objections might be eliminated. Chairman Lively pointed out that. this .particular., proposal does not fulfill the requirements for a "P-C" development. Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee did recommend to the developer that he not propose a "P-C" for this property. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 8:28 P.M., directed C-150 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Sub- division Committee for further study. D. C-151 - Marshall S. Hall, Wardell Road - RequeSt for Change of Zoning from "R-l-15,000" (Single-Family Residential) and "R-I-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) to "A" (A~ricultural) Chairman Lively opened the hearing relative to C-151 at 8:29 P.M. The Secretary stated that a NotiCe of Hearing was mailed and published. He further stated that the applicant wants to turn this property into an Agricultural Preserve under the Williamson Act. Judge Hall, the applicant, was present and stated 1) it is necessary that the property be zoned for "A" (Agricultural) to qualify for an Agricultural Preserve and 2) he is not interested in subdividing the property and does not want to be forced to do so. No one else present wished to comment relative to this matter. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 8:32 P.M., directed C-151 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Sub- division Committee for study.~.I' and a report at the next regular meeting. E. V-370 - Raymond W. Daly, Seaton Avenue - Request for Variance to Allow a Decrease in Rear Yard Setback Requirement to Permit Accessory Structure Chairman Lively opened the public hearing relative to V-370 at 8:33 P.M. The Secretary stated that 1) the Notice of Hearing was mailed and ~he applicant requests that an accessory structure having a 2-foot rear yard setback be allowed 2) this is a complex matter because the structure is already in existence since the applicant was issued a Building Permit due to an error by the Planning DireCtor and 3) the building has never received final building inspection and the City Attorney sugges~d"~th~.~'~'(3) alternatives to correct this situation: , 1) Relocate the building to conform with with the ordinance. 2) Eliminate the building. 3) Applicant apply for Variance (which he has done). Planning C6mmission Minutes ~ 27 December 1971 - Continued II. E. V~370 - Continued The Secretary further stated 1) the grade of this property~is, also, at issue here 2) the applicant was asked to stop construction until this matter could be resolved, but he chose to finish the building beforehand and 3) there is a petition signed byetwenty-eight (28) persons who are residents of the immediate area stating their opposition to the proposed Variance. In addition there are two '(2) communications filed in opposition to the subject request by: 1) Eugene and Eleahor Pallange of 20672 Woodward Court, Saratoga. 2) Mr. M. W. RasmuSsen of 20650 Woodward Court,.Saratoga. Mr. Daly, the applicant, was present ~nd stated that 1) if he had known he was going to cause so much uproar over this building he would not have built it 2) he had purchased a metal. building that was quite ugly in compari- son to the existing one and after starting to assemble it he decided it was an unsightly structure and he returned it to the store 3) perhaps, he should have continued with his plan for the metal building and avoided all the 'compli- cations he is involved in now 4) he went through the proper channels at City Hall and obtained the appropriate permits 5) he was never at any time aware thatehe was in violation during construction of this building and 6) he used the finest building materials available and he has no intention of moving the building. Mr. M. W. Rasmussen, 20650 Woodward Court, was present and t),n~ts~ated that his property adjoins this subject property and 2) he submitted and read a letter written by him listing his reasons for opposing the requested Variance and giving,a chronological list of events' pertinent to the ultimate ~pp%~a~o~o~or Variance in connection with this building which he considers to be illegal under the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Pallange of 20672 Woodward Court Stated he did not believe the subject building to be in accord with the City of SaratOga Zoning Ordinance - he does feel the building is an eye sore and will devaluate his property and it should be removed. Chairman Lively stated that the Variance Committee will make an on-site inspection of this property to determine the Planning Commission's position in the matter. Commissioner Martin, on behalf of the' Variance Committee, arranged for a meeting of the Variance Committee on Friday, 31 December 1971 at 9:00 A.M. for the purpose of reviewing this application. Mrs. PallaBge~.f 20672 Woodward Court ~tated that she hoped the Variance Committee would view this illegal structure from her property in order to better understand how offensive the s~ructure is from their point of view. Mr. John F. Bogas, 20694 Woodward Court, stated that the subject structure should most definitely be viewed fromZ adjacent properties in order to under- stand the objections of the neighbors~. Chairman Lively closed the hearing fo~ the evening at 8:54 P.M., directed the matter continued to the.next regular meeting,.,and referred same to the Variance Committee for study. Commissioner Martin, on behalf of the:Variance Committee, arranged with the applicant for an on-site inspection of the property on Saturday, 8 January 1972 at 9:00 A.M.o He, also, arranged with. Mr. Rasmussen and Mr. and Mrs. Pallange for an appointment to view the subject structure from their properties on Saturday, 8 January 1972 at 9:30 A.M. Planning Commission Minutes - 27 December 1971 - Continued III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SD-904 - George W. Day, Fruitvale Avenue and Douglass Lane - Subdivision Approval - 15 Lots - Continued from 13 December 1971 Commissioner Smith stated that as a result of the Joint Study Session with the City Council and the Planning Commission a new plan is required for this development; therefore, SD-904 should be continued to the next regular meeting. Chairman Lively so directed. B. SDR-931 - Jordan M. Pennoyer, Via Regina - Building Site Approval - 2 Lots - Continued from 13 December 1971 Commissioner Smith recommended that this matter be continued to allow time for further study of problems pertinent to this building site. Chairman Lively directed SDR-931 continued to the next regular meeting. C. SDR-932 - George Akers, E1 Camino Senda - Building Site Approval - 2 Lots - Continued from 13 December 1971 Commissioner Smith recommended that SDR-932 be continued to the next regular meeting in order to allow time to resolve some Health Department ~eqhiroments relative to this application. Chairman Lively so directed. D. SDR-934 - James F. Wilson, Pierce Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 13 December 1971 Commissioner Smith read the Building Site Committee Report dated 27 December 1971 recommending that the tentative map in connection with SDR-934 be approved subject to General Condition - I and Specific Conditions - II as set forth in the said report. Mrs. Wilson, present to represent the applicant, stated that 1) she objects to Specific Condition - II-I..zrequiring that the existing stable building be .demolished or relocated 2) this is a finely built barn and can be remodeled into a beautiful residence 3) she Would like the opportunity to present some plans to the Planning Commission showing the proposed renovation of this barn and 4) after the plans have been presented she feels this condition could be reconsidered by the Commission. Commissioner Marshall stated that this is a hardship lot and difficult to develop, but the Planning Commission agreed to consider it a legal lot, but now the applicant further requests the Planning Commission to allow a structure to be converted into a residence that does not conform with the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Smith recommended that the Building Site Committee Report be adopted as written.and the applicant be allowed to request reconsideration of the condition she finds objectionable. Chairman Lively explained that 1) a~portion of this barn will have to be removed or relocated because it sits within the required setback for this lot. and 2) Mrs. Wilson can meet with the Subdivision Committee to discuss reconsider- ation of the requirement relative to removal or relocation of the barn. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Building Site Committee Report dated 27 December 1971 relative to SDR-934 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit '~", filed 3 December 1971) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. E. SDR-935 - John L. Richardsony Quito Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Mrs. Pickering Smith was present and requested that SDR-935 be continued to the next regular meeting since the applicant could not be present at this time. Chairman Lively so directed. -6- Planning Commission Minutes - 27 December 1971 - Continued III. F. SDR-936 - JOhn Markulin~ Leonard Road - Building Site Approval - 2 Lots .The applicant has reviewed the propoTsed conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same. Commissioner Smith explained that th'e applicant does not have right-of-way over the property he is required to zimprove under the Building Site Commitee Report. The Secretary explained that the applicant will be able to put in the 30-foot street without affecting the building, but he cannot provide the 40-foot right-of-way. Commissioner Marshall stated that vi~ the Building Site Committee Report the applicant is being told that if he can meet all the conditions stated then he can_'de~elop the property. Chairman Lively recommended that the matter be given further study and a set of conditions be prepared that eyeryone can agree on or a recommendation for denial of the request be made. The Secretary explained that the applicant has indicated that he is attempting to obtain right-of-way over the Belcher property; thereby, providing him with frontage on Leonard Road. Chairman Lively referred SDR-936 to the Subdivision Committee and directed the matter continued to the next regular meeting. G. SD-937 - Saratoga Foothills Development, Corp., Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Wardell Road - Subdivision Approval - 21 Lots Commissioner Smith recommended that ~his matter be continued to the next regular meeting to allow time for further study. Chairman Lively so directed. H. SD-938 - Saratoga Foothills Development, Corp.~ Saratoga Avenue - 18 Lots Commissioner Smith stated that the Secretary was instructed to inform this applicant that the Subdivision Committee is hesitant to present this proposal to the Commission. The Secretary stated that the Park and Recreation Commission has submitted a memo recommending that this application for subdivision be denied~since the proposal is inconsistent with the General Plan in that the Central Park has been designated for this area. Commissioner Marshall stated that the Subdivision Committee would like to go on record and state~q. that they consider this plan to be unimaginative. The Secretary stated that the applicant intends to ,~rther discuss this with the Subdivision Committee and the applicant is aware 'that'the plan is unacceptable in the opinion of the Subdivision Committee. Commissioner Smith stated that as a result of this appl_ication the Council will have to decide whether~ not the City will defin{tely use this ar~a for a Central Park "hd if the decisi0n'is'Yo'use it for a park then the City will a, have to make funds available for puchase of said property. Chairman Lively directed SD-938 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for a report at the'~'f"PI~i~g Commission meeting. Planning Commission Minutes -.27 December 1971 - Continued V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT The Secretary stated that Commissioner Metcalf wrote up a summary of the items discussed and the action taken at the City Council meeting of 15 December 1971. A copy of this summary has been placed in each Commissioners folder for their review. z PLANNING POLICY COMMITTEE Chairman Lively stated that PPC did meet on 16 Decemberi1971 and 1) adopted the Joint City-County Santa Cruz Mountain Study including the bonus and site density 2) approved A1-20 acre zoning for the Redwood Gulch area 3) made recommendations to urge the Board of Supervisors to allow interim building regulations in the Monte Bello Rdige Mountain Study Area and 4) discussed Solid Waste Disposal at great length. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. STOP SIGN - Intersection of Brockton and Miller The Secretary stated that this matter is under study by the Public Works Department and will be resolved by the Staff. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. SDR-930 - Fernando J'. Gonzalez, ArroyO de Arguello - Request for Reconsideration of Conditions The Secretary read a communication received from the applicant requesting a reconsideration of conditions as stated in the Building Site Committee Report of 22 November 1971 Chairman Lively directed this request. continued to the next regular meeting and referred the matter to the Subdivision Committee. VIII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN None B. ORAL Saratoga Market Commissioner Belanger stated that a plan was submitted to the Design Review 'Cgr~mi~tee which showed ]a change in!the front facade of the Saratoga Market and the Co~fmLittee asked the applicant to resubmit a more simple~ plan. The Market has now been repainted a bright yellow and some grill work has been added. The Secretary explained that the applicant still intends to submit plans for this remodeling and until the~'~h'~'~i~y'~annot stipulate the colors he is to use on the building. : _j~arthquake Protection \ Mr. Bogart, WardeI1 Road, stated he would like tO emphasize the need for increased earthquake protection i.e.'who has jurisdiction to say what water to use or to turn off the gas! if and when At earthquake should occur. With the increase in pgpulation these matter should be clearly defined. Good Wishes for New Year ~ Chairman Lively thanked all the Planning Commissioners and Staff for their assistance and help in the past year.and wished them a happy and prosperous New Year. He, also, thanked the Good Government Group for their continued support and for the coffee they served at each meeting throughout~the year. -8- Planning Commission Minutes - 27 December 197;1 - Continued IX. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Lively adjourned the meeting at 10:16 P.M. Respectfully submitted, · , Secretary · a 1 Commission j