Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-23-1980 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION HINUTES DATE: Wednesday, January 23, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. ~ PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROUTINE ORGANIZATION Roll Call Present: Commissioners King, Laden, Fiarshall, Siegfried, Schaefer, ~Villiams and Zambetti Absent: None Minutes ~ It was .noted that the third sentence in the second paragraph under UP-434 should read: "FIe indicated that there would be an argument in favor of allowing an 11~ ft setback for the ~ara~e since the principal structure is already noHconforming and has that setback." With that correction, Commis- sioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, to waive the read- ing of the 'minutes of January 9, 1980 and approve 'as distributed. The motion was carried, with Commissioner l~Villiams abstaining since he was not present at the meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR , . Commissioner Williams moved, seconded. by Commissioner .Zambetti, to approve the following j:tems listed on the Consent Calendar. The motion was carried unanimous ly. 1. A-698 ~ Cal-Neon,. 12100 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Logos of Wright and Company and Saratoga-Foothills Realty signs, Final Design Review Approval 2. A-699 - Blackwell HOmes, 12045 Parker Ranch Road, 4 Single-Family Res.i- dences, Final Design Review Approval PUBLI. C HEARINGS 3. SD-].356 - Anthony Cocciardi, r~lt. Eden Road, 25 Lots, Tentative Map ': Approval; Continued from January 9, 1980 It was .reported by Stat=f that the final geology has been approved by t'he City Geologist. The follo,ing it'em's'.~of cohc6.rn .werej~di~cussed: .: access and circulation .. size and location of lots .. location of pools width of the roads and curbing drainage emergency barricade required by the Fire Department The public hearing was continued at 7:50 p.m. Marius 'Nelsen, the civil engineer for the project, discussed the discrepan- cy between the calculations on the notes and the map. He clarified that there are now 44.8 acres, which includes an area that is to be annexed to - I - .~lanni~g Co~mis s ion Page 2 · ~ ~Mee'£ing. Minutes 1/23/80 SD- 1·356i (cont.) the City from the Carrod property; given one Md area and the over 40% slope, the yield would be'25 lots. Mr. Nelsen discussed the sewers and · storm-d~ainage easement. It was determined that it should be stated in the Staff Report that surface drainage plans are not approved and are subject to approval. The possibility of eliminating at least one lot -and adjusting the lots lines was discussed. Mr. George Tobin, attorney for the developer, stated that, under the ordinance, all of the proposed lots are legal lots. He commented that the. building site on lot 6 can be moved closer to the street and the access driveway to it can be shortened, so that it can be ~·~-~~·~'~·n- dent'ly.~ Chai·rman Laden commented that it was the responsibility of the Commission · to ensure that all lots also contain sites which are of value, approp·riate · and buildable. Commissioner ·Marshall stated that, in some cases, geometry and/or site conditi6ns will alter the number of lots. He indicated that he felt lots 8 and 9~both h'ave problems which could be alleviated by using land from lot 6~ Jim Cochrane, 13615 Vaquero Court, stated that his house has started mov- ing, and he feels the area is very·unstable as far as the soil is con- cerned.' Mr. Cochrane also indicated that he felt the density is too high and the'traffic problem has still not been resolved. It was pointed out to Mr. Cochrane that the reports from the applicant's geologist and the City Geologist show there· are no geological problems where the sites are, and the areas where there are problems have been eliminated in the calculations. It wa's also mitigating measures addressing the traffic, c~culati~n an~ the road dis- trict. Mr. Tobin discussed the conditions of the Staff Report, and also expressed his concerns regarding the Water Assessment District and road. Joseph·Gabriel from Terratech commented further on the geology of the area. He Stated that it was their opinion, and that of the City G~ologist, that there is no active fault in or about the property that would impact this development. He discussed the various cla·ssifications of the landslide areas. Since no one else appeared, Commissioner Siegfried moved, seconded by Commissioner.Zambetti, to close the public hearing. The motion was carried unanimously. It was the consensus of the CommisSion that they' could approve the project in prind·iple, and Staff would then work with the developer to finalize the subdivis. ion for tentative ·map approval.· It was also the consensus that lots 5 through 9 be reduced from 5 to 4 lots and redistributed equitably between~the remaining lots. The roads were discussed further, and it was determined that the configuration of the roads will be studied. CommissiZoner Marshall moved to approve SDR-1356 in concept~ for a 23-1ot subdivision, with the recommendations and changes discussed by the Com- mission;! making the findings that all of the objectives of the 1974 General Plan an~ requirements of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga will be met ~ith that modified plan, and making the findings relative to Sec- tion 210~8i of the California Envi·ronmental Quality Act, that a, b and c of Exhib!it D are indeed met. Commissioner Siegfried seconded the motion, 'which was carried unanimously. 'i ~'l'~hn{ng ; COmmission Page 3 ~.Meeting Minutes .1/2.3/80' SD-1356 (cont.) It was'pointed out that it should be recognized that the project is being ~pproved in concept, provided that everything discussed is addressed adequately. 4. SD-1368 Allen Chadwick and Anthony Cocciardi, Old Oak & Chiquita Way, 11 Lots, Tentative Map Approval.; Continued from January 9, 1980 It was reported that the Commission has a full set of drawings regarding the site development plans.' Staff reported that they were recommending a continuance to allow the Commission to study the concerns regarding the road. CommisSioner Marshall noted that Mr. Don.' had applied for a variance in order fo site his house adjacent to lot 3. He commented that if some land cduld be given from 'lot 3'to Mr. Don, the variance would not be needed~and the road situation could be mitigated. The drainage situation in the area was'discussed.: The-public hearing was opened at 9:50 p.m. Dora Greens, 13451 Old Oak Way expressed her concern about the circulation problem~ and lot 1. Mr. Mar~ius Nelsen, the engineer, stated that he and Mr. Don's engineer were going to discuss moving the road to the east to reduce the amount of grad!ing that is going to be required at the end of Old Oak Way, and the possibility of exchanging some land to give him additional l~nd to imprpveZ his .building site. The chaparral and the fire problem in the area associated with it were discussed. It was determined that the following concerns should be addressed at a Committee-of-the-Whole study session: Lot 1 Roads and. their configuration . Connection with the Mathot property Poison oak, etc., on Lots 3 and 6 It was directed that this item be continued to a Committee-of-the-Whole on Janu6ry 29th at 4:30 p.m. in the Crisp Conference Room and the regular meeting!of February 13, 1980. 5. UP-424 Z Saratoga Foothills Development Corp., Request for Use Permit SDR-1439 - and Tentative Building Site,Approval to allow the construction of a 36-unit multi-family condominium project, at 12299 , Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road; Continued from December 12, 1979 Commissioner Zambetti stated that this item is of great concern as it relatesito the Subdivision Ordinance and the use permit provisions, and he made:a motion to deny UP-424 and SDR-1439. It was pointed out by Staff that the public hearing was still open, and the applicant has indicated'that he is trying to increase the easement from 10 ft. to i2 ft.- in the event that he is not able' to get the necessary easement from the Oak :Creek project. It was noted that the developer is meeting with the Oak Creek Homeowners Group to discuss this; therefore, Staff was recommending a continuance of this item. Commissioner Zambetti stated that he .did not realize the pub].ic hearing was still open, and he with- drew his: motion for denial. A letter from John Mallory and John Weir, dated January 10, 1980,~;.ii~U~i~p'~'~'F~'~h~'.t.~"~i~...eU~.~o~._p.~sed project, was noted into the record. f'=Planning C~mmission Page 4 Meeting Minutes 1/23/80 uP-424 and SDR-1439 (cont.) The p~blic hearing was continued at 10:27 p.m. Joan Green·, 12350 Goleta Avenue, stated she was representing some of her neighbors, and they strongly oppose the building of any more apart- ments; townhouses or condominiums in the area north of the railroad tracks. She commented that Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road in this area has become a continuation of San Jose's muddled mess.. Ms. Green stated that the traffic at the intersection of Prospect and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road would be increased beyond relief, and she felt the planned project was n6t suitable ·for this site. She urged the Commission to consider 'some development other than housing units in this area. Ms. Green indicated that they would prefer a park; however, medical buildings, which':would bring the least amount of traffic, should be considered. Mr. JOhn Mallory, Kirkdale Avenue, stated he would not like heavy density or heavy commercial. He too commented that professional and medical bui'ldi. ngs should be cons'idered. Mr. Mallory suggested light commercial as a possibility. Chairman Laden requested Mr. Mallory to discuss uses with his homeowners group,: land stated that there would be a study session on this project on Feb. ruary 5,~ 1980, at which time this could be discussed. Pat Ba. llinger, 12300 Julie Lane, President of the Oak Creek development, .. commented that Mr. Lohr had met with their group to discuss the fire accesS. Ms. Ballinger stated that the response from the group had been that ~hey did not want to give any· sort of fire access to the concrete· .. wall '~n the back, since it 'would increase the nuisance potential and increase their maintenance. She added that she felt this proposal was too dense for this site. It was· directed that this item be continued to the ·Committee-of-the-Whole on Feb~ruary 5, 1980 and the regular meeting of February 13, 1980. 6. UP-434' Richard I~in. dberg, 13050 Pierce Road, Request for a Use Permit to allow the construction of a detached 3-car garage over 6' high (12' high at mid-point of roof) in the required rear yard which would provide a 4' setback from the rear property · : line; Continued from January 9~ 1980 It was.~ reported by Staff that the applicant has submitted revised plans showing a 6 ft. rear yard setback,' which would allow him a 17 ft. space betwee~n the central stall of the garage and the fountain area. They commented that the applicant has indicated that this is the minimum area he would need in order. for a car to negotiate into that central stall. It wasi noted that a letter had been received from the neighbor, Mr. Lanfor:d, requesting a continuance of this item so he could make his presentation regarding the adverse impacts he feels are associated with this D:rOj ect Commis'sione·r Siegfried commented'that he had 'reviewed the plan and the adjoining property,' and felt that this proposal will have quite an impact on t he~ Lanfords .~' _~-~..-~=~.~I ~- ........~? ........-~":"'-i~ '-"ET~'~'--~'' .....................~- back, k ince i~""'i ~""a"H'6~i~o~'f~rUnFjl~'~ i~F~H~T"rl~'~'&'f'o~';""i~'~"fd~ 8~""""~F'.~'~'i'- "'='-' ate to: setbacks on nonconforming lots can be utilized and extended in this c~se to the extent that the garage. be no.' closer than the house to the property line, which is ]].-L~ ft. The public hearing was continued at 10:50 p.m. Mr. Lihdberg, the applicant, discussed his oresent proposal. He .stated - 4 - Planning Commission Page 5 Meeting Minutes 1/23/80 UP-434 (cont.) that he had addressed the concerns indicated at the last meeting by the Planning Commission. It was pointed out to the applicant that the setback of 7'1" suggested at the last meeting was a compromise, and now he was asking for a further compromise to a 6' setback. Mr. Lindberg stated that there is a symmetry associated with the property that he is trying to maintain, and he sees the impact on the Lanford propert'y as minimal.. It was the consensus of the Commission that the neighborhood would be impacted by this 32 ft. structure so close to the property line. Commissioner WilliamS moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Marshall seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner King, to deny UP-434 as presented, with the stipulation that, should the applicant reapply for a use permit with a setback no less than that of the home, 11½ ft., it would be considered favorably as long as it meets the other criteria discussed. The motion was carried unanimously. It was explained to ,the applicant that he could appeal this decision and indicate to the City Council that he was willing to accept the · .:"~' 11~ ft. setback, and it then~Z~'~'~-'f~l~I'~'~U~.~"~.~j~~jj~'~i~l The Commission pointed out that the City Council has the right to grant that setback if they don't grant the one proposed by the applicant, and new application fees would not be necessary. It was further 'clari- fied to the a~plicant that if the structure were attached to the exist- ing structure, a use permit would not be necessary at the 11½ ft. set- back, and the Commission would consider it favorably at 11~ ft. without it being attached. 7. UP-435 - Michael Purcell, 14560 Big Basin ~.Vay, Request for a Use Permit to allow a real estate office to operate in the "C-C" zoning district Staff reported that the building s~te approval. and design review for this application indicated that a real estate office would be the pro- posed use. They added that the ordinance which indicates that there can not be a real. estate office in a C-C district with. out a use permit .came into effect prior to the t. ime that Mr. Purcell had completed this new structure and obtained his business license; therefore, he has to comply with. the requirements and obtain a use permit. The public hearing was opened at 11:17 p.m. Since no one appeared, Commissioner Marshall moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Zambetti seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner'Zambetti moved to approve UP-435 per the Staff Report dated January 14, ].980, with the condition added to read: "Brick .. pavement is to be placed within the next 30 days between the sidewalk and curb, to complement the landscaping". Commissioner Marshall seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. The number of desks and sufficient parking were discussed. It was determined that the Commis- sion can review the use permit at a later date if there is a complaint about th.e lack of parking. 8. V-521 - Gary Hughes, 15254 Quito Road, ~equest for a Variance to allow the construction of an 800 sq.. ft. solar panel rack (maximum height 14') which would provide a 2' side yard where a 20' side yard is required Staff reported that the Land Use Committee visited the site and indicated. ~lanning Commiss'ion Page 6 Meeting Minutes 1/23180 V-521 (cont.) that 'a possible compromise might be a 10 ft. side yard setback, Which would allow greater exposure to sunlight and there would be less encroachment. Commissioner Marshall gave a report on the on-site visit. He des- cribed the site' and the adjoining property. He indicated that a reasonable compromise would be a 10 ft. setback, since then the neighbor could install the normal· size~:~.~'~I~:f~-'to block the view of .~- The public hearing was opened at 11:25 p.m. Mr.'Skinner, from Solar II, stated that the Planning Commission's recommendation would be a reasonable compromise. He indicated that D-r., .Hughes was out of town; however, he felt it would be acceptable to him. Commissioner MarShall moved' to close the public hearing. Commissioner Z'ambetti seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. It was moved by commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, to grant the variance in the matter of V-521 for a 10 ft, side.yard setback, as opposed to the 2 ft. setback .requested, making the necessary Eindings. The motion was carried unanimously, .. I.t was commented by the Planning Commission that, in 'the future, houses should be sited to allow the natural slope of the roofs to be used for solar panels. DESIGN REVIEW 9. A-697 DaVid Yen, 21355 Saratoga Hills Road, Swimming Pool, Final Design Review Approval · , Staff reported that the original site development plan showed the swimming pool in the front of the property. They commented that they felt this would have less visual impact than the previous location. Commissioner Williams moved, seconded by Commissioner Siegfried, to approve A-697 per the Staff Report dated January 17, 1980. The motion was carried unanimously. 10. A-700 Pettibone Signs, 12100 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Round Table Pizza Sign,. Final Design Review ··Approval Staff reported that the sign as proposed does not conform to the sign program previously approved by the Commission. Marc Pettibone, of Pettibone Signs, stated that he was surprised to find out that a sign· program had been established for the development, since they had received' no input on it. 'The shields on the proposed sign we're discussed. Mr. Pettibone stated that he felt the letter s. tyle ~s pa·rt~ of the logo for Round Table Pizza, along with the shields. He indicated that, if they had. to give Up something, they would rather give up the shields and have the letter style, but they felt that if they could get one of the shields it would help identify or tie it in with the' other advertising that is going to be done. After· considerable dis'cussion regarding the lettering and the colorful shields, it was the consensus~ of the Commission that they would follow the sign program as presented to the Commission by the developer and previously approved. 6 Meeting Minutes 1/2.3/80 A-700 (cont.) Commissioner Marshall moved to deny A-700. Commissioner King seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. The applicant was advised to obtain the approved sign criteria from the developer. COMMUNICATIONS Written 1. Letter dated January' 15, 1980 'from Solar II Enterprises. 2. Letter dated January '18, 1980 from Ernest T.' Barco, requesting review of the use permit of the Chu'rch of Latte'r Day Saints. Chairman Laden commented that this item will be discussed at a future study session. 3. Letter from the City AttOrney regarding Findings. 4. Notice of the Annual Planning Commission Institute of the League of California Cities, in San Diego on February 27-29. Oral 1. City. Council Report - Commissioner Williams gave a brief report on the. City Council meeting held on January 16, 1980. A copy of the minutes of this meeting are on file in the City Administration Office. 2. Chairman Laden thanked Councilwoman COrr for attending the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Zambetti moved, seconded .by Commissioner Schaefer, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 11:55 p.m.' RSR:cd