Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-13-1982 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COmmISSION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, October 13, 1982 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, SaratOga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROUTINE ORGANIZATION Roll Call Present: Commissioners Bolger, Crowthe'r', Hlava, Monia, Nellis, Schaefer and Siegfried Absent: None Minutes It was added to the minutes of September'22, 1982 that Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion to approve A-832. Commissioner Siegfried moved, seconded by Commissioner Bolger, to waive the reading of tile minutes of September 22, 1982 and approve as amended. The moti'on'was carried, with Commissioner Crowther abstaining since he was not 'present at the meet'ing. CONSENT CALENDAR Items No. 4 and 5 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Com- missioner Siegfried moved, seconded by Commissioner Monia, to approve the balance of the items listed below. Tile motion wa's carried unanimously 7-0. 1. SDR-1396 George Bottom (Mauldin), Bohlman. Road, Tentative Building Site Approval, 1 Lot, Request for Sec'ond On'e-Year Extension 2. V-556 - Warren Jacobsen, Request for One Year Extension to construct a two- story office building to maintain a height of 26 feet wilere 20 feet is maxi'mum 3. SDR-1525 - Don Harris, 13475 Holiday, Tentative Building Site Approval 1 Lot (over' 50% expansion') Discussion followed on No. 4, 'SDR-878, Katharay, Site Modification to allow the construction of a deck on a ~iFe of over 10% in slope. Staff clarified that the deck is located about 50 feet 'above and away from the creek channel. Com- missioner Crowther moved to approve SDR-878, with the condition added that landscaping be prohibited under the deck and that any other storage of materials under the deck not be allowed because of'potential fire hazard. Commissioner Bolger seconded the moti'on, which was carried unanimously 7-0. 'Sandy Klein, 14328 Taos Drive, addressed the Commission regarding A-838, Alan Joe, Taos' Drive, Request for Design Review Modification Approval to Construct a Fence. She stated that she had delivered to Staff mater.ial on "Design Review ~'~r Planned Community Development Fencing and Landscaping", wherein it discusses the general intent of the Planned Community area and states that open space shall be maintained and that there shall'be no fencing completely around the back yard. She' indicated that she felt that it would be violating the intent of the Planned Community if the applicant were allowed to completely fence his back yard. She referenced the minutes' of the City Council meeting of June 2, 1982, in which 'it shows that four Councilmembers felt 'that the whole idea of the Planned Community needed to be dealt with if fencing were to be allowed, and that the Mayor had indicated' that the deletion of the requirements would change the concept of the 'Planned Community and that the Commission would need to survey the area and determine the recommendation. Mrs. Klein asked that this matter be continued and studied. Staff explained that there were no recorded CC&Rs for the Joes' tract, and therefore the 15% fencing restriction was dropped. They noted that the Joes had obtained a petition of virtually all of the residents of the Planned Community zone. Dr. Alan Joe addressed the Commission and spoke on behalf of the proposal. He described the numerous problems in his back yard, stating that he felt that fencing was the best solution. FIe submitted.photos illustrating some of the - 1 - Planning Commission O Page 2 Meeting Minutes 10/1.3/82 ~- A-838 (cont.) problems and also submitted a copy o=f the petition with the signatures in favor of deleting the restriction in the CC&Rs for the adjacent subdivisions. Discussion followed on the CC&Rs for the adjacent subdivisions and the pro- cedure for changing them. The D pu.t~y City Attorney stated that the only involvement that the City may have ~s if there is a provision in the CC&Rs that states that they should not be .amended without the City's consent. He added that the City can't ini=iate an amendment; the CC&Rs are between the homeowners and the homeowners association. He stated that the matter before the Commission at 'this t~me is the design review for the fence; the actual application for the fence was already ruled upon by the Commission at an earlier meeting. Mrs. Joe spoke in favor of the p~oposal, stating that she was highly aller- gic to animals and noted the problems that she had incurred~ st Jack Tevis, 19607 Kenosha Court, ated that he lived in the adjacent sub- division and they were fenced legally. He commented that the concept of · the Planned CommUnity is fine, b~t it has not worked. He added that open space means 'that it is open to d~gs, kids, horseback riders, etc. He stated that he. felt that Dr. Joe~s application should be approved, since everyone else in the area has fencing, and it would give them the oppor- tunity to secure, protect and.thereby' properly utilize their property. Mrs. Klein stated that the City ~ounCil had also recognized the fact that the Planned Community concept was not working, and that is why they had directed the Commission to study the Planned Community area if the fencing is going to be changed. Commissioner Crowther moved to a~prove A-838 per the Staff Report dated 9-30-82. Commissioner Monia seconded the' motion, wh'ich was carried unani- mously 7-0. It was determined that the Planned Community area will be studied at a later date, no late~' than Feb'ruary, and possibly along with PUBLIC HEARINGS Overlay District t h' u ablish the bounda'ries of the distr~ct (generally that area contained within Saratoga Creek, Saratog~-Sunnyvale and Saratoga-Los Gatos Roads, Oak Street and St. Charl~es' and Sixth Streets), allow mixed uses on ~r0per'ly designated l~ots .with a use permit, modifying the list of ~onditional uses' to b~e 'allowed in the district, and by allowing variations in development standards through the use permit process per Article 18 of Ordin~nce.NS-3; continued from September 22, 19'82' Chairman Schaefer' reported that t has been determined that a Specific Plan will be done instead of a Viilag. 'Overlay. The public hearing was opened at 8:00 p.m.' No one appeared to address the Commission. It was moved and seconded to close the public hearing. The motion was carried unanimously. 7. GF-342 - Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance by changing the minimum site area C-201 - allowed in the A (Agriculture) District from 5 acres to 10 acres and changing the minimum site area' per dwelling unit from 2.5 acres 'to 10 acres. The 'City proposes to rezone certain parcels in the 'Northwestern Hil,lsides' to A (Agriculture) rather than NHR (Northwes'ter'n Hillsides Residential). The parcels affected were previously zoned A (Agriculture) and are under Williamson Act contracts. Amendments ~ill' be per Article 18 of Ordinance NS-3 The publ'c hearing vas opened at 8:00: p.m. No one appeared to address the Commission. It was directed that~ thi~.s matter be continued to the meeting 8. UP-522 - a in n Turner, Requ st Zfor Use Permit Approval to allow the construction of a gas station in the C-N zoning district at the co'rner 'of 'P'.ro's~ect and' S~ratoga-Sunnyvale Road It was reported that there had previously been a split vote on this item. - 2 - ""Plann'ing Commission i Page 3 Me. eting Minutes 10/13/82 UP-522 (cont.) Warren Heid, the architect, described the proposed landscaping for Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road and various plans being considered for the rest of the site. It was determined that Condition No. 4 will .be amended to reflect t'h6..-.:area which fronts on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Mr. Heid stated that he would be bringing in plans for design review as soon as possible and also some plan -to show the landscaping to be done across the front of the property. The lightino and hours of operation of other stations in the area were discussed. Commissioner Schaefer commented that she would like the lighting shut off :b" ?' r'd:.'): o' :-so" 'p .m. Commissioner Crowther commented that he feels it is poor planning not to consider this area as a whole, and thinks it is too important an area not to try to develop a reasonable plan for the entire site. He indicated that he could not vote for this application because he feels it is inconsistent with the General Plan, and he feels that a General Plan change is needed. He added that, even though he will vote against it, he feels that the pro- posal is a significant improvement over what is now at that corner. Commissioner Bolger stated that he f~els that the 1974 General Plan and public hearings for the 1982 General ~Plan have given a good deal of thought to the fact that the gateways to the City are of great concern to the resi- dents, and he does not feel a gas station is in ]harmony with creating a distinctive gateway, especially in lj~ght of the fact that the City will be · losing all sales tax dollars from gasoline s.ales by 1987. Commissioner Siegfried moved to approve UP-522, making the findings, with the amendment to Condition No. 4 previously .noted. Commissioner Monia seconded the motion. Commissioner Hlava commented that she had not been very enthusiastic about the idea of a gas station on this corner. However, she added, she has attended the Various neighborhood group meetings in her area and they have looked at the plans. She commented that the residents indicated that they felt that this was the most landscaping they could get under any circumstances and agreed that this was the best looking plan. She stated that she would now vote for. the motion, on the basis that she feels there are very few other uses where there would be this amount of landscaping. The vote was taken on the motion to approve UP-522. The motion was carried 4-3, with Commissioners Bolger, Crowther and Schaefer dissenting. 9. V-596 - Wallace &' Beatrice Schmidt, B'ig Basin Way near 3rd Street, Grant Variance Approval to vary from parking ratio requirements in the C-C zoning district per Ordinance 'NS.-3 'and 'Art'icles il and 17 Staff noted that this application has. been' withdrawn, since the applicant has decided to continue the same use and the. variance is no longer needed. It was clarified to the applicant that they can rent the building to any retail business with the same parking ratio that the previous use had. The Commission accepted withdrawal of application V-596. 10. '.V= 59'7 '~- -. Gei~'ald' 'BU~i~.'r ,.~ :Lji~r~'. D'~iv'e 'a'~d' Mo~aivo .R_6'a~., Reque's~' "'~o~' De:~'i'gn A"1839 - 'R~xFiew and Variance Approval to construct a two-stOry single family dwelling on Lot 8, Tract 6732 near Lira Drive and Montalvo Road in the 'R-I-40,000 zoning district wh'i'ch exceeds the allowable floor area by grea't'er than '5% per Ordinance NS-3'.47 and Article 17 Staff described the proposal, noting that they were unable to make the findings and were recommending that the' variance 'and design review be denied. The public hearing was opened at 8:25~p.m. No one appeared to address the 'CommisSion. Commissioner Monia moved to table the item until later' in the agenda. Commissioner Siegfried seconded the motion, whi'ch 'was 'carried unanimously. The item was then continued at 8:55 p.m. Jerry Butler, the applicant, spoke. in.favor of the proj'ect, stating that he feels that it is ih"'c':qinplian"~ 'wi.t]~"t~hje.._~._dj'~..c_en.t~='S'.t':r~.~'cltt_~'r.e_'S""'inL. the .area. The findings wer'e discus'sed. It wa's moved and seconded' to clos'e' the 'public hearing. The motion was carried unanimously. - 3 - Pla. n~ing Commission ~ Page 4 MeEting Minute.s 10/13/82 ._ V- 59 7 and A- 839 (cont.) There was a general consensus that the findi.ngs for~ the variance could not be made. Chairman Schaefer stated that she felt th!at the' findings could be' made, since at the joint meeting of the Commissi~on and City_Counci_! the tc considered. She made 'a motion to approve V-597~ and~ A-839, making the findings, i.e., the applicant is making use of solar; taking into considera- tion the topography, the other homes in the 'area., a!nd that the economics and market dictate that a home have a garage, and that a 6500 sq. ft. home on a one acre lot is not unreasonable. .The motion die~.d for lack of a second , ~ - It was noted that the 'applicant could withdr'aw and resubmit when the ordi- nance is effective. It was determined that the Design Review Ordinance is being discussed at the~.'!.next study sesZsion and will then be heard by the Commission and City Council at 'public hearings. Commissioner Monia moved to continue this item for 60 days. Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 7-0. It was directed that it be continued to December 8, 1982. 11. A-840 - Quito-Saratoga Center, Cox AVenue and Paseo Presada, Request for Design Review Approval to construct .a 2-sto~ry office building (Building "B") = Staff explained the project· The parking re.quireme,,nts were discussed. The public hearing was opened at 8:30 p.m. to be a single story financial office., and been modified to a two-story building. Kathy Mc~oldrick 12860 Paseo Presada, stated that ishe lives across the st.reet fom the ~uilding that is adjacent to this olne, and it is a mon- strosity. She expressed her opposition to this two!-story building being built next to it. Joan Faunce 18644 Bucknall Road, sta:ted that she w!as the president of the E1 Quito Pa~k Homeowners Association.' She noted th!at their concerns were: (1') traffic through the area, (2) hei!ght 'of non-reslidential buildings in existing residential area', and (3)' type of occupant! in new buildings. She stated that they' prefer limited use, with no retail~ or commercial. Terry Griswold, 12618 Paseo Olivos, c'ommen'ted on thle cars parked in front of the buildings on Cox Avenue, and also on the tralffic flow. She expressed her concern about the safety of the children who attend the preschool. Dr. I Beebe inquired as to feedback :from the c muhi.ty · om . It was moved and seconded to close the public hearing. The motion was carried unanimously. m . ., . Discussi'on followed on the preschool operation and ,the traffic flow.. Concern was expressed' by the Commission relating to the int'ensity of the use set- [ ' backs and traffic; specifically in r~'gard to the pr,eschool. I - Renaldo Martinez, traffic engineer, reported on a t,r. affic study he had done for the applicant. He 'stated that from a traffic smtandpoint the proposed change wo'uld. be definitely favorable, since th'ere would be considerably ' I less traffic· Discussion followed on the permitted' uses in that dkstrict. Commissioner' Nellis moved to deny A-840. CommissiOner Crowther seconded the motion. The motion was carried 6-1, with Comm'issioner Schae,~er' dissenting,' stating that she would prefer that there be further discuss,~on and compromise on the issue. COMMUN I CAT IONS Written 1. Discussion followed on-a letter regarding t!~e Parker Ranch area. Possible barricades were discussed'. Staf~ noted' that there is an off-street vehicle ordinance in the City, and they indicated that they will review it and 4 F~*lanning Cornmiss ion Page Meeting Mi'nute's, '10y,1,3/-82 ~_I Written Communications (cont.) provide a copy for the Commission. 2. A letter regarding addresses on mail boxes was discussed. Staff stated that they have written letters' to determine whether the addresses are going to be changed, and the changes will then be 'accomplished. Oral 1. Discussion was held on banner signs being displayed at Park Sa'ratoga Shopping Center. 2. Attendance of the Planning Commission at meetings was discussed. COmmissioner Monia stated that he felt that the Commission should have some input into the ordinance being consid'ered by the City Council re the atten- dance of the Commission at meeting. Commissioner Hlava commented that she felt that the Commissioners made a commitment at the time they accepted the appointment. Chairman Schaefer s~ggested that the Commissioners give their thoughts on this subject to the City Council, either in writing or by attending the next meeting. 3~ Chairman Schaefer thanked the Good Government Group for attending ~.,~and'~erving coffee, and the Saratoga News for attending. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Bolger moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Monia seconded the motion, which was carried, unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Re,, pectfully submitted, /' f ~ "t ~, ~_~ Secretary RSS:cd :