HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-18-1984 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DATE: Tuesday, September 18, 1984 - 7:30 p.m..
PLACE: Community Center Meeting ROom, 19655 Allendale Ave., Saratoga, CA.
TYPE: Regular Adjourned Meeting
ROUTINE ORGANIZATION
Present: Commissioners Burger, McGoldrick,.SCha'ffer and Siegfried (Commissioner Harris
arrived at 7:36 p.m.)
Absent: Commissioners Crowther and Peterson
ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
1. Daniel Heindel, 15234 Belle Court, Construction of a 6 ft. high redwood fence within
100 ft. of Saratoqa-Los Gatos Road; continued from September 12, 1984
Chairman Siegfried reopened the meeting at 7:33 p.m. on this item. He read a memorandum from
Commissioner Peterson, who was unable to be present, on the item observing that 1).a lO~12"set-
back should be required for the fence; 2) no physical problems would result; 3) a staggered
fence would look better and, 4) the new fence should be 3 or 4 feet north of the line of the
trees.
Commissioner Burger questioned the location of 'the e~i. sting posts. Mr. Shook stated they were
6 ft. from the ~ighway. Commissioner Burger indicated concern that the fence should not block
the trees or the trees taken down. She stated that she would be happy with a 10 ft. setback
for the fence, with a corner cut.
Commissioner McGoldrick stated that she had visited the site and felt the Commission should
stand firm on the 15 ft.
The applicant, Daniel Heindel, stated he just wanted to put up a fence and that he did not
understand how 15 ft. could be required given the Commission's previous decisions. After
questioning the possibility of a 10 ft. setback, he stated the area collected trash an·d,
therefore, he could not see the point of a wider setback. He felt 6 ft. was appropriate and
didn't want to go to the City Council.
Luis Pina, architect for the applicant, stated the applicant's proposed 6 ft. setback was a
happy medium and that a 15 ft. setback would be bequeathing 3,000 sq. ft. to the roadway.
Commis~·oner Harris questioned if the fence were 10 ft. back, would it be too close to the
trees? Luis Pina responded that the applicant wanted 6 ft. and that he didn't know if the
setbacks were being established for landscapingor safety. Chairman Siegfr~ed"·responded that
the setbacks were for the visual impact.
Commissioner Harris questioned the type of tree and indicated she w~uld compromise on 10 - 12
ft. to save the trees.
In response to Commissioner SChaffer's questions regarding the setback for safety in bike
lanes, Mr. Shook stated there would be greater safety with a larger setback.
The trees were determined to be 12 - 15 ft. back if the scale was accurate. Commissioner
Schaffer suggested a staggered fence, 10 - 15 ft. back, with no more than 50% of the fence
being closer than 15 ft. Mr. Heindel expressed concern over this proposal and the Commission
explained that the General Plan called for a lO0~ft. setback. Additionally, Commissioner
Siegfried pointed out that the applicant's proposed fence was very long for a straight fence
and this seemed to be a Commission concensus.
Commissioner McGoldrick told the applicant to go back and read the minutes for each one of the
former approvals to see how the situations were.different. It was also noted that the Commis-
sion had visited the roadway area recently to make their determination. Mr. Heindel stated
that chopping off 15 ft. from anyone's lot was a dangerous thing and is a lot of land value.
Commissioner McGoldrick moved to approve the fence subject to a condition that no more than
50% Of the fence be closer than 15 ft.~ Commissioner Harris seconded the motion, which was
carried 4-1, with Commissioner Burger dissenting.
F~'i~a~n~. Commission Page 2
Meeti~ng Minutes 9/18/84
Daniel Heindel. (cont.)
Chai~ma~ Siegfried noted that there would be a lO-day appeal period and that the Commission
motion was subject to interpretation by staff.
ADJOURNMENT
CommisSioner Burger moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner McGoldrick seconded the
motion, 'which was carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
Respectful ly submitted,
Secretary