HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-14-1984 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DATE: Wednesday, March 14, 198.4 7:30 p.m.
PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
ROUTINE ORGANIZATION
Roll Call
Present: Commissioners Crowther, Harris, Hlava, McGoldrick, Peterson,
Schaefer and Siegfried (Commissioner Crowther arrived at 7:37 p.m.)
Absent: None
..Minutes
Commissioner Hlava moved to waive the reading of the minutes of February 22,
1984 and approve as distributed. Commissioner Peterson seconded the motion,
which was carried, with Commissioner McGoldrick abstaining because she was
not present.
CONSENT CALENDAR·
1. SD-1364 - Allen DeMartini, Mt. Eden Road, Tentative Subdivision Approval,
17 lots, Request for One-Year Extension
2. SDR-1370 - George Day Construction Co. (Irany), Mr. Eden Road, Tentative
Building Site Approval, 1 Lot, Request for One-Year Extension
Commissioner Hlava moved to approve the items listed above on the Consent
Calendar. Commissioner McGoldrick seconded the motion, which was carried
unanimously 6-0.
PUBLIC HEAI~INGS
3. GPA-83-1-A Consideration of Draft Housing Element and Environmental
Impact Report
Staff stated that they have submitted a revised Housing Element incorporating
choices made by the City Council and Planning Commission at their study
sessions. They commented that they feel the Commission should focus on the
additional policies in the revised draft'. They noted that they have also
reduced the bulk of the Housing Element,. at the direction of the Council.
The public hearing was opened at 7:40 p.m. Since no one was present at that
time to address the 'Commission, the public hearing was continued until later
in the evening. It was reopened at 9:37' p.m. Staff discussed the changes
and the schedule for the ltousing Element.. Commissioner Schaefer commented
that the Governor's office, at the League of California Cities meeting,
suggested that any comments made by the State were advisory and should be
treated as such and not as a mandate.
Don Eagleston, 14669 Big Basin Way, expressed concern regarding the providing
of alternative housing for senior citizens and stressed the importance of
doing so. He indicated that, in conjunction with this, he is very much in
favor of retirement type communities. He suggested that the City consider
using some of the City land for these communities, particularly those near
shopping areas. He commented that, as President of the Village Association,
he would like to encourage commercial'structures with condominiums set behind,
a.s long as the condominiums are not directly on Big Basin Way, since they
would like to see that preserved for retail in the future.
Commissioner Schaefer.stated that another comment made at the League of Cali-
fornia Cities meeting was that the word "alternative" in several years may
mean manufactured housing. Therefore, anoth. er word might be considered if
the City does not mean manufactured housing.
Commissioner Crowther inquired about incorporating the City's policies on
secon~ units in ~'~.'e Hqusing Element. The City Attorney indicated that the
- 1 -
'Pi'anning Commission ......... Page 2
Meeting Minutes 3/14/84
GPA-83-1-A (cont.)
present element was drafted prior to last night's study session of the City
Council and does call for consideration and adoption of a Second Unit Ordi-
nance. The Council has now sent that ordinance back to the Commission for
further action and consideration. FIe stated that if the City Council decides
to modify the recommended ordinance they have received from the Commission,
then obviously that would require changes in the Housing Element to the extent
it refers to the Second Unit Ordinance as one means of providing lower cost
housing.. He explained that the ordinance has been referred back to the Com-
mission for the purpose of determining whether the Commission is able to
make the findings required by State law for adoption of an ordinance which
totally precludes second units throughout the City, and that will be coming
back to the Commission as soon as it can be agendized. He added that he did
advise the Council that that option had not been considered in detail by the
Commission.
Staff was' requested to get a copy of the findings from San Jose that they had
made and the basis on which they made th6Z~!~ and also copies of adopted ordi-
nances from the League of California Cities. The City Attorney clarified
that if the Commission determines that they can make the findings Staff will
certainly assist in drafting it and putting it into ordinance form; however,
he does not anticipate that Staff will be giving recommended findings to the
Commission. Discussion followed on the findings which would have to be
made and the City Attorney was asked to p.~ovid~ some."e~les of what would
be included under the categories.
It was directed that this matter be continued to a study session on March 20,
1984 and the regular meeting of March 28, 1984.
4. A-928 - Dwayne Richards, Request for Design Review Approval to construct
a split level single family residence at 14012 Palomino Way, in
the NHR Zoning District
It was directed that this item be continued to March 28, 1984.
5. A-934 - Parnas Corporation, Request for Design Review Approval to con-
struct a two-story single family residence on Saratoga Heights
Drive (Lot 10, Tract 6665), in the NHR Zoning District
Staff reported that they have reviewed the revised plan showing the floor
plan reversed and'the driveway adjusted, as suggested by the applicant at
the last meeting, and recommend approval.
The public hearing was opened at 7:35 p.m.
No one appeared to a. ddress the Commission. Commissioner Siegfried moved to
close the public hearing. Commissioner Peterson seconded the motion, which
was carried unanimously.
Commissione~ Siegfried moved to approve A-934, per the Staff Report dated
February 16, 1984 and Exhibits "B", "C" and "D". Commissioner Hlava seconded
the motion, which was carried unanimously 6-0.
6. A-936 - Pinn Brothers Construction, Request for Design Review Approval
to construct 15 single story residences on the north side of
Verde Vista 400 ft. south of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (Saratoga
Horticultural Foundation) in the R-1-12,500 Zoning District
Staff explained the proposal. It was noted that the house on Eot #5 extends
into the front yard setback and will have to be moved ~obtain a variance,
and the house on Lot #1 exceeds the floor area standard.
The public hearing was opened at 7:45 p.m.
The setbacks on Lots #2 and'#15 were discussed, and it was noted that the
applicant defined the driveway frontage as the front yard; therefore he does
now have the 25 ft. yard setback.
Commissioner Peterson inquired about the drainage from a personal standpoint,
since some of his neighbors have had some significant problems with flooding
primarily from the Horticultural Society. Staff explained the proposed
- 2 -
Planning Commission Page 3
Meeting. Minutes 3/14/84
A-936 (cont.)
drainage'system.and discussed the grading that will be done.
Commissioner Siegfried moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hlava
seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously.
Commissioner McGoldrick moved to approve A-936, per the Staff Report dated
M~rch 5, 1984 and Exhibi'ts "B" through "N", adding a condition that the home
on Lot #1 shall be no greater than 4,000 sq. ft., subject to Staff approval.
It was clarified that the condition #6 covers the home on Lot #5. Commissioner
Crowther seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously 7-0.
7a..SDR-1545 - Warren Sturla, Request for Tentative Building Site Approval
7b. V-615 - and Design Review Approval for four (4) office condominiums
7C. A-900 and Variance Approval for compact parking and a reduced side
setback at the southwest corner of Cox Avenue and Saratoga
Creek Drive in a P-A Zoning District
It was directed that this item be continued to March 28, 1984.
8a. Negative Declaration - SDR-1549 Frank Horvath
8b.SDR-1549 - Frank and Dagmar Horvath, Request for Tentative Building Site
Approval to create two (2) lots at 22122 Mt. Eden Road in the
NHR Zoning District
It was directed that this item be continued to March'28, 1984.
9. A-937 - Steve Scialabba Request for Design Review Approval to construct
a 2-story single family residence on Farr Ranch Court (at the
terminus of Farr Ranch Road) in the NHR zoning district
Commissioner Crowther abstained from the discussion and voting on this item
because of pending li.tigation. Staff described the proposal, indicating that
they were unable to make the findings and recommend denial.
Commissioner Hlava gave a Land Use Committee report, describing the lot. She
stated that they had looked at the other approved houses in the area that are
already built and a lot of them do look,like 3-story homes because they back
down the side of a hill. She noted that there was a consensus that this home
looks fine from the front but does look like a 3-story or tri-level on the
side as' you approach it. Commissioner Harris commented that there is quite
a bit of screening on the east side, so looking up from the Arroyo area it
would not be visible, whereas the Sinsley house and other homes on Parker
Ranch Road are very visible from down below 'and look very much like~3'-story·
houses. Commissioner Peterson indicated that he thinks the design offers'some
relief from the 3-story massive feeling.
The public 'hearing was opened at 8:05 p.m.
Steve Scialabba, the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. He noted
that by error.'th'e"Hom'~'~s'8% la~g'~r than he had anticipated. He discussed
two solutions to reduce it; one to shrink the existing house or to omit the
game room.
Commissioner McGoldrick moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hlava
seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously.
Commissioner Siegfried indicated that his only concern was the visibility from
the flat land looking at the home, and he does not think it is going to have
any more impact than other homes that are there. He added that the fact that
the site is 2.2 acres should be taken into account.
Commissioner Harris stated that sh~ felt this house was more interesting than
some of the Other homes in the area. She added that the most appealing feature
was the deck, and she is bothered by the fact that the Staff Report is recommend-
ing that there be no third story deck. She commented that she considers the
home more a .tri-level than a 3-story. She also indicated that she would hate
to see the applicant take off the game room because~she feels that is a big
seller and he is obviously in the business of selling houses.
Commissioner Siegfried moved to approve A-937, per Exhibits "B", "C" and "D"
and the Staff Report dated March'8, 1984, deleting Condition #3 regarding the
· PlaHning Commission Page 4
~ '~eeting Minutes .3/14/84 ~-
A-937 (cont.)
deck, and making finding #3, ExceSsive Bulk, on the basis of the eucalyptus
trees, the way ~'n which the home is se't given the topography of the site,
the fact that it will not have excessive bulk. fr'om the' areas where it is
most visible, the' architectural treatment, and the considerable setbacks
because it is a 2.2 acre site. Commis-sioner Harris seconded the motion,!.~hfch~,
was carried 6-0', with Commissioner Crowther abstaining.
10a.A-938 - Bob Bramlett, Reques't for Building Site Approval for an expan-
10b.SDR-1560 - sion greater than 50% and Design Review Approval for a 2nd
story expansion and remodel_ exceeding 3,500 sq. ft. at 14440
Oak PlaCe 'i'n th~ 'R-I-'i'0,'0'00 z'o'ning"dis't'ri'c't
Staff gave a .description of the proposal. They commented that the street
improvements are shown to be subject to a Deferred Improvement Agreement;
however, the Commission may wi'sh to consider the applicant making the improve-
ments now rather than defer them, since there are improvements on this street
immediat'ely north of this property.
Commissioner Hlava gave a Land Use Committee report, indicating that there
was no problem with the setbacks and no impact on any neighbors.
The public hearing was opened at ~:14 p.m. No one appeared to address the
Commission. Commissioner Peterson moved to close the' public hearing. Commis-
sioner Hlava seconded the motion, wh'i'ch was carried unanimously.
Commissioner McGoldrick moved to approve SDR-1560 per Exhibit "B" and A-938
per Exhibits "B", "C" and "D", and the Staff Report dated March 6, 1984.
'Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion.
Di. scussion followed on the street improvements. CommissiOner Hlava commen'ted
that the Commission needs to sit down and discuss when the Commission is
going to defer improvements and when they are going to be required. She
stated that she feels this is a case w]~ere the improvements have to be done
now and thinks that it is a logical extension down this street of some already
improved areas.
Commissioner Peterson commented that he had inspected the site and looked at
the road and felt it should be a Deferred Improvement Agreement. He stated
that he does not have any quarrel wi'th the' streets but has a fundamental
quarrel with putting in curbs and gutters.'
Commissioner McGoldrick amended her motion to delete any reference to a
Deferred Improvement Agreement for the' street impr.ovements in the Staff Report.
Commissioner Hlava accepted the amendment. Commissioner Schaefer commented
that she typically votes' against putting in pockets but thi'nks the roads out
here warrant putting in these kinds of improvements at this time.
The vote was taken on the motion, which was carried 6-1, with Commissioner
Peterson dissenting.
11. A-939 Mr. and Mrs. East, Request for Design Review Approval to construct
a 2-story, single family residence at 1214~ Parker 'Ranch Road, in
the' NHR zoning di's'tri'c't
Commissioner Crowther abstained from the discussion and voting on this item
because of pending litigation. Staff described the application. Commissioner
Hlava gave a Land Use Committee 'report, describing the lot and stating that
there was no problem with this house obstructing any view.
The public hearing was opened at 8:22 p.m.
Mrs. East addressed the window upstairs and s~ggested a stained glass window.
Commissioner McGoldrick moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hlava
seconded the motion, wh'ich was ca'rried unanimously.
Comm.issioner Peterson moved to approve A-939, per Exhibits "B", "C" and "D"
and the Staff Report dated March 6, 1984, with Condition #3 to state that a
stained glass window is an option as long as clear glass is not used. Com-
missioner McGoldrick seconded the motion, which was carried 6-0,. with Commis-
sioner Crowther abstaining.
- 4 -
Planning Commission Page 5
Meeting Minutes 3/14/84
12a. Negative Declaration - SDR-'15'61' ='Mr'. and Mrs. Levy
12b. A-940 Mr. and Mrs..Levy, Request for Building Site Approval and
12c. SDR-1561 - Design Review Approval to construct a single story resi-
dence with a 2-story garage which exceeds 6,200 sq. ft.
'at '1'9'8'00 'Gl'e'n'Una"Dr'i'Ve, in the' HCR'D' Z'o'ni'ng"Dist'ri'c't'
Staff explained the project. They stated' that the cabana requires a use
permit and they are recommending that the he'ight of the cabana be reduced
to 12 ft. when it is resubmitted for the use permit process. They added
that they have been in cont'act by phone with the County regarding their
conditions for the one portion of Glen Una on the side of'the site. Dis-
cussion followed on these conditions. Staff indicated that the County will
submit these conditions in writing within the next few days.
Commissioner Hlava gave a Land Use Committee report, describi'ng the property
and the proposed home.
The public hearing was opened at 8:36 p.m.
Mr. Levy, the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. He submitted
pictures of what is on the property now, stating that they intend to remove
all old structures. He indicated that they had shown the plans to the
neighbors. Discussion followed' on the conditions of the Staff Report rela-
tive to the widening of Glen Una. Mr. Levy stated that he feels' it is foolish
to do these improvements now when the' rest of the street is not widened and
requested that they be deferred. The impervious coverage on the site was
discussed,~-and Mr. Levy asked for a modification to the maximum allowed.
Staff commented that the Commission can grant a modification to certain
standards in the HCRD Ordinance, wi'th the proper finding.
Discussion followed on the impervious coverage. Commissioner Siegfried
commented that he is not particularly disturbed about the 'impervious coverage,
particularly since the site is 4% slope not only at the building site but
the average site overall. Commissioner Schaefer commented that the lot
is essentially slopeless, so she' does not feel the conditions for which the
Commission is looking at relati've to HCRD applies to this lot.
Commissioner Hlava agreed but commen'ted that this is the second time that
the Commission has made an exception to impervious coverage, and the other
one was a hillside lot. She stated that if the Commission wants to make
all of these exceptions, then the r~gulations should be reviewed for possible
changes. She added that she' agrees with Commissioner Siegfried's and Com-
missioner Schaefer's comments, and prob~bl'y this property should not have
been brought in as HCRD because 'it is not a hillside property. However, all
of the lots in that area are coming in as HCRD.
Commissioner McGoldrick commented that she agrees that the regulations
ought to be reviewed, but she does' not. feel that the applicant ought to suffer
because the C~mmissio~ is' dealing'~iti~ ordinances that they are not particu-
larly fond of working with.
Mr. Levy discussed the fencing and the cabana and described the rear of the
property. The attic space was addressed, and Mr. Levy stated that it was
for architectural design and he had no intention of using it for space.
The correspondence received on the 'projec't was noted. Pamela Nesbitt,
15450 Pepper Lane, referenced her letter in opposition to the project. She
stated that she feels a poor precedent is being set for the area. She
indicated that there are no one story residences in the area of that height
and a few two-stories, but they do not have this much impact. She added
that she may wish to subdivide in the near future and she would be directly
in line with this house.
Commissioner Schaefer expressed concern 'regarding the height of the cabana
and the fact that it is so close to the property line. She described the
oth.er homes in the area and their views in relation to this home. She
;~o~men~ed ~Ji'~' .tb, is. sa. me:,.de~ i. gn./~'~t's ide the ~City has 'bee'~;' C~.~ve~e'd_ ~nt:~- ·.
.!arge.~moy.ntS'of square..~Oot'hg¢'.]'She requested that4t not ever be added
onto or used for an addition, which Mr. Levy has agreed to. She added that
it should also be conditioned that they not be used ever for rental units
unless the ordinance is changed.
P~anning Commission t~· Page 6
Meeting Minutes 3/14/84 O
A-940 and SDR-1561 (cont.)
Discussion followed on the height· and size of the cabana. Staff clarified
that the cabana is not being approved tonight. They added that at the time
of the use permit for the ·cabana the design of the structure can come back
for consideration.
· Commissioner Siegfried moved to close ·the public hearing. Commissioner
Hlava seconded the motion, which was·~darried unanimously.
The City Attorney commented that if the Commission wi·shes to change the
Staff recommendation regarding impervious coverage, in-addition to making
the finding that the variation of the standard is in the interest of public
health, safety and general welfare, there ·is a set of ten specific guide-
lines and criteria. He discussed the·se and stated that if the· Commission
considers going above the 15,000 sq. ft. of impervious coverage they should be
able to justify that departure ·or modification of the standard based on one
of the specific criteria. He indicated that the Commission can deal with
this at the time of the cabana approval.
Commissioner Hlava stated that she has a problem with the height and size
of the cabana, and she does not think she would be inclined to support
anything that is in the setback. She noted that the ba·ck neighbor has an
existing house there.
Commissioner Schaefer addressed the widening of Glen Una Drive, indicating
that she feels that widening that street does not serve a good purpose.and
would create a lot of hazard. She rec~ommended that this Street should not
be widened now and should remain the· way it is. However, she feels that
possibly an asphalt or concrete berm should be there.
Staff commented that if it is the· consensus of the Commission to approve
the project with deferred improvements, they would recommend that the matter
be left open to allow Staff to take another look at what might be done now
short of full improvements and bring it back at the next meeting.
Commissioner McGoldrick moved to approve the Negative Declaration for
SDR-1561. Commissioner Crowther seconded the motion, which was carried
unanimously 7-0.
Commissioner Crowther moved to approve SDR-15·61 and A-940, per Exhibits "B"
and "C" and the Staff Report dated March 8, 1984, excluding the approval of
the cabana and making the· street improvements under· Condition II deferred
subject to review by Staff, and directing Staff to return with recommended
street improvements at the··meeting on March 28, 198·4. In addition Condition
5 shall be amended to read that fencing plans sh~ll be· presented in detail
to Staff for review and approval. Commissioner McGoldrick seconded the
motion, which was carried unanimously 7-0. Co'mmissioner Siegfried commented
that he was voting for this wi·th reservation, since he·is increasingly con-
cerned about homes of thi·s size. He added that it is a beautiful home, but
he thinks it has the size and magnitude of a house ·that is probably 10,000
sq. ft. in size.
It was noted to Commissioner Schaefer that Condition #4 covers her concern
relative to completion of the second floor.
13. A-941 - Mr. and Mrs. Penrose, Request for Design Review Approval to
construct a 2-story single family residence at 12296 Farr Ranch
Road in the NHR zon'i'ng di's'tr'ict
Commi.ssioner Crowther abstained from the discussion and voting on this item
because of pending litigation. Staff described the proposal. Commissioner
Hlava gave a Land Use Committee report, describing the site.
The public hearing was opened at 9:52 p.m.
Bud Johnson, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant has
~ndicated a desire to maintain the circular driveway if possible. He gave
a presentation on the project.
Marty Oakley, the designer, discussed the desi.g~.·as it relates to·the. appearance
of the house from the valley an~..ad~r~s's~'d'_'~h"~ ~l~'i~e.'Ij~'D'~Z~us~s~-~'l'lowed on
suggested landscaping along the ·rear of ~he home. There was a consensus that
the landscaping should be close to the·house.'
- 6 -
:~Pl~nning Commission -.. Page 7
Meeting Minutes 3/1.4/84
A-941 (cont.)
Russell Crowther, 20788 Norada Court, stated that he lives adjacent to this
site and is concerned abo.ut the items 'already addressed. In addition, he
added, he is also oppose'd to the' color of the house' and would like it changed
from a light gray to an earth ton~.
Mr. Penrose, the applicant, stated that he had no objection to changing the
color to a darker tone. He addressed the circular driveway and the land-
scaping.
Commissioner Hlava moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner' McGoldrick
seconded the motion, whfch'was carried unanimously.
After further discussion there was a consensus that a circular drivewa'y would
be allowed.
Commissioner Hlava moved to approve A-941 per Exhibits "B", "C" and "D" and
the Staff Report dated March 9, 1984, adding a condition that the applicant
'submit landscape plans for Staff review which basically accomplish some
screening and softening of the rear of the' house, with installation prior
to final occupancy, and a condition that the color of the' exterior of the
house shall be a medium tone. Commissioner Peterson seconded the motion,
which was carried 6-0, wi'th Commissioner Crowther abstaining.
14. V-631 - Core and Candice 'Bregman, Reques't for Variance Approval to allow
the construction of an 8' high, stucco fence in the front yard
(5'-6" from the front property line) in the R-I-20,000 zoning
'district"at"2'0'3'3'0 S~rat'o'.g~-Lo's Gato's Road
Staff described the proposal, recommending denial.
The public hearing w~s opened at I0:10 p.m. No one appeared to address the
Commission. Commissioner McGoldrick moved to close the public hearing. Com-
missioner Hlava seconded the motion.
Commissioner McGoldrick moved to deny V-631 per the Staff Report dated March
7, 1984. Commissioner Crowther seconded the motion, whi'ch was carried unani-
mously 7-0.
Commissioner Schaefer commented that the history of having fences along that
road, even though the noise has increased, is not a good practice and she
agrees with the Staff Report. The 'impervious coverage on the site was ques-
tioned by Commissioner Hlava. Staff commented that they felt they had not
exceeded the maximum; howe'ver, they would check the figuresi.
DESIGN REVIEW
15. A-660 Joseph Masek, 14435. Big.Basin, Modification of Design Review
Ap'p'r'ova'l';' c'ont'inue'd 'from January' 25', 198'4
It was directed that this matter be continued to March 28,. 1984.
MISCELLANEOUS
16. UP-218 - Congregation Beth David Synagogue, Discussion of violation of
condi't'io'n o'f'Us'e 'permit
Staff reported that there had been a violation of the condition in the use
permit which prohibits educational facilities, i.e. day care. They noted
that there has been a complaint from the neighbors relative to the substantial
noise on the playground. They indicated that they h.ave been in contact with
the synagogue; however, the noise'has continued. The correspondence received
from the day care school, requesting that they be allowed to continue this
use through the current school year, was noted.
The conditions of the use permit we're discussed. Chairman Schaefer commented
that the needs have changed regarding school and to stop the school at this
time of year would be very difficult. The options wer'e discussed, i.e.
removing playground equipment or moving it to anothe'r area in agreement with
the neighbors.
Michael Leitner, President of the' Board of Directors of the Yavneh Day School,
.~PI~nning commission .... Page 8
Meeting Minutes'. 3/14/84
UP-218 (cont.)
discussed their operation. He indicated that they have been in contact with
the neighbo.r5 to work out a solution. Options regarding the playground
equipment were discussed.
Bruce Farly, a neighbor, indicated he had met wi'th 'the 'president of the
synagogue, wh'o was pleasant,.bUt the"noise 'has continued'. He ~tated that
the major issue is the noise, and the only solution is not to use the
courtyard area, since that area reflects the sound toward the houses.
Discussion followed on another' area' for' the ch-ildren to use. Mr. Leitner
mentioned a huge grassy area on the' other side. He noted that it is not
enclosed or protected at this time, and possible fencing for that area was
discussed.
The City Attorney commented' that now 'there is an established violation of the
use permit, and the Commission has the power to direct Staff to suspend the
use permit immediately and discontinue it immediately. He stated that they
could direct Staff to take that action unless the' play area is relocated to a
portion that is designated wi'thin a certain period of time. He explained
the procedure that would be used' if the condition is not met.
After further discussion it was the consensus of the Commission that the. day
school operation would be a].lowed to continue until the end of the school
year, June 30, 1984, with the condition that the playground area will not be
used after Monday, March 19, 1984. Mr. Leitner inquired about a temporary
fence to be put up in the grassy area on the other side of the building by
the .parking lot. He was informed that if a fence iS built that is n'6"']Yi~h'e~
~.~h..~.n..6~f.~!within the setbacks there is no permit needed.
17. Rhett's, 14577 Big Basin Way, Request for-Addition of amplified music
and dancing use in C-'C 'zoning 'di'Stri'ct
Staff reported that Rhett's restaurant is having amplified music and dancing,
which has prompted complaints from the neighbors.and is in violation of the
zoning. Staff asked for direction as to whether the Commission would like
them to prepare a resolution for the inclusion of such uses within the zone
or whether the Commission wishes to direct the restaurant to make a more
formal request for a change in that .zoning.
Jan Wardner, Manager of Rhett's, commented that they had stopped the dancing
in the last two weeks because they did not want to be in violation. She
commented that they had purchased the business with the idea that they culd
]have dancing. She discussed their operation. Ms. Wardnet indicated that
they have.talked to the neighbors, and all of the complaints are being made
by one resident across the street in'the apartment building. She submitted
a petition in favor of the operation.
It was noted'that the ordinance would have to be changed to allow this use
as an allowed or.conditional use. Control of the operation was discussed.
Commissioner Peterson stated that he see this as a favorabl.e tenant mix for
the Village and thinks a conditional use permit is the solution for control.
Commissioner Schaefer expressed her concern about bringing in a lot of people
into the City and ?hanging the feeling of what the Village area is and what
our commercial zonzng.:areas have been. She commented that' the hours for this
type of operation are very late hours and it is adjacent presently to the
residential areas.
After discussion there was a consensus that the Commission would be willing
to consider the use but would need appropriate input. They determined that
ifRhett"s wishes to pursue the amplified music and dancing they should
apply for a formal application to amend the ordinance to allow that use, and.
if that is approved they can then apply for a use permit. The process was
discussed, which entails public hearings by both the Commission and the City
Council.
Don Eagleston stated that he sees this as a controversial issue. He stated
that very few businesses are still open at the' time of the music and dancing.
He noted that he does not think the representation on the petition which was
presented is adequate to give 'a cross-section of the neighborhood and he
would like that input. He added that he also sees a long term effect on the
Village area.
- 8 -
~Planning Commission Page 9
Meeting Minutes 3/14/84
18. UP-315 - Radoni Construction Co., Status of Use Permit at end of. 15-day
period
Staff discussed the Staff Report as to the conditions of the' use 'permit,
which lists the areas that have not been complied with. It wa's noted that
the previous motion by the Commission had included a timeframe which the
applicant had to meet. Staff noted the' correspondence Wh'ich had been sent
to the applicant regarding the use permit and also stated that they had been
iHf0'rm~d...th~f Sf'aff Was Submitting a report to the Commission at this meet-
ing.
Commissioner Hlava stated that she' fee'Is that there has been more than
adequate time in which 'to deal wi'th th.i's subject. She moved to revoke
UP-315. Commissioner McGoldrick seconded the motion, which was carried
6-1, with Commissioner Schaefer' dissenting because she would like to look
at the site again before taking action.
CO~IUNICATIONS
Oral
1. Chairman Schaefer' thanked the 'Saratoga 'News for attending the
meeting and the Good Government Group for attending and serving coffee.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting. The motion was carried
unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
~rt~.u~hoo~ed'
SeCret'ary
RSS:cd