HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-11-1987 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DATE: February 11, 1987- 7:00 P.M.
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
Roll Call: Present: Chairwoman Burger, Commissioners Harris, Siegfried, Guch, Pines,
Callans, Tucker
Approval of Minutes: Meeting of January 28, 1987
Commissioner Harris asked that on Page 5, forth paragraph from bottom, to read, "Questioned
the plans in front of Buy and Save." On Page 7, sixth paragraph, to read, "Mr. Heinrich
Hensiker..;" following paragraph, second senten.ce to read, "The other two story houses on
this street are less intrusive."
HARRIS/GUCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 28, 1987, AS
AMENDED. Passed 7-0.
Deletions to the Agenda:
Planner Caldwell noted the following changes:
Item 2, Exhibit A, III, 3., delete the word "leSs" to read, "but in no case more than 47 ft."
Item 4, Exhibits mislabeled; the west elevation should be labeled the north elevation.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
REPORT OF CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA:
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this Meeting was properly posted on
February 6, 1987.
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. DR-85-061 Gallo, request for design review approval to construct a 5,502 sq. ft. new
two-story single family dwelling at 20097 Mendelsohn Lane in the
R-1-20,000 zoning district.
Continued to February 25, 1987, at the request of the Applicant.
2. SD-86-009 Woolworth Construction, request for tentative map approval for a 3-lot
subdivision on a 1.48 acre site located at 13095 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. in
the R-1-12,500 zoning district.
3. UP-86-003 Gera, request for Conditional use pem~it approval to allow construction of a
784 sq. ft. cabaria that will be 16 ft. in height and located 22 ft. from the rear
property line at 19136 Springbro. ok Ln., in the R-1-40,000 zoning district.
4. DR-86-058 Viale, request for design review approval of a new 4,521 sq. ft. two-story
single family home at 12721 Star Ridge Ct. in the NHR zoning district.
5. SD-86-010 Trapani, request for tentative map approval for a 2-lot subdivision of a 2.69
acre site located at 15230 Sobey Rd. in the R-1-40,000 zoning district.
Commissioner Tucker asked that Item 3 be withdrawn from Consent Calendar.
Mr. Steve Miller asked that Item 2 be withdrawn from Consent Calendar.
Chairwoman Burger noted Item 1 had been continued to the Meeting of February 25, 1987.
HARRIS/SIEGFRIED MOVED APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR. Passed 7-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 2
FEBRUARY 11, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR; Continued
2. SD-86-009 Woolworth Construction, request for tentative map approval for a 3-lot
subdivision on a 1.48 acre site located at 13095 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. in
the R-1-12,500 zoning district."
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to Planning Commission, February 11, 1987.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:07 P.M. ;
Mr. Steve Miller stated that he prepared the Tentative Map for Woolworth Construction and
asked that a deferred improvement agreement be 'considered (Exhibi[ A, 4. c.).
HARRIS/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:15 P.M.
Passed 7-0.
In response to Commissioner Harris' comment, the City Attorney concurred that if there were
no substantial development remaining, it was unlikely that a deferrat would occur unless the
City would adopt such a policy, underground the 'entire street at some future date and
advancing the money to do so. Commissioner Siegfried noted that appearance of the street
would not be changed by such an agreement. Commissioner Harris stated that she was
favorable to a deferred improvement agreement in accord with other decisions made by the
Commission.
Planner Caldwell stated that Exhibit A, 4., c., should read, "Enter into a deferred improvement
agreement to underground existing overhead utilities."
HARRIS/PINES MOVED APPROVAL OF SD-86-009 WITH EXHIBIT A. 4. C., TO
READ, "ENTER INTO A DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT TO UNDER-
GROUND EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES." Passed 7-0.
3. UP-86-003 Gera, request for Conditional use permit approval to allow construction of a
784 sq. ft. cabana that will be 16 ft. in height and located 22 ft. from the rear
property line at 19136 Springbrook Ln., in the R-1-40,000 zoning district.
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to Planning Commission, February 11, 1987.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:15 P.M.
Commissioner Tucker asked Mr. Marko Gera, Applicant, whether moving the cabana forward
13 ft. (toward the columns shown on the site plan) had been considered. The Applicant asked
that the architect for the project be consulted; since the architect was unavailable until 7:30 P.M.
the Public Hearing was continued until that time.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
6. SD-86-011 Ng, request for building site and. design review approval of plans to construct
DR-86-070 a 1,927 sq.ft. two-story addition '.to an existing one-story single family
residence at 20602 Carniel Ave. :in the R-1-12,500 zoning diswict.
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission, February 11, 1987.
Commissioner Tucker reported on the site visit.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:20 P.M.
Mr. Edward Ng, Applicant, stated that he has a family of five and that the original house was
poorly designed. Many revisions were considered and rejected by the applicant and the
architect; building a second story addition to the house seemed to be the only workable
solution. Consideration was given to minimizing ·the impact of the addition on neighbors; the
Applicant has meet with his neighbors to discuss the situation.
Mr. Edwin O'Farriell, Architect, stated that the design submitted was an attempt to meet the
needs of this family within the zoning ordinances .of the City. He reviewed Planning
Department files of other applications submitted and noted the inconsistency of approval given
to other two story homes.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 3
FEBRUARY 11, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Mr. O'Farriell reviewed the floor plan of the existing house, the proposed addition and asked
for consideration of the needs of this family for additional bedrooms. Efforts were made to
minimize the impact of the second story additioni i.e., the front elevation was not as wide as
the depth and the addition was placed to the center of the house. In response to concerns of a
neighbor to the east, he suggested that a solar access plan could be worked out.
Mr. O'Farriell noted Staff Analysis, page 45, thati comments made in the first paragraph were
somewhat contradictory; in the third paragraph, he noted that the allowed square footage was
actually less than allowed square footage in the R-l-10,000 and thus, the applicant was being
penalized for being in a higher zoning district. Commissioner Siegfried noted Commissioner's
increasing concerns regarding the size and bulk of houses; past guidelines may not serve for
the present. Mr. O'Farriell asked the Commission to approve the Application and noted that
all requirements had been met by the Applicant. ':
In response to Commissioner Harris' question regarding reduction of the perception of bulk by
stepping back the addition, Mr. O'Farriell noted that the second story was already moved back;
further stepping back would increase the height of the roof elevation.
Mr. Victor Lam, 20510 Carniel Ave., Saratoga, Was favorable to the proposed Application.
Mr. Kun-Sun Fine, 19870 Lanark Ln., Saratoga,'was favorable to the proposed Application;
he noted that not allowing improvements on homes would discourage young families from
moving into the area.
Mr. Mark Miller, 11840 Brookridge Dr., Saratoga, noted that residents of the area were trying
to improve their homes.
HARRIS/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:44 P.M.
Passed 7-0.
Commissioner Harris noted from a site visit, her concern that the proposed addition would
appear large due to size of the lot; however, she was not opposed to the proposed design.
Commissioner Pines noted that the Commission would receive similar requests for second
story additions and asked that a policy decision be made on this question. He concurred with
Commissioner Harris' comments and suggested a reduction of square footage in the second
story area. With such a modification in size, he would be favorable to the requested second
story addition to this house.
Commissioner Siegfried concurred that the proposed addition was too large to be
accommodated; however, he was favorable to a smaller second story addition to the house.
Commissioner Callans concurred and added that the height of the roof line added to the
perception of bulk.
Planning Director Hsia suggested this Application be referred to a study session.
Commissioner Guch noted that the plan submitted was workable with modifications removing
bulk from the front of the house; she favored consideration of this Application at study session.
Mr. Ng was agreeable to this suggestion. :
..Consensus reached to Continue this Application to March 25, 198~, Planning Commission
Meeting with a study session to be held on March 3. Commissioner Pines commended the
Applicant for consideration given to neighbors and the impact on the neighborhood.
Chairwoman Burger summarized that the CommiSsion would be looking for a reduction in size
of the house and a reduction in the perception of bulk of the second story.
Consideration of Item 3, UP-86-003 resumed.
Mr. Daryl Fazekas, Architect, responded to Commissioner Tucker's question and stated that he
was agreeable to moving the proposed cabana forward toward the pool 13 ft.
GUCHTSIEGFRIED MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:55 P.M.
Passed 7-0.
TUCKER/PINES MOVED APPROVAL OF UP-'86-003 ADDING A CONDITION THAT
THE CABANA BE MOVED 13 FT. FORWARD TOWARD THE POOL. Passed 7-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 4
FEBRUARY 11, 1987
MISCELLANEOUS:
1. Joint Meeting with City Council on March 24, 1987 - Discussion of topics
Planning Director Hsia asked the Commission to 'submit topics of discussion for consideration
at the Joint Meeting with the City Council. TopiCs suggested:
- Purpose and extent of study sessions in dealing with Applications
- Fee schedule for Applications which were denied
- City's position on second-story additions
- City's philosophy in allowing second story additions
- Development guidelines for small and/or irregular legal lots of record
Chairwoman Burger asked Commissioners to submit additional topics for discussion to the
Planning Director in the coming week.
2. AZO-87-001-Discussion of proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance concerning
legalization of certain existing iecond units.
The City Attorney presented the proposed amendment to the Second Unit Ordinance and an
accompanying Memorandum, dated January 28, '1987. In summary, he stated this was an
approach to second units which were legally constructed, pursuant to a building permit or
where no permit had been required; he clarified that they would be known as "structures" and
cited the recent Batson application as an example.'
If these structures comply with current, applicable Codes, standards contained in the proposed
amendment would be applied; standards of the Second Unit Ordinance would no longer apply.
Use Permits would be authorized at an administrative level by Staff; Notice would be given
only to adjacent property owners and opportunity. given for neighbors to fie a protest or
request a Public Hearing. Hearings would be conducted by the Planning Director and any
appeal would be addressed directly to the City COuncil. A Public Heating on the proposed
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance will be held at the February 25, 1987, Meeting of the
Planning Commission.
The City Attorney stated that the Council voiced Concerns regarding:
Process of notification of neighbors be retained
Consideration of a reduced fee structure for applicants; 'calculation of fees to cover expense
of Staff time only :
In response to Commissioner Siegfried's comments, the City Attorney reiterated the
philosophy that since these structures were initially legal, the City's concern at this time was
that these structures be safe and fit for occupancy.. In response to Commissioner Tucker's
comment that obtaining a Building Permit did not automatically imply that the structure had
been built according to Code unless final approval had been granted, he stated that the burden
of proof was on the applicant since the City could. not, in many cases, establish that the
structures were lawfully constructed. The Commissioner stated that she was not in favor of
lowering building standards nor was she favorable to a reduction in the amount of the
application fee. Commissioner Harris commented that neighbors may be reluctant to file
complaint. Commissioner Pines noted the conflicting message; on the one hand, encouraging
property owners to apply for legalization of these Structures and on the other, the denial of such
approval by the Commission and/or the Council. Commissioner Harris objected to the
elimination of the age requirement, which was the:only redeeming feature of allowing second
units. :
3. Quality of Darkness Report
Chairwoman Burger noted that Commissioners Harris, Guch, Tucker, Planning Director Hsia
and Planner Caldwell accompanied her on a quality of darkness land use visit from 6:00 - 6:45
P.M. Use of landscape lighting was viewed in response to complaints on the brightness of
these lights; of particular concern was the use of a~c lighting. The lighting district of Sara Hills
was also viewed.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 5
FEBRUARY 11, 1987
COMMUNICATIONS:
Written:
1. Minutes of Heritage Preservation Commission, January 21, 1987 - Noted and filed.
2. Communication from the City Council - Noted and filed.
3. Mr. Michael Layne - Noted and filed.
Oral by Commission: City Council Report
Commissioner Tucker reported on the City Council Meeting of February 4, 1987.
AD.IOURNME1NT;
The meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:26 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,