Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-28-1977 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COI~IISSION MINUTES DATE: Tuesday, June 28, 1977 4:30 p.m. PLACE: Crisp Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Adjourned Meeting from Comission Meeting of June 22, 1977 I. ROLL CALL - All members present. I I. AGENDA ITB,! A. A-883 B~ayne Richards, Palomino Way, Final Design Review Approval, Single Family residence - 1 Lot The applicant discussed his proposed building plans and pointed out the grading anticipated for the proposed residence. Approximately 1300 cubic yards of fill and 1700 cubic yards of cut are suggested for the construction of the home, drive- way and surrounding patio and rear yard improvements. Concern for the extensive earth moving on the slope lot were unanimously voiced by the Conmissioners. The applicant was requested to investigate alternatives for siting and construc- tion of the home in order to reduce the ~uts and fill proposed. Suggested b-ere: step level construction to avoid entire flat pad improvement, moving the home further down the site to mitigate fill and to reduce the backyard area in order to concurrently reduce the grading for the pool and overall recreation area. Mr. Richards stated that the rear yard area could be reduced to mitigate some of the grading. Mrs. Richards objected to a step down home.' Mr. Lustig suggested that the applicants select a flat site if there were objec- tions to a step construction. Chairman Belanger stated that it was the intent in all slope building sites to fit the home to the land and not alter the natural topography to fit a desired structure which may not be compatible with contour grading techniques ~ich are preferred by the City. Conmissioner Marshall suggested the applicants review their alternatives as dis- cussed today and come back with a more compatible design. Chairman Belanger, without objection, continued this design review matter to the next regular meeting of the Planning Conmission on July 13, 1977. I I I. ADJO~ Conmissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Conmissioner Zambetti, that the adjourned regular meeting of June 28, 1977, be adjourned. The motion was carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned at S:0S p.m. Marty Van Duyn, Secretary /ft CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES- DATE: IWednesday, June 22, 1977 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Cit~ Council Chambers ~ 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ROUTIN~ ORGANIZATION A. ROLL C~LL ...... 'Pr~elYi .... Commissioners Belanger, Callon, Laden, Lustig, ~rshall, Will iams and Zambetti Absent: None B. MINr0TES Commissioner Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner Callon, that the reading of the Planning Commission meeting minutes of May 31, 1977 be waived, and that they be approved as distributed to the Commission. The motion was carried; Commissioners }~rshall and Williams abstained. Commissioner Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner Callon, that the reading of the Planning Commission meeting minutes of June 8, 1977 be waived, and that they be approved as distributed to the Commission. The motion was carried unanimously. II. CONS[NT CAL[\D~AR A. CompositiOn of Consent Calendar Commissioner Laden moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the Planning Commis- sion approve the composition of the June 22, 1977 Consent Calendar. The motion was carried unanimously. B. Items of Consent Calendar Commissioner Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner Callon, that the Planning Commis- sion approve the following applications: 1. Final Building Site Approvals a. SDR-1250 - Security Pacific National Bank, Big Basin Way, Conditional Final Building SiteApproVal.- 1 CommeyCial'Lot 2. Final Design ReviewApprovals a. A-584 - Helen Francis, 20473 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, Final Design Review Approval - Identification Sign (Helen's Antiques) - Per Exhibit '~" and Staff Report dated June 2, 1977 The motion was carried unanimously. III. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISIONS A. SD-12?? - James Day Construction Company, Sobey Road, Tentative Subdivision Approval ? Lots (Revision to Previously-Approved Tentative'~p for 6 LotS) Staff explained that this was a request for a minor modification in a lot line for Tract #5980 to accommodate existing improvements located on Lot #7 of the proposed tentative map. It was pointed out that this requested modification did notipropo~e' new building sites. Commissioner Callon moved, !s~onded bY Commissioner Marshall, that the Planning Commission grant revised tentative s~bdivision approval to ap~i'i~'- ~t'ib'H'S~rI277'tor 7 Lots per the Staff Memorandum dated June 21, 1977. The mo~i0~wa~ 'carried'flH~jimously. / CC~IISSION MINIFrES OF 22, 1977 III. B. SD-1302 - Clayton Thomas, Allendale. Avenue/Chester Avenue, Tentative Subdivision Approval - 5 Lots; Continued from June 8, 1977 Per the applicant's request, Chairman Belanger directed that SD-1302 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 13, 1977. IV. PUBLIC HEARiNGS A. UP-296 - Lyngso Garden B-~terials, Inc. (John and B~ry Lyngso), 12405 S. Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road, Reconsideration of Specific Condition #10 Only of Use Permit UP-296, Resolution #785, LYNGSO GARDSY~TERIALS, a Non-Conforming Garden ~terial Supply Operation LoCated at 12405 S. Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. It was explained that per Condition #10 of UP-296, the applicants had closed the Manor Drive access and had.requested'~h~'SF~e Department of Transportation to allow an additional entrance at the ~it'e"~'~6r'th~rnfortion of the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage. Note was made that the State D~partment of Transportation, per its letter of November 29, 1976, opposed modifying the existing Saratoga-Sunny~rale Road median to create such an opening. Consequently, after review of this situation by the City Department of Public Works, a Staff recommendation was made to reopen the ~'bnor Drive access. Introduced into the record was a letter received from Debby Kirshen, Saratoga resident, rendering_general! support for the LFngso operation, although the letter did not specifically address the Manor Drive access. Chairman Belanger opened the public hearing on UP-296 at 7:40 p.m. Mr. Trinidad of the Public Works Department explained that per the City Traffic Engineer's observations, traffic problems were created by illegal movements into the Lyngso property; i.e., diagonal crossing of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road against traffic and illegal U-turns entering and exiting the site. He noted that it was felt that the.reopening of Manor Drive would help to allevi~i~ this hazardous situation in light of the staFe,s'~fusal-f~-~n ~iteniate~o~ening. ® Horace Flatt, 12445 Greenmeadow Lane, urged the Commission to keep the Manor Drive access closed "simply for the safety of the residents." Mr. Flatt stated: "People who are patrons of this operation in the prior times before the blocking --'--,-- of the exit from the L}n~gso operation onto ~[%nor would very casually pull out ~,~. onto ~nor Drive completely unaware of the speed~ith which traffic flows along --' -"Saratoga-Sunny~rale Road in that area. It is zoned 45 mph and if you are going 45 mph and you turn onto that street, you are creating a traffic hazard. So I really ask that the Commission, before granting this, give very careful consi- deration not only to the traffic problem on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, but to the danger created by the opening of the exit on Manor Drive." · Fred Tater, 20577 Manor Drive, requested the Commission to consider leaving the .... . ~nor Drive access closed. He pointed ou~7~v_'~'.l of the hazards incurred at / this intersection when the access was open. Discussion followed on alternatives, with Chairman Belanger suggesting that the access be moved west farther dow~ Manor Drive. Commissioner Callon suggested that the northern entry into the site be identified as "entrance only" and the southern entry as "exit only." Mr. Tater felt that.-Chairman Belangef'Fsugges- . tion would create more problems than it would resolve, and tO Commissi6her Callon' ._ '~-. suggestion he stated thath~felt limited access would be worse than the present ' ~situat. ion but better than ~he opening of Manor Drive. · Mrs. Sifferman, 12400 Greenmeadow Lan~_p_o_in. ted out that Manor Drive narrowed, and she contended that..~movinR ~he access do~ this street would make it very difficult for vehicles to maneuver for safety reasons. She suggested that a n left-hand turn" sign be erected to prohibit making left-haM turns from Saratoga-Sunn>~ale Road into the site so that traffic would have to make a U- turn at Cox Avenue in order to enter the property. · Don Sifferman, 12400 Greenmeadow Lane, suggested that the existing Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road bermbe modified to a raised concrete berm for safer traffic control. .Additionally, he reiterated Mr. Tater's suggestion of extending this berm farther south to "accentuate. the difficulty of making illegal left turns." '. '~ CO~'ilSSION MINIJTES OF 22 ~ 1977 IV. A. UP-296. Lyngso Garden ~aterials - Cont 'd ._e.,-., Mrs. Shork, 12529 Greenmeadow, Lane, pointed out the dangers of having to make a '--'--' right turn off of Saratoga-Sunnyvale RF~d onto Manor DYive at a ~i~h"~d~"ShF ~':~ :~ ?'~i~'g~a' ~he Cormni~si6~ ~o 'keep' Manor D~ive closed and '~ foll0~ M~'S'." Sifferman ' s ...... ~' suggestion of erecting a "no left-=hand turn" sign. ® Richard Cardella, attorney representing '.'L_y~_gso Garden Ma. terials_,_st_a_ted'_tha. t_._t__h. ey'' wo~l'd'p~f~ opening the Manor Drive access. He pointed out that they had helped to build and pay for this street, and he stated they they felt it would be in the best interest to reopen this access. Mr. Gardella explained that they had made two unsuccessful efforts to secure a break in the median from the State Depart- ---..: ment of Transportation so that it would be farther removed from Manor Drive. He stated: "Esse~'~i~lly we would propose and hope for the reopening of Manor Drive ~' -__a_~.c_e._ss_, ._b_u_t__~,e_._ can.. l_iy.e... _wi.t_h .the_. PrO_Sen_t_. Ci_r_c_um_sta=n_.c_e_s _. '! ................................. ® Mrs. Tater, 20577 ~anor Drive, urged the Commission to extend the berm on Sar. atoga-Sunnyvale _Ro_a_djtb prohibit left-hand turns. She stated: '~Fhe people who are coming into the Lyngso property are coming there. for a service and they come there occasionally. I don't think that the inconvenience that they would have to go through ~uld be that much. We are willing to take the inconvenience of a "no left-hand turn' for ourselves." ~'~iss~oner ~:~rshall pointed out that a "iio left-hand-turn" sign at this interse~tio~ ~,~ould only move the traffic problems a few blocks in either direction. As there were no further public comments, Commissioner Lustig moved, seconded by Con~issioner Marshall, to close the public hearing on ~JP-296. The motion was carried unanimously, and the public~ hearing was closed at 8:30 p.m. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by CommisSioner Laden, that the Planning Commission adopt the Staff Report dated June 17, 1977 deleting Condition #10 of UP-296 and rephrase it to permit access via Manor Drive with the following condi- tion: That Lyngso Garden Materials, Inc. provide stop signs on their property for egress on ~nor Drive and for both exits on Highway 85; that "right-turn only" signs on the egress points on Highway 85 be provided; and that Staff be directed to ask the State Department.-of Transportation to provide a solid median to replace the bar median between the :north- and~t. hbound lanes on Highway 85 beBveen the railroad tracks and Manor Drive. : - Commissioner Marshall explained that he considered the majority of objections and suggestions made to be unrealistic in that none of them addressed the problem of entering or exiting the property northbound. He stated that since the State did not agree with the City's recommeHdation for an additional access, he felt the logical thing to do was to consider that ~-b~nor Drive "is the only point at.which either northerly trips leaving the property or northerly trips entering the property can be made without moving the problems two blocks in either direction." In response to a question raised as to the possibility of the State not being agreeable to such a barrier, Commissioner Marshall stated that the traffic would have to revert back to turning into Manor Drive and making a right turn into the L)mgso property. He added: "But at least the illegal movements diagonally across oncoming traffic on southbound Highway 85 will be eliminated." Discussion followed on this motion with the point being made that the State would possibly expect the City to pay for such a barrier. Chairman Belanger pointed out that the City would be incurring a .substantial road improvement cost for a use which would expire in 2½ years, and she favored continuance of this matter for review of suggestions made during the public hearing. Commissioners Willian~ and Callon also favored continuance of this matter for further re~iew. Commissioner Lustig concurred with Commissioner Marshall's Suggestion in that he also felt sealing 'off Manor Drive ~uld "shove the problem in either direction." The motion made by Commissioner ~rshall ~as carried.'. Commissioners Belanger, Callon and Willjams voted no. RECESS: 8:40 - 9:00 p.m. (NOTE: Commissioner Lustig left af-ter the recess.) -3- CC~['IISSION MINUTES OF 22, 1977 IV. B. UP-340 - Roy Stokes, 14833 Andrew Court, Request for Use Permit to Allow for the Construction of a 10-Foot High Tennis Court Fence within the Required Rear- yard Setbacks Located at Douglass Lane (Lot #5, Tract #5927) (Ordinance NS, Section 3. Note was made that no correspondence had been received on this matter, and that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval. Staff pointed out that all ordinance requirements had been met. Chairman Belanger opened the public hearing on UP-340 at 9:05 p.m. · Mr. Roy Stokes, applicant, ex~slained that the court would be located near existing dense trees, and he pointed out that he would be installing additional landscaping. As there were no further public comments, Commissioners l~rshall moved, s~conded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the public hearing on UP-340 be closed. The motion was carried unanimously, and the public hearing was closed at 9:07 p.m. Commissioner ~rshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission approve application UP-340 per Exhibit "A" and the Staff Report dated June 16, 1977. The motion was carried unanimously. C. UP-341 - Mr. and Mrs. Sheinberg, 18541 Arbolado Way, Request for Use Permit to Allow for the Construction of a 12-Foot High Platform Tennis Court Fence within the Required Rearyard Setback Located at 18541 Arbolado ]~:ay (Ordinance NS-3, Section 3.7-1) Note was made that a Staff'.¥leport had been prepared on this matter recommending approval. Also reference:" was made in said Staff Report that the applicant was re- questing a use permit for a 12-foot high aluminum fence ~dth an aluminum deck and : superstructure. The applicant, Mrs. Barbara Sheinberg, explained that t_h_ey' ~!ere ..... -. "'~ actually proposing an asphalt and concrete playing surface., Staff modified the S'~f~'Report as follows3: (1) The last sentence of the first paragraph under Project':.,~ ~ Description ~'as amended: "The proposed court will have an asphalt and concrete - ~-7: playing surface, an aluminum superstructure and steel fence." (2) The last sentence.- .- of the second paragraph under Project Description was deleted. '-"""' Note ~s' mad~ that ~' ~ pamphlet S~bmitted with;~the' use' permit a~p~icat'i~n, thi'~ ::' - -: -' facility was identified as a structure instead of a fence. Commissioner ~rshall expressed concern that this be clarified before action was taken. Chairman Belanger opened the public hearing on UP-341 at 9:12 p.m. ® The applicants explained that platform tennis was similar to outdoor racketball, and they pointed out that when the ball hit the fenct, it's sound was a dull "thud." Additionally, they explained that the pamphlet submitted ~4th their ~ application identified a platform tennis facility_.as erected in the East where weather was a factor in construction. The applicant assured~hTCS'mm~ss~on that the facility was not a "structure" per se, but rathe~ 'Was like' 'a 'termis court. ® Robert I~:alsh, 18640 Woodbank Way, expressed concern relative to the noise this activity might create. He requested that the noise level be determined in ..... c-- "standards understood by everyone" before action was taken on this application. As there were no further public comments, Commissioner Laden moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the public hearing on UP-341 be closed. The motion was carried unanimously, and the public hearing was closed at 9:35 p.m. The Commission diseussed the question of noise, and it was their consensus to con- tinue this matter for further review. The opinion was expressed that since this was the first platform termis court in the City,_.-_"_ Commissioners should visit similar 'f~'f~fties within the area to ascertain the noise levels of this sport.' The Variance !'~ittee was requested ~0 visit ~Aimaden/~th~'e~iC c~n~e~ for 'this purpose. Chaif~nan Belanger directed tha~ UP-341 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 13, 1977 pending further review. ~ CC~IISSION MINIYrES OF 22, 1977 IV. D. V-467 - Kelez Investments, Sobey Road and Ten Acres Road, Request to Allow the Relocation of Existing Overhead Utility Lines for Purposes of Street Widen- ing without Undergyounding of Said Lines (Ord. NS-3, Section 22.1) Note was made that no correspondence had been received on this matter, and that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval. It was explained that said recommendation ~ms conditioned for the applicant to enter into a deferred improvement agreement to place utilities underground at a future date when the area further develops or when PG&E proceeds with plans for undergrounding the entire area. Chairman Belanger opened the public hearing on V-467 at 9:50 p.m. Commissioner Marshall stated that he felt the map submitted ~th this application did not properly present the immediate area relative to exemptions from underground- ing. With respect to the cost of undergrounding, Commissioner ~rshall stated that he felt the cost would be higher to underground in the future than it would be today. e A.H. Wagner, area resident, stated: "Barring~any serious engineering problems attached to bur~-ing the cable underground, we don't see good reason why it shouldn't go underground now." He urged the Commission to deny this variance request. ® Bob Kelez, applicant, stated that he saw no purpose in undergrounding this 4-lot subdivision when most of the adjacent residents had overhead lines. He pointed out that he would have to underground in front of adjacent property o~mers' homes "so we are overdoing our frontage and it is ben®fitting nobody." As there were no further comments, Commissioner Zambetti moved, seconded by Commis- sioner ~rshall, that the public hearing on V-467 be closed. The motion was carried unanimously, and the public hearing was closed at 9:56 p.m. Chairman Belanger stated that the Commission in establishing its policy on under- grounding was aware that there weren,t®as 'throughout the Citywhichprobably would not.-b~d~rgroun~.ed in the foreseeaSle future. She added, however, that in order to mrentually eliminate the "clutter of poles" in the City, a policy had been es- tablished to require undergrounding of utilities as new developments occurred. Commissioner Zambetti moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Planning Commission deny application V-467. The motion was carried unanimously. Note was made that this decision could be appealed to the City Council ~ithin 10 days. E. V-468 - Stephen & Lois DeBrock, 20546 Reid Lane, Request for Variance to Allow a iS-Foot Reduction in the Required Exterior Sideyard Setback to Allow for the Construction of ~ Swimming Pool at 20546 Reid Lane (Ordinance NS-3, Sections 3.7 and 3.2f) Note was made that no correspondence had been received on this matter, and that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval. Commissioner Callon pointed out that the Variance Committee had made an on-site inspection, and she noted the Committee's concern relative to the removal of trees on site, pointing out that a suggestion had been made to move the pool fortyard in order to avoid removing more trees than necessary. Staff explained that it had been discovered after the inspection that PG&E had an additional easement on the southern border of this site making it more difficult to locate the pool'an)a~here else tH~n proposed. Chairman Belanger 6pened the public hearing on V-468 at 10:02 p.~. ® Mr. DeBrock, applicant-, explained that moving the pool fomvard a few feet would project the pool in front of the. house, and he stated that this was the only location on the site that a pool could be installed because of the ~isting PG&E easements. He explained that the trees proposed would be removed were a 10" Japanese elm, a 6" pine tree, an 18" pine tree which "has already had a major limb broken off in a previous storm and an arm extending over the roof in a weakened condition;" a 15" firm; a 12" fir to the rear "which has been trimmed severely by PG&E;" and a 2' black walnut tree whichwould be in the way of a proposed addition to the house. '-5- :' "' COi~IISSION I~[INIlTES OF 22, 1977 IV. E. V-468 - Stephen & Lp.is DeBro.c.k. - .Cont'd ....... Commissioner ,~arshall expressed sympathy over the pool location situation, but he ex- pressed concern about the number of trees that had to be removed. He suggested that the pool be moved fon,Tard a few feet to reduce the number of trees that would have to be cut "not so far that it passes in front of the house but to the extent that it gets a little farther away from the PG&E easement and the trees along the back property'.line." Commissioner Laden stated that the only 'tree:~which could be ~aved by moving the pool forward would be the 12" tree that has been cropped by PC&E, and she favored approval of the variance on the basis that the site was the only location for the pool. Note was also made that cutting the pool size dmm to the standard 15' x 30' size would not save any additional trees. Commissioner Callon moved, seconded by Commissioner Mlliams that the Planning Commission grant approval to application V-468 per Exhibit 'W' and the Staff Report dated June 16, 1977. The motion was carried; Commissioners Marshall and Zambetti voted no. V. DESIGN RBrlEW A. A-577 - Los Gatos-Saratoga Board of Realtors, Blauer Drive, Final Design Review Approval Office Building. ' " ' Note was made that the Comission had reviewed this application at its Committee-of-the- l~l~ole meeting of May 17, 1977, and that the Land Development Committee had granted tentative map approval to this site at its meeting of June 16, 1977. It was pointed out that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Com- mission grant tentative design review approval to application A-577 per Exhibits "A" and "B" and the Staff Report dated June 16, 1977. The motion was carried; Comissioner ~:illiams abstained. B. A-583 - h,~ayne Richards, Palomino Way, Final Design Review Approyal.- 1 Lot Although note was made t;nat a Staff Report had been prepared recommendin a_pproval of this aI)plication, concern was expressed by the Commission of the '.gr_a_d$_n_g__pr~oposed for this site. It was the consensus of the C~mmissioh to cOntinUe ..... A-583 to the Commission's r.~gula~ adj'odHied meeting'on'~lime 28, 1977 at 4:30 p.m. for further' 'Considirati0n. "The applicant was requested to provide more accurate information depicting the topography, as well as a grading plan. VI. MISCELI~.\~EOUS A. Review of 1977-78 through 1979-80 Capital Improvement Program The Commission felt that the CIP ~;as consistent with the General Plan; however, Commis- sioner Marshall did not feel that the particular solar energy project proposed by Councilman Brigham in the CIP was appropriate. Discussion followed on this project with the $ecretary explaining that Councilman Brigham was proposing to place demonstration retrofit units of $15,000 each on 2 exist- ing structures, and to utilize $40,000 with a matching grant to refit the City govern- ment buildings ~ith such units. It was explained that he was suggesting that this money be taken out of the Saratoga revenue-sharing funds. Commissioner Marshall dis- agreed with this proposal in that he felt the City would be duplicating efforts made by other agencies within the area. He pointed out, that the library would have solar energy units, and he ex]~ressed the opinion that the City should be joining forces with other area groups for better results. It x,:as the consensus of the Commission to declare the CIP consistent with the General Plan, and to address the solar energy project proposed by Councilman Brigham at the June 291h Joint Council/Commission Committee-6f-the-l~l~ole meeting. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Callon, that the Planning Commis- sion declare the 1977-78 through 1979-80 Capital Improvement Program consistent ~th the City General Plan. The motion was carried unanimously. -6- ..... CO~'~,IISSION MINUTES OF JUN~ - - VI. B. Consideration of Ame.nded City Street Tree List; Continued from Bune 8, 1977 Note was made that a revised tree list had been prepared which included the suggestions made by Commissioner ~rshall at th~:'laSt Commission meeting. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commissions~do'~'R~'6rution PC-128 approving the Revised City Street Tree List. The motion was carried u~janimously. 1. Letter dated June 21, 1977 to the Commission from Deryl L. Cram, 19866 Sea Gull Way, requesting the CommisSion to make a determination as to whether he could install an air-condit,ioning unit in his sideyard setbacks. It was exDlained that City ordinances did not specificall address the location of mechanical equipment other swimming pool equipment, and ~[at Mr. Cram was requesting the Comission to deter=-- mine whether such equipment was considered to be a structure which would be subject to setback requirements. The Secretary pointed out that Mr. Cram felt that this unit was not as noisy or as obtrusive as pool equipment, and therefore, should not be subject to the same requirements. It was noted, however, that Staff felt it was similar to pool equipment in that it had essentially the same noise and bulk as pool equipment. After discussion of this request, Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commis- sioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission reaffirm the interpretation made by Staff that air conditioning units are considered to be mechanical equipment and analogous to swimming pool equipment. The motion was carried unanimously. Bo ORAL 1. Staff explained that Security-Pacific..Natio~al Bank on Big Basin Way was requesting modification of the design review plans by erecting a screen on 2 sides of the build- ing so a~ to block visibility of these units from Oak Street. The condition rela- tive to this Design Review application (A-537) was read into the record: "A non-reflective earth-toned material is to be used on the flat roof element located over the center of the building. All air conditioning units and other imeC_han_i.ca!. means shall be fully enclosed and screened from view at all points." Mr. Foug, applicant's architect, contended that at the time Design Review Approval was granted on this design, the Commission ~:as aware that these units might be on the roof. He e.xplained that the packaged units were found to be 10" higher than the proposed parap~t:~'i~-~and in order to avoid raising the parap~j')~ they were proposing a redwood screen on 2 sides of the building° He indicated that he felt this was in compliance with the Commission's condition. The Commission pointed out that they had stipulated that these units would either be :enclosed'~.i~Hin the building or screened by the proposed 18" parap~j--: It was the feeling of the._C. ommission to not allow an additional fence to be erected atop the proposed parapetj:i for purposes of screening these units. The Commission's consensus was that the air' conditioning units either be enclosed or designed such that they could be hidden from view by~h.e proposed 18" paraphet. Staff was directed to agendize this-matter for review at the July 13, 1977 Commission meetin~. VII I. F ...... ~ Con~nissioner Laden moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission ' )'-' meeting of Jm~e 22, 1977 be adjourned. The'motion was carried unanimously, and the meeting "-~ was adjourned at 11:20 p.m. S ko / ' -7-