Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-25-1981 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARA'I'O(3A P.LAENIN5 COMMISSION Mzi. nut ~ s I)ATE: Wednesday, Februa. ry 25, 1981 7:30 p.m. PhACE: C. ity Council Chambers, 51.3777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeti_ng ROUTINE ORGANIZATION Roll Call. .. Present: Commission. ers Bolger, (2rowther~, King, Laden, Monia, Scha'efer and Zambetti Absent: None Minutos. The :following correcti. ons were made to the m:i. nutes of Feb'ruary ll, 1981:' On page 4 in the f'i. rst Daraoraph th.e size. o[: the shopping center be'h'~g built sho~.ld be 19,000 to 20,000 sq. ft., instead of 40,000 to 50,000 sq. ft. On page 5, :i.t should be stated. that Commissi. oner Crowther moved to approve V-542. O.n page 7, i.n the second. paragraph, .the :sentence should be added. "Commi. ssi. on. er Crowther requested that the speci ITi. ca. tions on gradi'ng restrictions in other communities, such as Los Ca. los and Los .~ltos llil.]s, be reviewed in establishing cri. teria." On page 7, in. the third paraggraph, the sentence should be add. ed "Commissi. oner Crowth. er noted that in the 1968 General Plan a one [n ten acre li.m.i.t had been .put on tlnose areas in the slope conservation zone to protect th.e s'cenic ri. dgelines." On that same page, in the fourth paragraph, the word s.tricken in the fi. rst sentence should 'read strike, and older grazed 'area should read an over-grazed area, and th.e 71. a.st sentence shoul. d read: "14e added that he wou].d like that statement either cla'ri l:ied or removed." With those changes,. Commissi. oner Zambetti moved to waive the reading of the minutes of February 171., .1_981 an.d approve a.s amended. Comm:issi. oner Crowth. er seconded the motion, which was carried, wi. th CommisSioner Schaefer:abstaining since she was not present a.t the meeting. ; PtJBI,]5C HEAI'~INGS ~ la. Negative 1)ecla. ration - SDR-1484 - Harold Thompson. lb. SDR- 1484 - Harold Th. ompson, 14906 gobey Road 2 l,ots, Tentative Building Site Approval Sta. Ef descr-i. hed the project, sta~ing that there was a requirement th. at the Cominigsion make an exception i'tY they wish to approve it. They ex:pla:i'ned that tt!i.s proposal. would create a 'fifth l. ot on a private access street, which creates an inconsistency ~i. th t'.h.e General .Plan. 2[t was noted that the Land Devclopmen. t CoMnittee has been very consistent in .-thei. r act_i. on.s with. regard to creation of a f:i.'Eth lot on a pri. vate access road an.d has consistent'l.y denied. such an application. Staff also noted th. at the .minutes were attached on the Jacobsen project, which was a simi. Iar situation. The Land Development Committee had denied this project; :it was appealed to the City Council., and the Council approved the fifth lot. Staff noted that there had been a letter receiv'ed from Mr. Chest, a. neighhot, in opposition to this project. The publ. ic hearing was opened at 7::45 p.m. .Jitka Gymhal, representing Westfal. 1 t.inginecring and the applicant, stated that the property line cottld be straightened out i.f the stable was moved,' and i.t was always the intention of th.e app'l. icant to move i.t. She indicated that this private access'. road was in much better condition than the road involved i.n the .lacohsen project. She clarified that the neighbors had not been approached 'as to the possibility of maki.ng the road a .puhl:ic road. : - 1 - I~.~I ann i ~g .: C o mm-i. s s i on 1.-' a g e 2 Meeting Minutes - 2/25/81 SDR- ] 484 (cont.) "- Mrs. Tho~npson, the a.l-~plicant, stated' that she had tal. ked t.o Mr. 'Vernol~, a neighbor, and he d-id not oppose th.e project. She discussed the natural runoff stream which goes through th.e end of h. er property, under the access road. She stated that when there is;. a lot of water it runs towards Mr. Ghest's property after it goe~ -. under2 the 'road. Mrs. Thompson commented that this water comes .~'rom next" door] to_ her property and al'l. the surround- ing properties and does not {~ where Mr Chest indicated in his l. etter The road and easement was di_scussed,: along with the kitchen in the guest house and the barn. Clyde Ghest, 14900 Sobey Road, stated that they had moved there because it is a. rural environment. He explaine:d that they had looked a.t the ordi- nance when they moved there and understood that on a private road there could only be .four properties. Mr..Chest stated that th.e past owner ha.d indicated to the Thompso~ wh. en they 'bought the prope'rty that it was llot possible to subdivide l~eCause of the ord:i_n. ance. He stated that he was .~ opposed because (1) i.t destroy's. h'i.s .view, and his property w-~lue wotlld decrease, and (2) jt is a.. private ro. ad, and the're will obvi. ously be more Wear and tear on the road.. Mr. Chest stated that he 'felt that the 'ordi- nance has kept the sort of environme'nt which Sobey Road has. He described the swale on the property', stating that in order to build you woklld have to d:i. vert that dry creek, wh.-i. ch wot~.l.d be a. substantial amount of work and involve a 'l. ot of grading. ; Carolyn Fel:i.x, 14908 Sobey Road, a.g'~eed-with 'Mr. Chest. She expressed concern over the drainage prob].em, stating that it was a very ser:ious one. It was explained to her that if this' project were a. pproved., j_t would be approved on tl'~e con. di. tion that the drainage problem be taken care of to the satis.lFaction of the Engineer:i.n.g Staf.f. Commiss:i_oner Zambetti moved to c'l. ose the public hea'ring. Commissioner Monia seconded the motion which was ~carried unanimously. Commissioner Zambetti. stated. that, r~f the Commission were to grant a fifth lot, they would be i'nco'ns is tent in rega. rds to the Su'bdivision O'rdi- nance and also cont~arX to the General PZlan. t-.le stated that h.e would. -m0ve'tb deny the' ~pplica~'i'on--~ithOut-prej udice; 'and. the. j~pplican~' could appeal it. He explained th. at i~e would have r. remendous difg:i. culty making the findings because of the density :problem along Sobey Road, and there would be five lots accessing on a. private access road. Commissioner Schaefer seconded the motion, stat-i.~4g that if someone buys a home on a private road, with an ordinance stating that only four homes will be servecl, that should offer some stab:i_lity to .people to kl~o~q what to expect as far a.s projects being built there. Commi. ssioner (2rowther stated that, as one who has appeared before this COmmissioner in the past and heard many other cit:i. zens appear and quote these sections of the General Plan and asked that they be considered with regard to fairl. y large subdivisions, and essentially ha. re them generalized ~.~ st~ch a way that they were ignored., he 'Einds it curi. ous that on a one . lot situation a].l of a sudden the General Plan 'i.s being en.gorced. FIe stated that he strongly supports the motion, si. nce he believes th. at th.e Subdivision Ordinance must be upheld, but he thinks the statements here about the General. Plan are inconsistent with past actions of this Commis- sion, and he feels that the Commi. ss:~on woul. d have a. hard time basing the. motion on. incons:i. stency w:i th the Gen.eral Plan because of that. Chairman Laden stated that, since tl~e General Plan is a document of policy rather than ordina. nces, sh.e supposes that it is open for interpretat:i. on as to whether it h. as been I7ollowed' for consistency o'r .not. She stated that she 'Eeels that the ordinance specifically states no more than IFour lots on a mini. mum access road, and that perhaps the applicant has not made all th.e eiFfort tha. t could he made to ma'ke a pul3'l::i.c"'-:road 'i.'f that is a possi- bility. If th.a.~. is not a possibi. lity, she added, she feels that, until the ordinance i.s changed, the Comm:i. ss:i. on must abide by it. P'.k..an'n:i_i~g' Commi. ss i. on Page 3 Mi. nutes Meetin~ ?/25/81 SI)R- 1484 (con. t. ) Commissioner Crowther stated that he would like i_t clear that he has n.o problem interpreting the General Plan thi. s way; in fact, he ]ieli. eves .:i.t should be i. nterpreted th.:i.s w~.y, but he thi.nks th.e Commjssi..Qn should be consistent i.n the 'future on ~.121 dases of interpreting i.t.:':. '2 .......... :' " Commi. ssioner Zambett:i. stated that h~ feels we have to realize that are talki. n.~, about a Subd:ivis:ion Ord:inance and a Zoning Ordinance and the General. Plan is general. l-le added that th.e Subdi. visi. on Ordinance states what can be done, and th.e Comm:i. ssiOn h. as to abide by 7it and work w:i th i.t. The vote was taken on the motion to deny SDR-].484 without prejud:i_ce. The motion was carr:[ed unanimousl. y, and th.e applicant was informed o.~ the 1.5-day appeal_ period.. 2. UP-295 Saratoga Gardens Nursery, 12585 Sa'ratoga-Sunnyva]e Road, Fj'rst I';:i. ve-Year Revi. ew of the LIs6 l-'ern~i.t Approval (approved 'Eor a 15-Year Peri. od) to ope.rate. a.s a noncon'~orm:i.n.g nursery use in the R-].-].9 500 district Sta. f.E gave 'tl~e background of th.':[s use permit, stating that this was the first F'LvezYear revlcw of the a.l~proxral. It was noted tha. t there h. ave been no compl. ai. nts regarding th=is operation. Staff :i. nd:i. cated th. at they have made on-sj. te visits and ha. re ribted that the nursery is in vi. olati. on o:tT Cond:ktions 1, 3 and 4. : Condition 1 was discussed. St~ff nbted that there are areas that are not completely enclosed; there ,are bags o.f soi:l"_mi~ter:i.a].s that are not housed w:i. thi. n the structu. re, and st'.acks of concrete and wood steps and tools used in thi. s operation a~e outside. The public hearing ~as opened at 8. f:15 p.m. Sarath Vi. danage, own. er of the ~ursery, expl. ai_ned that "~'t 'the' 'time" th.e use p. erm:i.t was approved they were asked to build a structure to house all o'f the 'fert:ll. i zer and non-I~l. an.t' material. It was determined at that t.'lme th. at' such a structure woulSd haye to be five times the size o.f the structure they have today. l. le ij. nd:lcated that they had rcce:i. veda ].etter from StafviT, dated September 3, :1976:, stating that Condi. ti. on I was modi:fi. ed to i. nclude only 'fert:E].'i. zers and nonip].ant items, and. soil co'nd.];.t:LOne'~"s potting soi.ls, stepp:lng stones~ etc. would be left outside. He stated that he knew' o:[ no n. urseries that store soil condi. t:ioners insj. de an enclosed. structure. Mr. Vidanage j ndj. cated 2th. at there were no chemica].s or ferti.- lize'rs stored. outside. It was .noted b-), Sta'~f th. at there is no copy o'.f the letter menti_oned by Mr. Vidanage i_n tlne use permit 'fil. e. Condition 5 was discussed. B'Ir~ V:i. danage explained that at th.e time the s:i. te approval was gi.xren to build a. structure, there was a ]..ocation fo'r the trash compartment. [.Ie called and asked the garage company if it was possib].e to have the containers at ~the point shown on the map, but they said they could not bring the equTi. pment into where i.t was designed, so he has moved the garage bin to'the .corner o'f the 'property and away .from t'ratTfic. He -i. ndi. cated that trees provide a screen, and i.f they were to huild a. '.large enough structure;to House this they wou].d have to cut most of the branches of two evergreens wh:ich provide a. natural barri. er. Conditi. on 4 was di. scussed. Mr: Vi_danage stated that they contacted a surfacino 'Company and were i_nfGrmed that in order 'to stripe it, they would have to resu'rface the parking lot. lie explained that they have not had the .funds to do that a~ ye~, but are p].ann:i. ng to resur'face sit. He stated tha. t th. ey could defini. te'ly l~a:i_nt some si. gns. The circulation of traffic wa.s d:i. scussed. , S:ince no one e~se appeared, Commiss:ioner Kino' moved to close the pub].i_c hearing. Comm:i_ssioner Zambetti seconded the mot:i. on , wh:i_ch. was ca. rri. ed klllarl i, IIIOuS ]_y. : P'] a.nnii~g- Commi ss ion : Pa 'e 4 M:inutes - 'Meet ing 2/25 / 8 ~1. UP-295 (cont.) Commi:ssjL'oner King suggested that' the conditions be reviewed for toclay's situation, to see :i_f the present conditions are appropr:iate. Commissioner Mon. i_a sta.~ed th. at he would have. a probIem by total].y deviating -fro~ the present condit:i. ons, and he ~elt that the condit.~ons establLshed at the time of the approval of the use': permit took into considera. tion its impact on the surrounding neighborhood. as we'll.. Condition No. :1. was discussed. :It was suggested that th. is cond:i. tion be modi'fied to al.]ow outside st0ra. ge of soi'l cond:i. tioners, potting so:i.]s, stepping stones, etc. Commissioner Scha. efer moved that Conditi. on No. ]_ be amended to read: "A].I fertilizers, ch. em:i. ca].s and items that would relate to the public h. ealth, sa.fetv and welfare sh, a].]. be stored within enclosed structures." (]ommissioner:.zambe~'ti ~seconded '{!%e"m.0~ion. Commis- sione~ Monia commented {hlat'tie ~eels the condition shpul.d be_ studied, and '.if the .Gommissi'on' 'ae'cid'eS 'to alloW' this appliddnt'~o start storing soil condi{.ioners a. nd supp].ies outsid. e, he would ]:i. ke to see some ].imitations on the quantity o.f materi. al that be'will. store. Chairman I.,aden commented th. at in th& past it has been ve'r>~ diff'i. cu].t to make some determ:inations of tlne: exa. Gt quanti. ti. es i'f the Comm:ission is not famil:kar with the business. Sh~ stated that, since i.t is a use permit, the Comm:i. ss:i. on ha.s continuous jurisd:i. ction 'tO control and review it. Commissioner Monia suggested t. ha.t an extension be a. ll.o~ved for 60 days, a.'nd the applicant can come back' wi. th the kinds of things hc needs to operate, and then Staff can look at it and determine whether o.r not th. at will. meet our ord:inan. ces and wh~ther or not we have some safety :factors. At that t:i. me the Commi. ssion cou.ld modify o'r accept it on that'basis. Comm-i. ssioner Schaefer stated th'at she had grown up i.n a family who wa.s in the 'l. an. dscapino bus:i. ness an:d she' feels she :i.s quite aware of the companies in this area. She st'a. ted: that she gives them credit for know- ing more a. bout the:if'business n:eeds. She commented that she felt the a.l~p'l. icant has been an ext'reme].y. responsi. b].e bus:i. ness person a.nd knows the needs of the community, andi she. did not feel.the Comn~i. ssion shot ld get invo'lved i.n setting quant:i.t:i. es, etc. until we see a need or reason to get i. nvo 21. ved. The vote was taken on th.e motion to. amend Condition No. '1.. The moti. on was ca. tried, with. Commissioners Monja, Bo]ger and Crowther dissenti.ng. Commissioner Crowther commented that he had received a ca:l.'l .from a con- cerned citizen related to the s::i. tuarion occurr:i. ng on Canyon View Drive, where chemical's were :i. nvolved, a. nd he feel. s there i.s concern throughout the communi. ty that our ord:inances a.'re not properly structured to take care of th.e situation and protect the public hea. Tlth and sa.:fety. l-'le stated that is p-arti. cularly concerned about' th.e way this motion was worded, because it does not say airything about that' obligation, and in this case things l:ike :tnsect'i.c:i_dc cou].d be stored in: large quantiti. es even inside :i.n such a. way th. at i.t would endanger a .neighbor's residence. He added that he · fe].t this has to be addressed a;nd tlne Commissi. on needs to det'(~':m:i. ne wlnat needs to be done in the o'rdinan:ces to cover this. Commi. ssioner Zambetti agreed., s'tat:i. ng that he :i_s in a. bt~s:i_ness that has a tremendous amount of chemica. l.'s in. it, and every six months he .i.s investi- gated in.regards to the chemic~l.s that he has on the site, by di.Eferent agencies. FIe added that ma.)~be 'the 'ordi. nance does need to address some of the th:i_ngs that exist j_n. the cQmn~unity, but we wou].d have difficulty enfo'rcino i_t Comn~:i. ssioner Crowth. er stated that one of the comments was that we didn't have an.y way of :pros:ecuting a.n individua'l or even col'leer- ing the City's expenses assoc:i.~ited. with. the circumsta. nces on Canyon View. Drive. M~. Vidanage stated that .the:i.r 2mater:i.a].s '.fall into two categories, ferti. lizers and insecticides in one. category, and soil amendn~ents in th.e other. He explained th. at all of th.e materials such as -~ertilizers and 4 - I] 1 ~:~ n n :i. n~g c o mmi s s :k o n P a g e 5 Minutes Meetj.ng 2/25/8 UP-295 (con. t.) .insecticides ~re in an enclosed. bu:i..l. ding and are subject to :i. nspect.i. on by the State and the AgriCu].tural Commi. ss:i. on. FIe added that no chemicals are stored outside of the building. Fie cla. r~.iT~ed that they do have specif:ications a.s to the use and storage o.f those ch'emica'/s. Condi. tj. on No. 3 was discussed. Comm.i. ssioner Bol. ge.r stated that he wou:[d ].j_ke to see the Sta. l::[ be given an 6pportun~.ty to work w-i. th. the appl:Lcant to see if there -i.s a way.that they will not dest~'oy an>~ trees an.d stil:l. a. ccomp].'Esh a. screening. .There ~qas a consensus to leave Con- d:i.t:i. on No. 3 as stated and ha. re the Staff work with the appl:i. cant . Condition. No. 4 was d:i. scussed. Comm:i. ss:i. oner K:i.'ng stated that he i.s no~ sure that the pav.'i. ng and stripjno of a parking lot j.$ necesse~rilv the best th:fng to d.o in a. somewhat rural a. ppear:ino' nu'rserv, where x.'o~ wOL~:Ld put a n.~.ce fence along the front. 2(Zomm'i. ssioner Bolger agreed, stat'i. ng th. at perhaps the Staff or th.e Commissi. on as a who].e should l. ook at this parking area an.d see wh. ether or not -i.t ~.s adv:i_sable to pa. ve.. lie stated th. at he wotl.]_d also he somewhat again. st any undue ha'rdship placed on a commercj_a]. venture j.n. our communj. t~.- Commissioner Zambett:i_ stated that he fel. t the striping ~.s necessary.: He stated that he feels :i.t is :i.n~por- rant tha. t people have a loacl:i. ng and.' tm'l. oading area, and there :i.s some type o.~ parallel. or d~agona. 1 parkj'ng th. ero to a].l. ow someone to know where to park. .,. Commj. ssioner Monj. a commented that l~e feZIt the Commission was miss:i.-ng the po:i_nt here. l.le commented that the ,.al~pjl. i. cant has a use permj. t because j.t i.s a busj. ness activj. ty that is j_n a resi. dent-i. al area., and he has a responsil~i].j. ty to keep this thi..ng u.p in a decent manner. [-le stated that he iFelt the stripi~g is part of j_t; and he thinks that having a good drj. vewa'y, good. c:l. ear s'Lgnage, :i.s al:l. an. :i. mportant pa'rt of th:i_s appl:i. cant compl. y:kng with th.e use pe'rm:[t that .was or:i. gj.n.a].'l.y granted, a.s we].:l. as keepi. no it i.n tiptop shape in the a'rea. where the a. ctj. v:ttv j.s l--le stated tt~at h.e would like 'to see the app'l:i. cant st'ripe, rather than to have a very 'rural. driveway. Commissioner Crowther commented th~:~t he fe].t that you have to ].ook at thj. s s'i. te. He sa:i.d that he :~'elt a, larger i~rob]en~ i_s that somet'imes plant m3terials are stored out j_n the driveway. There are large true'ks there at times and -i.t somet:i.mes get very:congested, and he l:e].t. th. at 'i.s more important than pavin. g and striping: He suggested lookj. ng at the whole situation and revj..ewing the use pei'mit. Commissioner Zambett~. moved to have Cond:it'i. on 4 to read as jt now 'is stated.. Comm:issioner Mon~a seconded the motj_on, which was car'r:i. ed, w:i. th Comm:i. ss:i. oners Bol. ger, King and. Schaefer dissenti. ng. The a. pp].j. cant stated tha't .s.:i_.xty da.'~s would be a' reasonabFle time wi. thin which to compl'y with Condi. ti. ons 3 and 4. Commissioner K':i. ng moved to accept the cond':i. tion i_n the Staff Report which states that the applj_cant h. as si. xty days in wh'i. ch to compl'y with Cond. itj. ons 3.and 4. Comm:issj. oner Zambett'i. secon. ded the mot:ton., xqhi. ch was carried unanimous'l.'y. 3. V-543 Kornel Sp'[ro, 19753 Mi. noq~m. Court, Request 17or a Vari. ance to allow the construction. o.f:a 4'1'.6 sq. ft. soZl. ar accessory struc- ture (about 3.5' h'Egh) to.mai. ntai. n a. 10' rear yard where 25' 'i.s requi red Staff commented th. at the applj. cant has submj_tted revised. site pla.'ns j. nd.:icat.i. ng a. 3 ft. rear yard, rath. er than a ].0 ft. rear yard. They stated that the item would have to:be readvertj. sed. s~.nce j.t i. ncreases the variance 'request ~ and they req~ms.ted th. at it be conti. nu. ed to the March 25, .198'1. meeting. The publ:i.c hearing was opened at 8:45 p.m. Norman Marti. n, ]2524 M:El. ler A. venue~ sta. tea that he was patti. ally responsi- 5 l.)]=a!~nimg= Go.remiss ion Pa. ge 6 'rC]~et'ing - Mi..nutes 2/25/8]: v V- 543 (cent.) b:/e for the section in tile Subdiv:i. sio~ Ordinance on accessory structures in rear 'yards, and. h.e th. ought he wo(t].d try to c'lar:i:fy tile thinking o:t! th-i.s ord:inance 'for tile Commi ssion's cons j. de-rat_ton. tie expl. ained tba. t prior to 1.969' accessory structures were allowed to be l. ocated .i.n any pl. ace in th.e rear yard. He stated that j.n the smaller zonj. ng areas this created. quite an overbear:ing ef:t:'ect upon nei_ghborj. ng yard. s. Mr. Martin stated that the Council. was getting appeal. s on rear yard. setbacks, with the threat that j.f it wasn't given, tile peop:l.e would detach the ad.d:i.t:ion from the house and make it an accessory structure, since tile def:i. niti. on of an accessory structure a.t that time was a bu:i. ld:tng 22 'ft. h-igh, wh:i. cb could contain al. 1 the rooms that a ,house Wou5Ld contain except cook:i. ng fac-i. lit ies. As a resul. t of a s:i. tuation ~.n l',i.~' neighborhood, he exp]_a. 4..ned that he was a member o:f a comm.tttee wbj_ch made suggest_i_ons to the Council. on ways to change the"ordj. nance, and the present section i.n tile Subdiv:ksion OLrdinance. is the resul. t. He -.i_ndicated that their purpose xqa. s to prevent essentj_ally add.:i. tions to houses be:i. ng bu:ilt wh:ich were very overburdening on 'neighbori. ng yards. Mr. Mart'i_n stated he would 1. j ke tile Comm:i. ssion to take this into consideration when this appl. i.'cati. on is discussed, since 'it may be thn. t there are now structures that..~tre being bui. lt,_ for example, so]_a.'r panels, that are cGnsi. derabl. y' lower than. the 6 ft. height, and the Commj. ssion may want to change the o,rdinance so that these th'i. ngs will. be al].owed. 1-]e :cbm'ni~B_tejd that patios can be put ri. ght tip to tile rear 'fence, and he d'idn't 'real. l.y see the di'ff-erence between a patio and a. st'ructt~re that is very l. ow which is not di. stuTbing to tile neigh. borhood. It was directed that this item be continued' to tile meeti. ng on March 25, .1981. Break - 8: 50 9: 0 5 p.m. 4. A-756 - Kathleen Ba'rri. e, 1.2896 P:i.e.rce Road, Single-Family Residence, I-::i. nal. Design Review Approv:al Staff gave a description of tile proposed project. They exi~l.a'i. ned that this two-story structure over 22 ft,. in he:ight is on a lot with an average slope 1. ess than 10%. There.fore, it. fa].l.s under the requirements of the urgency ordi. nance and is a noticed t3ubl. ic hearing. sta f-f i. nd:~ca. ted that it complies xqj. th three oiT the five c'r:kteria. o:f the urgency ord.i. nance. l'lowever, it wj..l. ZL create some .privacy i. mpact problems with a xqind. ow th.e second story elevation. Stafff-' indicated that a single story structure in the same vic~tnity would have the sane privacy impact. They stated that tile structure i. tsel. f WiZtl parti. a.l.l.y b21. ock the view of the property to tile northeast; however, the ord.:i.n~n'.ce :i. nd:icates that it has to be an unreasonab].'e i. nl~e'rference with views. Again, tile sdtith'ern view o-f the property to the northeast is un-imt3a-i. red; therefore, 'Sta. f:g feels that th.i.s particular proposa.'l does compl. y with Lh. ose two criteria, and they are recommend:i. ng approval.. The publ. ic hearj_ng was opened at 9:.1.2 p.m. Robert Bostedt, 21.2890 Pierce I~oa.d, expressed his opposi. tion to a 2-story house being there. He stated. that he feels this will. shad. e a sol. a.r heater wl'~ich he :i.s p.l. anning in h:Ls 'back yard. Staff stated that they di.d. a 'sh. adow ma.i~ of th:i s structure and :i_t did not impa:i.r the solar access of his property. Mr. Bostedt stated he wou'l.d l. ike to see tile engineerj'ng data on tile shadow map a.t a 'l. ater date. He also i. ndicated that quite a few months before tilere was 150-200 yards .of f:i.l. 1. brought j.n tbj_s area wilere tile house wil.'l be. lie cli. scuSsed lLh. e flood:i. ng problems onto his property -from this property. Mr. Bostedt stated. that the swal. es on the applican. t's property h. ave been fill. ed in. He cornmen. ted th. at he wou].d like some assurance when thi. s house is bUi_l't that he doesn't receive more f].ood water than he al.~eady has. Mr. Bo.4tedt stated. that h.e fee].s tl3j_s struc- ture wi21.1 unreasopa_hly interfere with h'~.~.: view and it x~'il.l. const:Ltute an unreasonabl. e~-~i_n'va. sio~;Z of privacy. I-le added that any house woul. d, but a ].-story house would be l. ess o'f a2prob]em than. a. 2-story. Mr. Bostedt PYanning Cornmiss ion ILlage 7 Mee'ting Minutes 2/25/81 A-756 (cont.) stated that th.e :f:i.]l had been dumped between the cottage and hyis yard, where the plans show the new h. ouse ~s to be located. (]hairman ]_,aden stated that she felt the Commj_ssi. o'n ha.s concerns that ca. nnot be addressed tonight,' i.e., ~he re:lat:i. onshit~ of on.e lot to another and the des:ign o.f the house. She sdggestcd that this :i. tcm t~e put on a study session, with the app'l. icant bx;inging in a site pl. an show:i. ng the surround:i. ng homes and the:it elevat:i.dn in comparison to thi. s ].and, so th. at the CommisSion can look at that 'i.n '~:;e].ationst~-il~ to.the other' property. .She stat:ed she also has some concerns about the building in genera. 1. Mr. B0stedt Commented that he had tentati. ve site apl~:rova:l. to bull. d a home in his back yard, but th. at :it had just expired. He exp'lained that the present zoni. no' does all. ow him to I~u:i. lda home and subdi. vi. de his lot MrA. Ba. rri. e, .the appl:lcant, stated that Mr. 'Bosted. t's house is qu.i_te a distance from th.:/s house that she j_~ p:l. annj_ng to bu:il.d. She st'.ated that there :i.s no fill underneath the area where the proposed build:ing will be. She exp].ain. ed that she had put in fi. ll. because she 'forrod she wa.s down in a gu'l.'l.>.' and had 'lost a:l.:l. o.f .her top so:i.]. Mrs. Barri. e exp:l.a:i_ned that 'when she t~'i.~'st..].:ivcd on this 'l. ai. nd the people 'l. iving i.n Mr. Bostedt.'s house had perpetual prol.~lems with flooding, and the're was no structure ~vh. ere 'the cotta-ges are now. She indicated that she has spent considerab].e time, el:fort and money, after bui.'I. ding the :first t~ui ld:i. ng last ),ear, to 'regra. cle Pa. rce]. B so that water drains dowl] tox~'ard the dra:i. nage Cl:i. tch at the i~ot:tom of Parcel. A. She :i. ndicated tl4a. t if this ma. tter was continued to a stud.y session on March :l_7th., she felt i.t woLll_d be too ]ate and she won't be ab'le to build it. She stated that she had not kl]Qwll she needed l)esign Review Approval and her contract w:i. th Cap Homes :i.s running out; therefore, she w:i. ll :lose her money and. h. er financ:ln.o 'l'h.e pOss.lbi].:i. tv of continuj. ng this matter ,. O' ' i ' to the meet:lng on March .1.].tl'~ was discussed. Mrs. Barr.i.e. stated that it m:i. ght he'l.p, and she w'['l]. subre.it all. :o.f the :information needed.. Con~m:lssioner Monia stated that h.e h~.id spent a long time on th:i.s si. te. He commented th. at he could not trigu're Out why there was concern about the 'shadowin. g of th:is bu:lidi. ng onto.the other p~-operty. t4owever, in li. ght of th.e fact that there :is some consideration to subdivide the next :l. ot, h.e feels the concern 'rea].ly :is more the upcom.lng home and the possible subdivision nex:t. door, 'rather than the present :i. mpact o:f the prol~osed home on the a:l. ready ex:i. sting neighbor:i. ng home. Comm:i. ssioner Moni. a stated. tha. t he was quite sa. tisified with the project a. nd would ~ove to a. ccept the recommendati. ons of the Stafi5 and approve A-756. Commiss.i_oner Zambetti stated. that he woLl].d ].j. ke to see this matter con- tinu. ed. l-le added that al..1. of the cr:i. teria :i.n the urgency ordi. nance must be met, and the nc:ighl>o'r says that this structure imt~a.:i. rs his na. tt~ra'l. v:i. ew. .Commissioner Mon:i.a .stated that he :i.~ concernbd that, :l.lT an>, individual comes forward and speaks to some ncgat:ive 'find~ rigs, we keep postpon:i_ng ev'e.ry public hearing. or design review. lie stated that he j.s sa. tis:fied tha. t there is not a'neighbor's home wi. thin 5.0-60 fee.t of th:is h. ouse. lie also indi. cated that he did not see any grading on that p'rope'rty, and there are trees in tha. t area. where the home wi:l.] go. Commissioner Mon:ia stated that he :i.s not certaj. n that all. o'f th. ese concerns mentioned are val:ld. l. le stated that he fee:Is he l~a.s enough 'info~'n~ation on d'ra:inage and topograph>, from the packet and being out on the site. Commissioner Crowther stated that he did not -Feel he has en. ough i. nforma.- tion. He commented that he persor~a.l.]y would l.i. ke to take more t:i.~ne to get additional. :information and look at j.t more careful.].y. Commi. ssioner Monia too'red to close t]~e public hearing. There was no second to the motion. It was the co'nsensus to continue the public hea'rino to March 1]_, 21.98].. 'l']'~e app].:icant was requested to submit th.e -foil. owing: - 7 - A-756 (cent.) (1) Slt:ing ot_" the su'rrounding structures, with elevations (2) topographica]. in:Eormat_i. Qn (.5) ln:t~orma. tion off the gra. dj. ng that has been done (4) in:format ~on on the drai na. ge sittm. tion. 5. l)j. scuss ion o~ Ci. rcu:l. atj. on Portion ~:f th.o Speci:/].c Plan 'for the Northwest Hil].sides; Cont:i. nued from February. ll, ]981 (8:30 p.m.) Sta. ftT noted the co~'respondence rece:i. ved. on this matter.. ]:t was also noted that on March 3, 1981 the con. suZl. tants will be present at. a study session to answer some otT the more, techn:i. ca] questions. The pul~].].c hearing was opened at 9~50 p.m. i):i_anne Bo].ger, of th.e Speclfic 'Plafi Gemini. tree, exp].a].ned that they had taken the entire Measure 'A' area, :asked the Staff to calculate the. tota.]. potent.ial number of'homes that wou:Id go in, a'nd then asked No]re ~ Associ- ates to take that numl3er, l.,.ooking ~:tt .four di-f:ferent va. ria. tj. ons of 'road patterns, and come back w:[th a map,cons:i. sting of those road patterns and the varj.ous .computations, and what the 1rapact would be :i.n terms of di:E~erent comb:i. nat:i. ons o:f roads. She stated.that the'it discuss:i. on centered pr.imar'i. ly around those number counts. The geological over].ay o-f wh. ere the 'roads would go over th.e ex:ist:i. ng geo.logy.was n. ota. vai].able then; :i.t :i.s now. She added that they had not addressed the circu].at:i. on patte~:ns th. rough the Pa~'nas d. evel. opment and through' the-McBaln 6 G.ihbs development. Comm:i ss:i. on. or Crowther stated that N'Ieasu're 'A' 're:lFers to the :Einanc:ia]. r..ksks to the City o:f maintaining streets i.n h:i_].].sj. de areas, and he asked to what extent the Committee addressed those risks and ew.lluated such thi:ngs as lands :l. ]. de ]~a. zards, slope stab:i.l_ity and costs related to the c:i. rcL~latj. on p].an. Dia. nne Bolger stated that they had addressed the who:le issue o'f the roads in terms 6f ci. rcu].ation p'r:i. maTi. l.y. There was some discuss:i. on in te'rms of gradj. n.'g and proportions o.f sl. ope, but most o.f the construction of the roads :from our pe~'spectjve was goj. ng to be taken care 'oiT hy th.e va.]'ious developers,:and then the City would.be responsible 'for the maintenan. ce once they became pul_3].lc roads. She commented that the Cone Repo~t, which discusses the :fiscal :i. mpact olT the roads for the · City, came to the Comm:i. ttee very ].a. te and a.t that tj. me d~d not have nt.nnl~er d a t a ]. n i t. Commiss:~oner Crowth. er commented that, in read:i. ng over the Cone report on the financial aspects, h.e believes the ntnnbers are not val].d on the ma:i_ntenance o.f roads in th. at area.. He explained that the Cone report addresses the fact that these st're6ts w].ll adcl ].4.~ to the t. ota'l b].anket gt'reets ]_n the City, but it a. ssume~ that the cost wou].d also on].y be increased by ].4%, and it cloesn~t properly account fo'r rea'l r].sks and .fi~ancLal cons ] derations. in. the h] ] 1 slde area. Wa].ter Cze'ropski, 12672 Arroyo d.e Arguel].o, stated that he had just ~'ece:i. ved notice o:E the meetj. ng and have not had an opportun'kty to purchase a- copy 6'f th.e Plan. He 'i. ndica. ted he wou].d. g].ve :[nput at the study sess:Lon on Tuesday. Cl'ruck 'H6ZGa?:', a 'resident o.g Kreis].er Court, asked 'for a defin:ition the proposed emergen. cy access road'. Chairman Laden stated that i.t wou].d be used only in case of a 'fire or ambul. ance need and would not be a through roa. d. She added that there wou].d be a barrier, determ:i. ned by the Fire Del~artment and othey agencies invo'Lved. StaEtT cla'rifi. ed that- there had been a. pl_an submitted on the school p'roperty :i.n that area, wh. ich is not consistent under MeasUre Commiss:i. one'r Crowthe'r noted that th.e geelog'it maps do not show th.e school property in the Measure 'A' area. :He a].so commented that the Measure 'A' - 8: Plra~nnin~d Commi. ss ion Pa '~e 9 g Meeting - Minutes 2/25/81 '~ Specifi_c P].an (cont.) : maps show the property as R-I-15,000 and. that :i.s not consistent w:itb the Genera] Plan. Sta't:,'ff ex'plaj_ne.dthat the 1974 Genera].. P].an i. ndicates that if a school :i.s not to be built i.t will go along with the surround proper- ties. Commissioner Crowther stated:that that is ne:ither consistent with Measure 'A.' or the Genera'l Plan and' i.t seems inappropriate to include th. at zon:ing :i.n. a Measure 'A' map. ~t was noted. that the geo].ogic maps are to just sb. ow the circulati'on and the geological problems, and they a. rc not in fact show:ing that that is th.e zoning that i.s go:i. ng to end up on the property. ; Mr. ::"'i.i;&hdr stated that .i.:f the plan is to have an emergency access road by the d. er[-'inition given ton:ight, then he :feels the resi. dents of Kreisler Court wou].d be acceptable to tha. t type of arrangement, rather than a through street; the>: are very concerned about Kreis'ler becoming a' through street. Wi].lem Koh].er, 2].821 Vi.a Regina, ~ta. ted that lie wou].d ].:ike a de.fi. ni. tion o:f an emergency access from the Fi.r~ Department, and also wou].d ].ike to know wh. at kind o'f barrier would be tlsed. He a'l. so asked who has the responsi. bi].i. ty' for the emergency access. Mr. Koh].er sta. ted that the people on Via Regina are very concerned. about the responsil~i_].ity :for the roads. Ile stated that topographical maps are needed, with ].ocati. ons where the proposed roads are. Cha:irman Laden stated that the map was to indicate connections and n'o-t neCes. s~'rily th.6 enginGe're.d direction of each o:t.-' those roads, but to indicate the general area that the road. wou].d come i.n and what roads would be connected by va. ri. ous means. Commissioner Crowther agreed x~ith. Mr. Kohler's comments that th:is in.tTor- mati. on is n. eeded because he thinks the risks to the Ci. ty are a 'funct:i_on of the slope on whi. cb these roads are being bui_lt. He commented that a.t th.e time of the 1974 General. Plan it was i_n. dicated that i.t was :i. mposs.i..- b].e to extend Wa. rde].l. Road because .i.t was too steep. Mr. Kohler ~.l. so stated th. at tie would ].i. ke to ask aga:i.n to get a clear ordi. nance for off-road vehicles and. :imp].ementati_on of that ordinance. Capta:i.n Sporleder, o'f .the Saratoga F:i. re Depa. rtn~ent, stated. that an emergency access 'road would be one ,'for emergent>; vehi:cles, i..e. the :f:ire department, ambulance and police vehicl. es. He exp.lained tt%at the t'ype of barri. er would bare to tie i.n' conjunction w:i. th Publi. c Works, the po].i. ce and the fire department r:fnd the type of lock that would be on that, if :in :fact there would be a lock. Captain Sporl. eder stated that the cost ot--' 'replacring the chain or barricade wou].d be the person re'lated to the .fire or the insurance company. He stated that the>, would probal~ly on'l.y cut the last 'l. ength on the cha:i.n. l~ubl'i c Works Staf'f commented that the emergency gates a. re not util. ized regul_a.r'ly and have not become a tremendous burden on the Ci_t.x.: for main- tenante. He stated that he could n'ot 'reca].l. when we ha. re bad to expend Funds 'for the rep].acen~ent o]-'. any of the gates or barri. ers. Sta.:ff added that these accesses prov:lde a.].so for emergency out', in the event of dl.sruption to the road. Ron Knapp, 2(/885 Ward. ell1. Road, stated that he was not ' spea.'ki. ng o'f:fi. cially for the Wardell Homeowners Associ. ation, but th. ought lie could express th.e conce'rns o'f some o:f. them. He stated ttna. t the concerns and probl. ems o:f the people in that area are rea.].ly the same a.s before Measure 'A', when the Circulation E].entent. was being discussed. Mr. Kna. pt~ stated that a lot of peop].e :i.n that area have not real].>, been aware of what is going on and haven't in m~iny cases studi. ed tlne ne~v plan properly. He stated that quite a :few people will xvant to speak to .the d:i.t~'ferent issues, such as traff'i.c 'f'l. ow and topographical a.n.d geo].ogi. ca'l concerns, the :fi. nancia.]_ aspects, and rights-o:f-way at the next meeti~.ng. Commissi. oner Zambetti commented that '_i.t is ve'ry important that th'e Plann- 9 ~ ; Pl..anni~g Comn~i. ss ion Page 21.0 Meeti'ng - M:inutes 2/25/821. Speci'Fj.c Plan (cont.) ing commj_'ssion get the Spec.ific P]_an to the C:ity Council and that the Council acts on this before April 25, 1.981, or the City wj. 2[1 be 'i.n a. very poor legal position in regards to not ha. vj. nga Specific Plan which was required in Measure 'A' to be p'roduced within one year. lie added. that the Speci. fic Plan Comm:i. ttee met and those meetings were public, and they were posted. :i.n different areas. Commissioner Zambett~ stated that the c:i. rcu'l. ation being discussed 'i.s ver~' simila'r to what was in the EIRs for th.e subdivisions in that a'rea. Commissioner Bo].ger pointed out that, under Section 3 of Measure 'A', it states "The City of Saratoga sh.~ll within one year from the ef:fective date o'~ this ordinance, or as soon'thereafter as feasible complete the comprehensive review .... ".. FIe stated that basically there are a. lot of issues that the Commission needs to take a. very ].ong h. ard look at, and he thinks we have the time to d.o it now and should not rush to do these th ings. Commissi. oner Za. mbe~'ti commented that he d-i_d not want to rush this matter; however, there are only certain alternatives th. at we have in circulation j.n the Northwest I'lil]sides, and he'.does not want to constantly co~tinue the .i. tem. He emphasized again th~:~t he felt the April 25th deadline j.s ve~'y important to the City -from a legal standpoint. Th.e C'i. ty Attorn. ey stated that the advice of the Special. Counsel Measure 'A.' has consi. stently been to t~?y to meet the April 25, 198_]. deadline. There is some question as to the exact meanj. ng of the port:i, on o:f Measure 'A' that Commissioner Boil. ger read. It does not set up a. definit:i. ve time schedu.l.e; it just says a.s such reasonable time thereafter, and it ;is a rather subject:lye stan. dard. 'lln an effort to avoid any con- flicts or problems that the i. ndelTini. te wording might present, we have recommended that the City Cou~cil Shoot for adoption by Apri. 1 25, 1981. Commissioner Crowther stated that he thinks it is perhaps i. mportant t0 shoot 'for that t. ar~et but he-feels it is more j. mportant to compjl. ete the comprehensive review that Measure '.'A' calls for. He stated that-he is conce'rned that there have been many hearings on the circulation plan. s in the past; th.e're h.'ave been pet'itH. ons circulated and prior dec:is:ions have been made, both in General. Plhn modi.ficatj. ons and other cases, l:i. ke Pa'rker Ranch, where it was decided2 not to put a through connecto'r road and the present tentative map o.f t~a. rker Ranch shows no connector road through. that area beca.use o:f the .input from the citizens. He added th. at he thinks that now, with the lower density, which was one o'f the key aspects of Measure 'A' we are showing more roads than we have e'ver shown before, an.d he questions wbethe'r that makes sense. Commissioner Crowth. er stated that he thi. nks that the Commission needs to do a very ca~*e:ful review of this and come to: something that is goj. ng to be more acceptable to the communi. ty. Ile a'dded that he does. not -feel. it would make that much d.i'f'ference irf we 'were a few wee'ks ].ate and d~i_d a better job. Chairman Laden stated that she trel.t a.t this point, since the City has retained legal. counsel to advise us, that the Commission would be out of order not to make every possible e'.F-fort to pass this on to the Council so they can adopt 'i.t by Ap'ri. 1 25, ]_98.]_. She stated that she understood the concerns o'f everyone. Chairman Lalden asked. t:o'r a.s much public i.'nput at this meeting as posslbl. e. She sta. ted that she thinks it is the Conun:is- sion.'s duty to take the input of th.e cj.t:i. zens to try to turn a document out that speaks to the best otC ou~ abil. ity and that of the Committee, to the City Council as the w:i11.ofl the commu'nity, and move on expeditiously a.t this poj. nt. D'i. anne Bo]ger commented that in one o-I= th.e Apl:yendices to the Speci'k'ic Plan there -ks the map that gives ~he road counts 'Cot the various al. ter- natives. She stated that she :ffee]~s a key issue for the people on Warde].l to look at is th. at, iiY you do not ~put Wardell tl~rough, and you put Comer through to the new proposed "road that runs para].lel to Pierce, the impact on the existing homes on Wa. rde]_21 is the same, if not worse. - P.]~:u~nir{g' Commission Page 11 Meeting - Minutes 2/25/81 ~ Specific P].an (cont.) Dee Ful'gham, 'representing the Warde]_1 IIomeowners Associ. a. tion, stated that there is a title conflict on upper Warde].]. She stated that they need to inform two new own. crs that the road runs across their back yard.. Sh.e indicated that they would bring all of thei..r information back at the next meeting. Mrs. Fulgham expressed the fo].].owing concerns: (1)' th.e private 'road. They need a copy Of the geological. maps to show their members; (2) the creek on lower Ward. eli; (3) traffic impa. ct. Commissioner Cro'wthe'r stated that he questio'ned serious].y whether the c:irculation l~'l.a.n that has been prepared -i.s cons:istent with Measure 'A' He noted that in the present 1974 General Plan Comer -i.s not shown as going through. Virginia Romeo, 12848 Pierce, expressed: 'her concern regard:ino' the many acc'idents on Pierce Road. and Saratoga-Sunnyv'ale. She stated that if a..l.]. these hi]ls are go:ing to be deveLl. op~d, there wi].]. be a prob]en~ on Pierce Road. 'It was pointed out to Ms. Romeo that a road has been suggested th. at runs between Mr. Eden and Prospect, ]which will. connect with. some of those roa. ds a. nd hopei~u].]y take some of the traf:fic to that direction away from Pierce. Ms. Romeo a].so stated that 'she felt there should be anotlner signa.'l. :light at Blauer. l?ubl:i.c Works Staf:t: stated th. at the City Council has recentFly referred to the General. Plan Review Committee the matter of a tra:ffj. c s:igna]. :i.n th.e v.:i. cinity o:f Pierce, Brandywi'ne and Blauer, and that wi:l. 1 be reviewed as part of th.e General P].an review. I):ianne BGlger stated that there had been n.o Specific d:i. scussion as to who might l~ui.].d the road between Mr. Eden and Prospect, or when :i.t m:ight go in.. She added that there was sollie ~a:l.'k about the design of that road be:ing part of the Water Assessment D:i. strict. Staff exp.l.a.lned. that when the Water Assessment l)istrjct was original'l.y proposed, [~n improvement district wc[s added. to j.t which. wot~]_d i~'~c].ude the road connectin. g Prospect and Mr. kEd. en. They :i.:nd:icated th. at there was an EiI:R for both. of these projects that was approved by the C:i. ty Council. It was not-ed c~Hat ~e deve].opers would pay for the construction of the road, not the ma:i. ntenance. Commissioner Crowther questj. oned -i.f':the Cj. ty could af:ford to take the r:i_s'k o.f ma:i_ntain:i. ng that road, si. nce 'i.t is on very steep la. nd and ]a. nd that is indicated as uns'tab].eC. or pofentj.~lly unstable. Com~nodore Woodford, 12755 Arroyo de ,Arguel]o, stated that' they have just moved the.re, and the:i.r p'roperty has 'a roa. d running through its back yard. IIe stated he would need some t'i. me to prepare some questi. ons an.d get some in:formation. [-le stated that he had not been told of the ro~.[d when he bought the property. Commo.d'ore Woodford stated he would like to know where the road wi].l be; how i.s 'it going to affect his property; how many people 'it will ser~ice, and what are the options if you don't put in Comer and Ward ell. He urged the Commission not to hurry through th:i.s and allow h:i.m to protect his property. Comm:Lssioner Crowther stated that Wjjl].iams .and Mocine, wtno prepared the ].974 Genera.]. Plan, at 'the public hea, rings o'n the General Plan, :ind:i. cated that Ward ell Road was too st. eep to extend. IIe stated that the Comm:i.s- s:i. on need. s to go back and reviexq th. at and find out xqhat th.e facts are. Char'l. es Gu.'i. chard, 21]_30 Wardell Road, stated that he owns a 40 :ft. ease- merit on Wardell Road; He commented .that there are six l~eop].e who have a 40 ft. easement.from the Qu:ito 'lj. ne to where Wa. rde'l.l. Road :is now. M'r. Guich. ard expll. a.i. ned ~.hat he had previously gi. ven the Commiss:i. on all of the deeds app].ying to' this 'road with the easements over :i.t. He stated that to have people say there is some question about the underlying rights people have to build that road is _[ncorrect. He subn~itted a subdivision map to the Comm i. ss ion. :l-U..:itnnj:rtg Comm-i. ssi_on Page 12 Meet'i. ng Mi. nutes 2/25/81. Spec.i..F-i c l.'ltan (cent.) Mrs. M. Ven. ator, 2].1.20 l:Varde].]. Road," s'tated that she had prev:iously submi. tted documents to the Czi. t), 'sho~,~:i. ng that this -i.s :indeed a pr-i. gate · road, a. nd ),ou do not have an), r-i. ght-.o:ll-~.vay across zi.t. She also'commented that the U.S. Geo'log.i. ca.l_ Survey' Map .has %.~'ardel. 1 Road superi. mposed.' on the sectj_ons that are so unstab.l.e the), are absol. utel), unabl. e to contazi. n a road. Al. so this map does sh. ot~, th. at there are areas that are too steep to builtd a road by the zol~.j]lg that :i_s put i.n for hi.l'ls'ide conserx~ation. Mrs. Venator asked ~hO was going to .pay for the cost of deridetuning the privat.e 'road and land. The Ci.t)TM Attorne}.' stated that he -is 'not in a position to .in.d.i. cate what the star. us of any road j_s there, and this ~i. 11. hage to be determ:i. nod. ~,Vith regards to matters o-f condemnat:Lon, .i-t! those are exre3- needed, the costs of the condemnatci. on are borne by the condemn:i. ng autho3'it.y. Be)~ond tha. t, he added, he cannot say x,~,hat woul. d be n:~'~f~:ed~;.;.-i.f.anything, ./or th.e condemna- Mrs. Ve~ator sta. ted that sl~e t~,ot~]ct. 1.:i. ke the Cit), to bear in mj. nd tha't, i.:f · i.t is to be condemned, (,'ha.t t,~oul. d. it' cost the Cj. ty; and ~,,hen you get to the U.S. Geot. ogj ca:l_ Map, how it t,,i].l j. ncl:i cate the .imposs i. l~i.].j.t'>.~ o-IT con- structing the road. She added that., j.f someho~,~' a'court ~,,oul. d condemn it and th. en turn a. ro[mcl and .force he'r to pay for the construct:i. on , how would the City allTotal to .maintain it, ~v'hen '>'ou are pay:i. ng bet~,~oen $4,000 and $S,00() :for one .foot for maintenance of h. il:lside roads. B.i:l.]. I"lei. ss, eng:i. nee'r :for Parkor l'~anch, expla. i. ned that the're ~,'as a through road, so cal.'led, J5rom Prospect Road to the rear pa.~'t of the Pa. rker Ranch, ~.,'h:i. ch ~,'as termi. nated, and had an emergency connect:i_on. on.l.y ~,j. th a gate bet~een those t~vo Do'i. nts; there ~va.s no through con. nection 'into that propert>~. Commi_ssj. oner Zambetti noted tinat there ~,as a].so a cond.:i. tjon :i.n the tenta'tive maI~ that, wj. thj. n a :fi. ve year period of t:ime, the Parker Ranch development cou:l.d turn. t.l~o road into a. through s:treet j_:f they 'found that tlne res-i. dent-.s that ~vo'rc !i. vi. ng on the Pa. rker Road ~,,antcd a through st. feet i.n ~'egards to health and sa:fet>,'. Mr. Heiss stated' t. hat they had to 'p'rovide the casement and bond, so that :i '/th.e (':i.t}' determ:ined that 'i.t ~,~a.s approl3r:i. at.e that the road be connected as a publ. i.c conncc't:i_on, that :i.t ~,,ou].d be done. Comm:lssioner C'rox,,the'r commented that the General P:l. an ~vas modified to sho~,, that road as not goi. n.g tl'~rough, j.n '1.976 or 3977, and :i.t '~ould seem :l..iko that prov':i. si. on o'f the tentati_vo map :j.s clear'ly :i. ncons.i. stent with the (;erie ral P.tan. Commj. ssioner Zambett:/sga. ted. that :i.n' ,June o:tT '1.978 the final E.I:R on Pa. rke'~:" Ranch xqas app~.'ov'ed and th. en the tentat:i. ve bt~il. cl:i ng site app'roval t.,;as grant. ed, and at both of those t:i.m'es the roads ~,'ere' d:i. scussed. I:n Oc.tober of ].978 P.]ans 2A an.d. 2B ~,ere 'rov:i.'sod, and at these'.~oet-i:ngs"j.t was men- t:i. oned man')~ ti. mes that the most' :i.mpo:rtant thing j.s thro.ugh c'i.~'cu:tation. B.il:l He:i. ss, enoineer :for the Pa'rnas Corporat'ion stated tha. t on the :i. ng there 5. s no d.:tscussj. on o:f anot:her possil3:l.e through road, an extens:i. on . of 'l.'o:]_lgate x,'esterly from its prQsent t. ermj. nt~s to P'ierce Roa. d. · An agree- merit has been reached bet~v'oen l'a. rnas Corporation. and the City to pe'rmj. t deve'i. opment ot7 that parti. cular propert)'. Parhas ag'reed to reduce the densit>. in conformance to Measure 'A' and h. ave an agreement to a.!.lok, them to proceed. One of the quest'Lens :in' that partict~:la.r process ~,,a.s whether or not th.i.s through road t¢ou'Id be ma. ae a pt~blic roacl or an emergency' connectj_on, and th.is should be reso:Lved, since' construct:i. on ~,,j.l. 1. begin j.n ,.lanet llarr:i.s, 2.1.083 Comer l:)r:i_~re, sta. tecl that the poopLie on Comer ~.~ere gory happy ~,,Lth the :i. ni. tial. plan that the>~ thought ever),bodv agreed:to, and that x,;as th.e loop concept, and that :in the:i.r mind serves the :Local. circu- 1. a'ti. on for res:i. dents of the area. Sh.e commented that they are conc. e3'ned Comer and 1-~'i. erce x,,'i ll become tho'.rough:tFares ~,'i. thout the t~;a'rdel]. connect:i. on, a. nd sh.o quest'i. oned the need :for a. tho'rough.fa're. If the dens_i.t)' i.s go'ing - .p!a..nni.'ng Commi_ss ion Page 13 Meeting Minutes - 2/25/8]. Specif_i.c Plan (cOnt.) to be .l. ower i.n the hi.l. ls, and we don.' t want commuters comzi. ng through that area., then why do we have to have through traffic, she asked. She stated. that if there is going to be Lhe north-south alternate route, then they want a,lot of di.f~erent accesses, but the key one shou].d be Wardell.. [f we can't have Wardel.l., go back to the loop concept and just serve the ]_oca.] people and not have the through tra. f~ic at al.]_. Mrs. Woodford, kI. 2755 Arroyo d.e Arguelie, stated that they h. ad not kn. own that there ~vas an easement o'n .the property xql~en they bought i.t. She stated. that she did not understand how a deadline could be reached on' the Speci. fic Plan when the owners o.~ the private road are n. ot in agreement a.s to whether they want i.t to be a l~ubli. c road or not. Comm:i. ssioner King commented tha. t tl'~e, deadline is for the Commission to move something forward to th.e City Council, not a deadline to build a road in a specific pl. ace. Chairnmn Laden stated that there has~ been some d. iscussjon ~Or of years as to the rights-of-way on :that particu].ar easement. If the City adopts thi. s plan and i.f the roa~Is arc :i.n fact designed to be con- strutted, those legal prol~lems will have to be resolved a.t that t:i. me. Dora Grens, 1.545]. Old Oak Way, expre.ssed gratitude for the findings in the Specific PZlan rega. rd:i. ng Old Oak Way and Quarry Road. She described the accidents that have hat~pened in 'that area, and an emergency road only will help prevent these accidents. She asked about the barrier, stating that in that territory there will be wide spaces an.d one road, and one barricade is not goi. n.g to d.o much good. Sh.e agreed xqith Mrs. Harris, stat:ing that i.f the through circulation is not accomplished they would prefer the loop concept. It was clarified that th.e developer will be responsj. l~le for bringing Quarry Road back to mi. nimum access standards. Marcus Peck, ].389.1. River l~a. nch Circle, stated that he was. in support of the plan prop0sedL He asked about the difference :i.n the number of homes that could have been built under the' tentati. ve map approvals and wh. at will be al. lowed under Measure 'A' :He stated he x,,as concerned about the lawsuits the City is facing, '.the legal. i. mplicati_ons, and how much tax- payers are goin. g to have.-to pay for .maybe a few ho~nes. Staff estimated that in the case of Parker Ilanch, for example, there xqas approximatel'y a. -]0% reducti. on. Commission. or Crox,;ther stated th. at h.e thinks another financial consideration i.s the lawsuits that the City faces .due to deve].opment on unstable soi 1.. Those Financial risks are possi. bly much larger, Lhe added. M'r. Peck commented th. at lne 'Celt the engineers, with all of their education and experience, can d.o a good. job i.n addressi_ng th.e geol_ogica]. problems that they a. re encountering. Commissioner C'rowther commented th. at the map shows areas of l~otenti-al landsli. di. ng where the City 'is pe'rmi~ting houses to be bui_lt. l-le stated that h.e feels the City i.s taking a ~::i. sk when they approve building permits in an area where i.t is mapped out that there is a risk. Commissioner : Schaefer commented that she [e].t :i.t is important to remember that there are different opi. n'[ons on this. Vince Carted, 22600 Mr. Eden Road, Stated that he thinks the plan is a good one and recognizes that i.t is not compl. ete. I.le commented that, to move peopl. e out, you need roads a. nd'circulati. on.. He i.ndicated that Pierce Road i.n :i. ts present condition is a dangerous road, and he feels Tollgate Road sl~oul. d bc expended. Mr. Carted di. scussed the road-in connection with the Water Assessment l):i. st'rLi. ct, sta. ti. ng that they had an 12IR, and the geo].og:i. st and engin. eer~ said :i.t was ~easil~l.e. He commented that the proposal was that th.e road. would be ~bu.i. lt by p'~i_vate funds; however, the Ci. ty Counci.'l. has never had a hearing on the project, and they have probably lost all of their opportunity to go through the bonding capabi. li.t:i. es. He '~i.~.nn:kng Cornmiss ion Page 14 Meeting Minutes 2/25/81 Speci_ fic 'Plan (cont.) stated that th.e .Comm:i. ssion shoulcl. go: 'forward with the ci. rcu]ati. on and Specifi. c F'lan; if they put it o.[f the')/wil. 1 lose all o'f the opportunities to get a. nythino done properly Mrs. Venator commented that the (]'i.t>,~ :is n. ot going to meet the:lr dea. dl_i. ne, because the people who have the pr:i. vate .property are going to issue a restraining order :if the City tr.ies to take thei. r road. Cha:krman Laden noted that the Spec:li7~ic Plan -[s, as has been stated., a plan that we need to move forward on, and: if the legal ramificatj. ons can't be resolved. and the City ever goes ahead w:ith j.t, that is' another step. Pub].i.c'Works Staf'f commented that the ownership or lack o.f it relative to the Wardel.1. Road extens:ion is no di.:f:ferent than any o:f the balance of the circu].ation plan shown there, which ti.~' a. ll across prjva. te propertj. es. Comm:issioner Crowther pointed out that over half of the total maintenance cost to the City in the 71. ast fi. ve '>.'e~rs has been on two roads in th.e C:i_ty, Bob].man Road and RedwoOd Gu].ch Road.,: both hil]_s:i. de roads j. nvo].ving erosion control. and correction of slides, so. there is ev:idence that these ki. nd of roads in the h:i. lls are costing the C~ty. Bob McBa:in, 16461 Los Gatos Blvd., stated that McBain and Gj. bbs j.s p'resently under obligation by contract and bond to the City to conti'nue the street at the present ti. me through th. cir property onto Pj. erce Road. He indicated that they have obligat'lons that lnave. been paid for and contracted with the C:i. ty to d.o. FIt was noted that tb:is :is the same 'road that Mr. I-Ieiss had l~revious].y relYerred to. , It wa.s directed that thi. s :i_tem w:i. ll. be continued to a study session on Ma. rcl'~ 5rd a.t 7:30 in the Community Center Meeting Room, and the regular meet:trig of March 11, 1981. I)ES '[GN REV ]jEW 6a.. Negati. ve 1)eclaration A- 741. ,John Markul:kn 6b. A-741 ,John Markul:i.n, 1.5200 Montalvo Road, Si'ngle-Fami..1. y Residence, Fi. nal Desi_gn Revj. ew AplTrow~l; Cont:i. nued from February 11, 1981 StZ~f'E described the proposal, stating that the 'applicant has indicated that he will conlYorm with th.e concerns of the Commi. ssi. on prev:iouslv expressed.. They noted that the app].:tcant has removed a portj. on of the 3-car garage so that the structure itself is not over a slope of 40%. l.lowever, they have :i. ndicated tha. t part of that a. rea w:i. ll be fi.l. led and a retaining wall used to support that. Staff commented that they feel there :is no adverse rimpact associated w:i th th.e structure2, and they c'oncur with the appl. icant's architect, who has sul~mi. tted a letter. to the Commiss:i. on , also addressi. ng these po:ints. Commissioner Zambetti moved to app~'ove the Negative l)ec].arat:i. on fo'r A-74].. Commiss:i. oner King seconded the motion, which was carried unan:i. mousl. y. Commissioner Zambettj. moved to approve A-74'i, per the Sta:f:f Report a.nd.. I2xhj. bj. ts "C-I.", "D-1", "E-i" and "F". Commissioner King seconded the moti. on, wh. ich was carried unanimously. 7. A-7SS R. Haas, Chester/Via Teso'ro., Lot 114, Tract S924, Single-Fami:ly Resid. ence, Fi. nal l)esign Review Approva. 1 Staff described the current proposal; 'l"hey stated. that th.e appl.icant has submitted a 'l. etter :~ndicatino--some of the modifications he wishes to make, due to the discussion he has had with. the adjacent l~roperty owner, which would further reduce the visual -kinpaCt and height of the structure. Staff stated that the'y h. ad j_nd:i. cated t.o the applican. t that he submi. t revised l?-l.~;nn'i~g Commi. ssion Page 15 Meet:i. ng Mi.:nutes - 2/25/81. A-755 (cont.) plans showi. ng these changes. Sta±'f s'tated that the st'ructu~*e as .:i.t now stands complcles with ordinance requirements, with the exception of the deck area on. the north s:i. de of the structure, which. wou].d have to be reduced or modified to co'nform with. ordinance reciuirements. Mr. ,James Burns, 2i.4506 Chester, stated that be has an addit:iona.]. concern regarding a rather .l. arge eucalyptus tree. He indi. cated th. at j_:f that could rema:i.n it would minimize some 6't~ the problems associated w:i.t.h pri- vacy. Mr. Burns d;onnhented th. at if tt~at .coul_d be done, a].ong with th.e other th.:ings mentri. oned. 'i.n Mr. Haas' lllette'r, he would approve the plan. Mr. Haas, the a. pp].ri. ca. nt, agreed to t}'~j.s. Mr. Burns di.d note, for the Comm:iss:i. on's consideration, that it was a. very large house. Comm:i. ssioner C'rowther stated· that he was troubled because it has a slope o:f over 20% and yet is is only a 41,000 sq. 'ft. lot. He asked· i.f th.e average ].ot s.i. ze in the subdi. v~.sion :~s in accordance wi. th the Suhdiv~ksion Ordina. nce. Sta'f-ff explained the site 'cGverage :ffo'rmu].a. lit ~,a.s the consensus of the Commi. ss'Eon that a swimming pool location be sh. ox~,n a.s part o'ff the design revj. ew a.l?proval. Commj_ssion. er Crowther stated that with th.e slope o't7 th'i.s s~.te and the way :i.t .[Ta. ces Chester, a ].ocat:i. on t~o~ra pool wol.11d be very d.:i..lTficu].t. He asked if there was a so'i.'Is report on th:i.s site. Mr. Haas commented that there was a. soj.'l.s report that was required as part of this subdiv:i.s'i_on. BiZI_]_ lte~ss, the engineer, stated· that Terratech di.d a soils and geotechnical :i. nvest-i_gat:i_on o]·7 the site. They dril.]ed a sei'ies o i~ boring throughout.'.the project, but he di.d not th. ink there ~,as a speci:fii. c boring on thri. s ]_nd. ivi. du~l lot. flowever, they t~ound a cons.iste~)cy. with. in the basri. c area 'w:ith the borings that the'y h.a.d and did develop a cr~terj. a for -IFoundation design. The sZlope and oradTi.'ng were discussed Comm:i. ss:i_oner Moni. a stated that he 7felt the applicant h. as done a good job in d:i. scuss:i. no' h.:i.s plans with the neighbors and try:i. ng to wo'rk and alleviate some of the concerns. He stated he l~as a problem xqith. the size o7~ these · :i~U~eLsand the impervious surface coverage. He expl. ained th~:~t if there i.s goj. ng to be a. new ordinance soon, he is not sure at thj_s parttitular tj. me :k:17 the CommTi. ssion waists to continue to approve houses o'ff this size that are essentj. a. 1].y go:i n.g to be :i_n contTl. ict w:i. th the llew ordi. na. nce that probab].y w:i. 1]. be passed wi. thj. n a short t~.me. Chairman Laden. stated that she felt the Comm:i. ssion has to approve o'r deny an app].ication on what the'y have to work with today, rather than on a possj. ble new ordj.nance. Commissioner K:i_ng commented that he has a problem with trying to deal with an issue that :is not in the ordinance we a-re dealing w:tth. l.le added that he d.j.d not fe¢~l. the a. pt~l:i. cant shou].d he held up on something that might not happefi. ' ~[t was directed that this ~.tem be co~ti. nued to the meeting on. March ].1, 1.98]., and the applicant was requested to subm~.t a plan showj. ng the loca. t;i. on of a pool. 8. A-757 - R. Ila. as, 1.4()24 Camino Barco, Si. ngle-Famil. y Residence, Final Design Revj. ew Approval Sta'ff:iZ exp'l_ajned that this project l'~a.d been to the Commiss~.on s'everal times and also to the C:i_ty Council. They noted that the applica'nt has talked to the ne~.ghhor:ing property owners and they have aoreed on th. Ti.s design and on the d. riveway a].j. gnment for this s~.te and the Ilenry property. CommisSi. oner Bolger a.s.ked ~.'E thj_s pad is j.n a fl. ood pl. ai.n area·. Staff reported th. at thj_s proposal. was revi.~wed by the l)epartn~ent o[7 Inspection Services and these pad elevations were suggested by that department for that reason, to ensure th. at the stru(zture wouZl. d not be damaged o'r not. be in a flood situation. Commi. ssioner Bolger commented that he had visited the site a'Fter a 'raTi. n and ].ooked across the street, a. nd that property's l?lanning Commission ..,.. Page 16 Meeting Minutes 2/25/81, me nts t'd't~he drainage' of ~:h'iS pa.r~.:i.~..~'~ar p>o'~z~ty"; includ'G~g';'~':'~'u"i'>e~t and cleaning out that swale area. ,, CommissiOner Monia noted that a new :. drjveway had been cut. Public Works Staff exi3].ained that the're was a gr~di. ng permit to gllow relocation of that driveway. They. stated. that part of the condition of the gubdiv:ision of the Henry prgperty and the creation of this lot'was the relocation of that driveway..:,:~.-~_C Jim Stuart stated that he had noticed that the driveway had been moved and 'it appeared that some grad'ing had taken p].ace on the property itself, away from the driveway area. He asked. :i.t~ some calculations had been done to make sure that the culvert below that new .driveway is not going to back Up on top of Mr. Balboni's' property.and create more 'problems. Public Works Staff explai.~ed that the grad:ing that has taken pla. ce is relatzi'~e to th.e driveway, They indicated that there was some clearing of brush. They added that an extension had'been'added to the existing p~_pe and. some of the drainage to that culvert area is less now than it was when it was first install. ed. Staff stated that they. did not think there is water year round in the stream, and the main channel an.d the pad · -elevations were such to preclude flooding damage to this structure j.f there was a backup in that .main chaBnel. Commissioner King moved.to a. pprove A-.757, per the Sta'~'g Report dated February 19 198]. and Exhi. bits "B", "C", "D" a.nd "E" Commissioner Sch. aefer seconded. th.e motion, which was carried, witt~ Commissioner Bolger dis sen t illg. ' 9. A-760 - Mandaric (R. Haas), Chester/Via Tesoro, l_,ot g3, Tract 5924, S:i. ngle-Family Res i. dence, Final. Design l~evi. ew Approval Staff described. the current 'proposa. i. The applicant stated. that he knows oE no plans for a pool for this site. It was the consensus of the Commis- si. on that i.t is important to include a pool location. It was noted that a tenni. s court would be inappropriate because of the Slope. 'It was directed that this.item be cbntinued to 'the meeting on March 11, ].981. "l'he applicant was requested to subm:'i.t a plan showi.ng the location o'E a swimming pool.. Commjssioner Crowth.~r noted that the overall height th. is structure is given on this pla~, ~here~s' it'was not .given on the plan for l.,ot ~14, A--757. The applic~.nt was a'lso asked to submit this infor- mation at the next meeting. COMM[I N I CA T IONS Written It was noted that the matter' of the mezzanine in the V:E1].age Square Shopping Center has been 'wn~t.h. drawn. Oral 1. City Council. 1 Report - Commissioner Crowther gave a brie'E · report on tlne City Council meeting held on February 11, 1981. A copy o'ff the minutes of tha. t meeting is on file in the (]ity Admini. stration. Office. 2. l,and Development (]ommittee - The timeframe involing tlne Land Development activities was discussed. The possib_Elity of setting up a. Subdi. vision Committee of the Commission was considered. Chairman I.,aden asked the Commiss:i. onors to consider the opt:ions and they will be discussed a.t the next meeting. 3. Chairman Laden thanked Councilpersons Jensen and Clevenger for attending th.e meeting, and the Good Gov~rm'ent Group for 'attending and serving c o f 'f e e. - 16 - l:>i~ h~i~:i_~'~ *Connn~s s j. oI~ Page .]. 7 Meeting Minutes 2/25/83. AD.JOLIRNMENT It was moved. by Commits :i. one'r Monia, secondeel ]')y Colllnliss :i older Scha. e'fer, to actj ourn the meeting. 'l"he lllot:i. on. was carrzied Ll'nanzi.~nOtlS]y, and th.e meeting was adjournc~d at '1.2:20 p.m. \ Respect:lTully submitted, RSR: cd