Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-25-1983 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, May 25, 1983 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, Mc Goldrick, Nellis, Siegfried and Schaefer. Commissioner Crowther arrlVed'~.~t 7~'p'.m.. Absent: None Minutes The following changes were made to the minutes of May 11, 1983: On page 4, second paragraph under A-869, "Commissioner Hlava noted 'that in the area where you'would want to put an addition they already have a spa installed and a raised deck." The spelling" of Harvey Sanden's name was noted. Commissioner MCGQldrick moved, seconded by Commissioner H]ava, to waive the reading of the minutes. of May 11, 1983 and approve as amended, 'E~e motion was carried, with CommisSioner Siegfried abstaining and Commissioner Bolger abstaining on the approval of the section of the minutes after the discussion and voting oD SD-1512, since he left the meeting at that time. Commission'er Hlava moved to approve the minutes of May 11, 1983 as amended. Motion carried ~-0. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. SDR-1259 J. Politi, Request for One-Y,~ar Extension of Improvement A~.~e.e.ment 2. Jieh Huang, 15040 E1 Q~ito ~ay, "site Modification Approval to construct a single sto'cy addition on a site of over 10% in slope". 3. Tom Elston, 14355 Quito Road, "Site Modification ApprovaI to construct a pool on a site of over 10% in slope".. Commissioner Nellis moved to approve the ±tems on.the'Consent calendar. Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion.. Motion carried 6-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. GPA-83-1-A Consideration of Draft Housing Element of the City of Saratoga and Environmental Impact Repor'~; con:tinued from April 27, 1983 Commisssioner Schaefer noted that a~ the study session last night, it was decided to continue the Draft Housing Element to the next Study Session which is June 14rh and to JUne 22, 1983 for Put, lic Hearing. 5. A-875 Michael Layne, Lot 1, Tract 6632, r.~on.ta[vo Rcad (near entrance to Villa Montalvo), Request for Design iReview Approval to construct a ~w'o'- story single family dwelling in ~he R-I-40,000 zoning dis'trict; continued from May 11,_1.9S3 This item was delayed until the end of the meeting, at the request of the applicant ~.ko ha~] another commitment. The public hearing was" opened at 9:00 p.m. At that time the applicant had not arrived and the neighbors agreed to give their public testimony at the next meeting. It was directed that this matter be continued to June 8, 1983. : 6a A-878 - Joseph and Patricia Bailey, 12861 Foothill Lane (near Pierce Road), 6b V-607 - Request for Variance and Design Review Approval to construct a struc~ ture over 22' in height which is less than 10' from an existing structure in the R-I-40,000 zbning district; continued from May 11, 1983 Staff sta~ed .the application·;~as for Variance and Design Review where the accessory structure ·is closer to 4' rather than 10' Staff reviewed the appli- cation and is able to make the findings,··hecause the site is heavily wooded and landscaped. The structure will also have variable impact on the land on which it is located. 1 ~plan~i. ng Commission Meeting Minutes 5/25/83 page 2 A-878 & V-607 continued Commissioner Nellis commented that the applicant is going to pu_t on an a.d_dition, basically for the reason of putting in solar energy and:t-'H~e'were.pik~,~.,i~jcO_n,j4unc-! tion with this to modernize two bathrooms, add a laundry room and to expand the kitchen. Commissioner Nellis also stated that it looked as if the only issue to address would be ti~e height of the structure. . Fie also stated-that the only neighbor that it would. affect would be the neighbor t6 the north:..' , .'Th'~s neighbor had signed a_'. statement saying that he approved of the applicati0ni M~:'s. Bailey stated that the room was to .be a solarium. Als'o st~£j. ng_.' ~ha_t for the sun to be effective it would need to be o~'~li~'~'.'~r~'icUlar height'. ''~ .~.l)e · s-~'j~i.F'~'~ht'~' X~oUld' ~h-en 'BET' ~'f "th~ 'tOp' '0.f' the' '~'~'~"~'~' "'co lieCt~'rs Commissioner Nellis mo~ed to approve A-878 and V-607 per the conditions of the S~taff Report dated:'M~y'_3; 1983 and Exhi'bits "B and C". Commissioner Bolger seconded the motion, which was carried 7-0. 7. V-608 Mr. and Mrs. Alberto, 20036 .Charters Court, Request for Variance Approval to construct an addition which maintains a 25' rear yard setback where 35' is required in the R-1-12,500 zoning district (near Charters Avenue); continued from May 11, 1983 Staff noted that this application was continued because of the 2-2 split vote. It was noted'that this was a one-story addition to a two story structure and does encroach into the rear. setback. The' ': setback iS 2.~ ? . where 35 ' is required.. However, staff ~_o~ed. tnb~_: j.~j-i~ Was _hOt'~a'..~9_.~.~,v.':.~..muc.t..u.r~:,...:add~,~g _to tile :st.ruC~ure would only need a 25' setback' ahd'-'.it.wou~d me.e.t the setba.C.k....r. equiremen. r.~. Comii'ssioner .McGoldrick 'asked if Staff had access to the May 18, 1983 letter from American Design and Engineering and if they agreed with it. Staff noted that"'.. they had access to the letter and that they were in agreement with it. Commissioner Hlava noted that the Land Use Committee had been out to the site and because of the shape of the 'ya-~d it seemed almost impossible to add to the front of the house and since the wider part of the lot was at the garage side of the house it seemed unlikely that a pets. on. would add to the garage si. nce'.:: it would b~.-_'_'~ep~Tat.ed from t'h~.-rest of ~he r_e. Siae~ce. The public hearing was opened at 7:46 p.m. Bob Alberto, addressed the issue regarding height saying that he would be willing to sign a statement to the effect that they would not build a second story on the addition. He also said that they had a signed petition from a majority o'f their neighbors saying they were in agreement with the variance. The City .Attorney addressed the issue regarding height, saying that it would be hard to limit the signed statement to say the app.~icant would not be able to build a second story. It should state a s.pecific h'e:i_ght r'eS-~r-..i.Tcti'on and',p'r_~.,c_..lu~de_... ~.".ge~jB'_nd'U..~"~O~""4.f'live.abi'6~ljace'l"_ Itl.'WSuld"t-hen. be_ reco'fded at th.e County Re.-.:-.;-,-..--. "corders Office and would resemble CO & R's. Commissioner McGoldrick moved to approve the Variance per the 14' height re- striction::.,.~n-d the conditions of the Staff Report dated May 3, 1983 and Exhibits "B and C". Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 7-0. The City Attorney noted the name of the 'document be called a Development Re-~"-'..'.'. striction. 8. 'A-873 - Pinn Brother Construction, 14675 Aloha Avenue (near Forrest Hills) · '- Request for Design Review Approval to construct a single story family dwelling in the R-l-15,000 zoning district. 9. A-874 - Pinn Brother Construction, 14703 .Aloha Avenue (near Forre'st' Hills) 'Request for Design Review Approval to construct a single story family dwelling in the R-l-15,000 zoning district It was suggested that these two items be discussed together. Staff noted that both applications~.h..'~9~.a~" height of 23½ feet instead'~ of the" .i. required 22 feet. The 'public hearing was opened at 7:55 p.m. Planning Commission Meet~'~g Minutes 5/25/83 page 3 A-873 & A-874 continued C6mmissioner Mc Goldrick moved to approve A-873 for Design Review per the Staff Report dated May 17, 1983 and Exhibits "B and C". Motion was seconded by Commissioner Hlava and carried 7-0. .~kam:i,j. sS~o_n_~7~T..'~i~Go:~ ~l-r ic-.-k...move d .t,0' .~.pp..r_0,~e A r_.8:7- 4 for-_~.e~_~:,i:.~i ~w.--p6jr ~h6-.- S-t af.["- '.Ileport dated May '18'.', 1983 and Commissi. one~ Hlava and Car'ri'e'd ?-'0. ' ......' .... 10. A-876 - Clay' Thomas Construction, Lot ~1, Tract 6454 (Chester Avenue near " .....' '" "' :~":'~'~;~': ~'FS-t'~ "~H'~:i~.':-~i:l'~,."dweilin-~'-,iy~ th~ "R/'15'4'5,00 zoning'~'is[rict. Staff noted this was for Design Review Approval of a two story structure. This does meet the standards and criteria of the Design Review Ordinance. The height is 27 feet where 26 feet is reouired-.:for 'a pub].ic hearing. 'Staff feels there is' some ,~fi~acy lmpac~ but float' thi'~ C~n"be'~figa{ea.:5~C,'landsaaping.' '. Staff recommen'ds approval.. It was noted that this project is to be done in conjunction with the parcel next to it. There will be a common roadway which will be constructed. The".~ublic"t~earing was opened at 7: 59 p.m. Commissioner Nellis moved to approve A-8~6 per the Staff Report dated May 17, 1983 and Exhibits "B-and C' :' Commissioner Bolger seconded the motion, it was carried 7-0. 11. A-877 - Paul Masson Winery, 13150 Saratoga Avenue (south of Cox Avenue), Request for Design Review Approval for landscaping in the Limited Industrial District. Staff noted that there is lighting within the confines of the gardens and there may'-need' to be some limitations on the lighting but recommends approval. The' 9ublic'.'-Hearing was opened at 8: 00 Mr. C. H. Johnson addressed the Planning.Commission and stated they wanted to replace the pool and sculpture which 'is in front, facing Saratoga Avenue. He also noted that they would like to turn this into a wine and cheese tasting area where people can mingle and bus loads of tourists can meet. It'.was also noted the lighting is only 24 V ].ighting. Mr. Dunkley Murrey, Architect, who is assisting in the project stated that the lighting was also for security reasons. ~emb6rs.~of .the-.Com~issi'on :were 'wonde'r'i. ng jfi~t"'how high the poles would be for the lighting. staff noted the lighting near the entrance would be 5 or 6 feet above the berm. Commissioner Crowther suggested a height limit of 5 feet from the landscaping. Commissioner Schaefer suggested a time 1.i. mi.t-for the lighting of 9:30 p.m. Commissioner Crowther moved to approve Design Review Application A-877 per the Staff Report dated May 17, 1983 and Exhibit "B" with the ..addit~.onal conditions: 1) L~.ghtjn~ on "tl't'e 'wa'I~: steal 1 "be"'ffo' -not Off"ttia" X~aiX~':-.s;H.~ ]" "h'6'~"'exceed 6 -'feet"; ana" 2) ~S'7'.l.'~gtit i~g in.-this ' a~p. 1 icat-'ioh'- "' i.s--ai-I~i;~'a"7z/f~'~=9'-fB'o'rp;'Hi'2'- The too'lion was seconded by Commissioner Hlava. The motion wa~"'carri. ed unanimously 7-0. 12a - Negative Declaration - SDR-1538 - Quito Village Office Center 12b SDR-1538 - Quito Village Office Center, Cox Avenue and Paseo Presada, Request for Tentative Subdivision i~p. prOval. for a 2-1ot subS' "..' division for a site in the ..~_L~' z_o_nipg_ .d.i.s.tr_ic.t ......... Staff noted the applicant requested Tentative Building Site Approval in order to split an existing lot into two lots, to allow d~f.ferent ownership of two buildings on the site. Also noted was the common joint 'usage of the parking area. Commissioner McGoldrick discussed the 90 parkin~ snaces One of the neighbors noted the sign on Cox that is to prohibi't vehicles 'from exiting the driveway and from turning left onto Paseo Presada. It was also noted that' this sig.n is. quite frequently down ;.. 'The n'~ighbor a~o not'ed.'.~h'e'.~raffic'was l~e~vv a'n~l 'many "cars we're_ speeding'. 3 P1 anning Commission Meeting Mintues 5/2.5/83 page 4 SDR-1538 continued Russ Swanson noted the traffic on Cox and the !~7,~te'~-,he'~'fin'aS in his'. y:.a~d.~_.... from the shopping center. He also sugges'ted the possi'~'ility of traffic re- routing of heavy commercial vehicles. Staff noted that traffic re-routing would only cause problems on other nearby. streets, stating also that it would take considerable time to study this. It was decided to bring the traffic pro~lem r~garding d. iverting commercial · ..~-]Y..~=.~.l.~e.s to a study session sometime in the fall with the Owen Property. Commissioner Crowther had some questions .regarding parcel "B" and the lot split and whether it would be affecting the square foot age. Staff stated,. none of the shown driveway area overlaps the location of the building in the present plan.. The current design review approval would remain the same even though there is a lot split on "top of it. HOward Shel=don-spoke for the owner regarding the application,-~eek'~H'~k. a minor two lot subdivision to facilitate the sale of the office buildings. The joint access and parking agreement "]~=a~e'. a~'F~ad~. b~'~ff~' ~g'r~'d'=t'o'B'~-' the persons purchasing the building and will be submitted to the City Attorney. It was noted that there was a problem in 'maintaining the sign referred to ~ item ~'3~ in the memo from Staff dated November 18, 1980, but it was now= re-erected and in place. The island is constructed in accordance with plans approved by the City. All items in the a~..6~' memo have been taken care of at this time. Commissioner Schaefer suggested there be some sort of time frame for putting the sign back up if it should go down again. The City Attorney suggested a landscape maintenance agreement. Mr. Sheldon stated there would be a ~n~sca~e and sign maintenance agreement with the second building. Commissioner Crowther asked about the increase of parking spaces form 90 to 103. It was noted by Staff, that in actuality there are more parking spaces .th~.~ is required of the parking restriction. The excess parking spaces are going to Parcel A. The City Attorney noted that for clarification SDR-1538 does not supersede SDR- 1472 and any conditions of the original site approval still remain in effect. SDR-1538 related o~jy to the lot split and it does not modify, revoke or amend any of the '~a.rl~er .condi'F~.ons. CommissiOner Hlava._~moved to approve SDR-1538 with the'La~l~ition of · '.~,.f~.]i,.i.a~a~tH~t a~]. 6.~,~'d!.tiOn~""'z:a'S"set y6~ft~ i.n'..SnR-1472 remain in.-.fu!]. force.and :-ef.fe'~t.-...Th& motion was seconded by Commissionef 'Siegfried and 'Was carried 7-0.' Item.'~." VII-F of-'the'[:Permit Review Conditions in the staff report were changed from item VI, noting there were two item VI's .in the staff'.report. 13. V-609 Ralph Renna, 1S041 Sobey Road (near Sperry Lane), request for Variance Approval to construct a masonS"' wall over 6 feet in height in the R-i-40,000 zoning 'diStrict It was directed that this matter be continued to June 8, 1983, at the request of the appl icant. Oral 1. Commissioner Mc6oldrick '~ve. a brief report from the City Council meeting. 2. It was noted the study sessions would be returning to the first and third Wednesdays of the month. "dtV~-~n'~".Schaefer thanked the Saratoga News for attending', and the Good Government Group for serving coffee. ....... ~_.... Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 5/25/83 ~v page 5 ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Crowther moved, seconded by'Commissioner Bolger, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at' 9:05 p.m. ', Re'spe:ctful'ly submitted, Secretary RSS:bjc