Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-12-1987 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: August 12, 1987 - 7:00 P.M. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Roll Call: Present: Chairwoman Harris, Commissioners Burger, Tucker, Clay Absent: Commissioners Guch, Siegfried Approval of Minutes: Meeting of July 22, 1987 Commissioner Burger requested that on Page 5, second paragraph to read, "Commissioner Burger noted that there was currently no transition between retail/commercial and residential use in the Village. She added that..." BURGER/TUCKER MOVED APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 22, 1987, AS AMENDED. Passed 4-0. Deletions to the Agenda: None. QRAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. REPQRT QF CLERK QN POSTING OF AGENDA: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this Meeting was properly posted on August 7, 1987. PUBLIC HEARINGS CQNSENT CALENDAR; 1. DR-87-051 Day, 20822 Beauchamps Ln., request for design review approval for a 6,058 sq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City :Code. Continued to September 9, 1987 at the request of the applicant. 2. UP-87-014 Klien, 21400 Tollgate Rd., request for use permit approval to allow a winery in the NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to August 26, 1987. 3. Merger of Protiva 14466 Oak Place, Consider an objection from the property owner Parcels of staffs determination thht two parcels at the above address should be merged pursuant to Article 14-65 of the Saratoga City Code. Continued to September 23, 1987, at the request of the applicant. 4. SD-87-013 Jordan, 14234 Paul Ave.,. request for building site and design review DR-87-090 approval for a new 2,966 Sq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code. Continued to August 26, 1987. 5. DR-87-060 Sinsley Construction, 12342 Crayside Ln., request for design review approval of a new 5,638 gq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the NHR district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to August 26, 1987. 6. DR-87-034 Rivoir, 20410 Pleasant Aye, request for design review approval of plans to construct a new 4,800 sq. ft. two-story home in the R-I-20,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 arid 15 of the City Code. Continued from July 22, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 2 AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued 7. DR-87-036 Waller, 14473 Oak Place, request for design review approval to construct a new 3,372 sq. ft. two-story home in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued from June 1987. 8. UP-87-012 Broner, 12246 Via Roncole, request for a conditional use permit to allow a glass pool enclosure to be located within the required rear yard, 5 ft. from the rear property line and 1 ft. from the left side in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued from July 8, 1987. 9. DR-87-043 Brown, 14470 Oak Place, request for design review approval of plans to construct a new 2, 175 sq.' ft. one-story single family residence in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code. Continued from July 8, 1987. 10. DR-87-084 Speers, 19466 Melinda Circle, request for design review approval of plans to construct a 1,056' sq. ft. second story addition to an existing single story residence in the R-1-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 11. DR-87-066 Goss, 19180 Austin Way, request for design review approval of plans to construct a 748 sq. ft. second story addition to an existing residence in the R-1-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 12. SD-87-006 Ralston, 19905 Sunset Dr., request for building site and design review DR-87-028 approval of a new 5,460 sq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the R-I-40,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code. 13. DR-87-092 J. Lohr Properties, 19560 ,Via Escuela Dr., request for design review approval of a new single story, 3,644 sq. ft. single family dwelling on a 14,490 sq. ft. lot in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 14. DR-87-091 J. Lohr Properties, 19588 Via Escuela Dr., request for design review approval of a new single story, 3,984 sq. ft. home on a 12,610 sq. ft. lot in the R-I-12,500 zoning district. 15. DR-87-065 Sedin, 15387 Hume Dr., request for design review approval of a new 4,390 sq. ft. two-story single family home on an old walnut orchard in the R-1-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 16. DR-87-064 Terborg, 12334 Crayside Ln., request for design approval of plans to construct a new 5,093 sq. ft. two-story home in the NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Commissioner Clay requested removal of Item 7 from Public Hearings Consent Calendar. Commissioner Clay, Mrs. Palmer requested removal of Item 8 from Consent Calendar. Chairwoman Harris requested removal of Item 16 from Public Hearings Consent Calendar. BURGER/TUCKER MOVED APPROVAL OF PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALEN- DAR WITH REMOVAL OF ITEMS 7, 8, 9, 16.' ITEMS 1-5 CONTINUED. Passed 4-0 7. DR-87-036 Waller, 14473 Oak Place, request for design review approval to construct a new 3,372 sq. ft. two-story home in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued from June 1987. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. Commissioner Clay stated that previous submittals of this Application had not included a pool in front of the house; he commented that such was a change from that previously presented. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued The Public Hearing was opened 7:05 P.M. Mr. Waller, Applicant, confirmed that on the original Application there was a requirement that the pool be removed; however, a new design of smaller dimensions was being presented for consideration at this time. In this Application, the garage would be attached to the house. Planner Caldwell confmned that Staff was aware that the Applicant had revised the plans after the Meeting of the Committee-of-the-Whole. Commissioner Clay noted the change in appearance of the site and objected to the frontage now visible. Mr. William Plimpton added that the house had been set back an additional 3-4 ft; sufficient landscaping surrounding the pool would be installed to prevent the pool from being too noticeable nor would the appearance of the front yard be hampered. BURGER/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:10 P.M. Passed 4-0. Commissioner Burger felt that retaining the pool. was of little significance in terms of changing the appearance sought; however, she agreed with Commissioner Clay's objection to the Commission's not having seen the revised plans. Commissioner Tucker asked that in the future, previously approved and revised plans be:. available to the Commission. Commissioner Burger asked that reservations expressed by the Commission be noted for the record. BURGER/TUCKER MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87-036. Passed 3-1, Commissioner Clay opposed. Chairwoman Harris stated that the new Application was in harmony with the neighborhood; however, she concurred with Commissioner's comments above. 8. UP-87-012 Broner, 12246 Via Roncole, request for a conditional use permit to allow a glass pool enclosure to be located within the required rear yard, 5 ft. from the rear property line and 1 ft. from the left side in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapter'15 of the City Code. Continued from July 8, 1987. Planning Director Hsia reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. Commissioner Clay questioned whether there was input from the neighbors regarding encroachment into the side and rear yard setbacks. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:15 P.M. Mr. Preston Hill, Representing the Applicants, reviewed the efforts of the Applicants to fit the pool enclosure structure to the site; concerns raised on adequate drainage had been addressed. Mrs. Lavadia Palmer, 12234 Via Roncole, Saratoga, stated that salesmen for the pool enclosure could not guarantee that there would be no drainage onto her property and salesmen suggested she build a trench on her property. 'She objected to the expense that would be incurred and expressed concerns regarding potential damage to her property from drainage. Mr. Hill responded that Staff had adequately addressed the problem of drainage. Mr. Maurice Broner, Applicant, stated that the drainage system had been designed so that mn off would be to the side opposite of Mrs. Palmer's property. Planner Caldwell stated that plans were reviewed by the Chief Building Inspector; Staff was confident that the system as proposed would control drainage on the property and direct it toward the south and to a storm drain. She cited Building Code requirements that drainage had to be controlled on site. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 4 AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR. Continued The City Attorney advised that the CommissiOn could rely upon the opinion of the City Engineer as to whether the drainage system was adequate; however, if damage occurred to the adjacent property it would be the responsibility of the Applicant, not the City. If further verification was desired by the Commission, app~'oval could be further conditioned. TUCKER/BURGER MOVED TO CLOSE THE .PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:27 P.M. Passed 4-0. In response to Chairwoman Harris' request, the City Attorney reviewed the actions available to the Commission, concerns raised by neighbors and additional conditions of approval that could be imposed. He noted that City Engineering Staff had reviewed the plans for an accessory structure and were satisfied that drainage would be directed away from adjacent properties. The height, reduced to 8 ft., would meet requirements regarding accessory structures. Commissioner Burger felt the Applicant had made a good faith effort to respond to concerns voiced, namely, a reduction in height and square footage; furthermore, only one corner of the pool enclosure encroached into the setback. The drainage had been addressed. BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF UP-87-012. Commissioner Tucker felt that drainage was not the only issue; impacting Mrs. Palmer's view was also a issue. She would not vote favorably on this Application and asked that the Commission consider requiring additional screening to prevent visual impact. Chairwoman Harris stated she would second the Motion with the following Conditions: Further review by the City Engineer Additional screening be required as suggested above. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED APPROVAL OF UP-87-012 AS AMENDED. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO REQUIRE FURTHER REVIEW BY THE CITY ENGINEER AND ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE SCREENING. Passed 3-1, Commissioner Tucker opposed. Mr. Preston confumed that the screening required would be landscape screening. 9. DR-87-043 Brown, 14470 Oak Place, request for design review approval of plans to construct a new 2, 175 sq. ft. one-story single family residence in the R-l-10,000 zoning district. per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code. Continued from July 8, 1987. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. Planner Caldwell noted the addition of a Condition 9, to read, "The existing driveway easement on the applicant's lot shall be cancelled and the driveway for the lot at the east removed in accordance with the approved plans." Commissioner Clay asked whether there were remaining questions regarding the lot line; the City Attorney stated that the location of the lot line with respect to the Prolira home was not an issue in this Application. Staff was satisfied that regardless of any ambiguity with respect to the location of this lot line, there was sufficient setback of the proposed house that a variance would not be necessary. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:35 P.M. Mr. David Pines, Architect, stated he had not received a copy of Condition 9 previous to the Hearing; with regard to the Minutes of July 8, 1987, he noted for the record that Applicants were still reviewing the title report and the deed, to ascertain whether the easement was legal. Drawings were required to be submitted three weeks prior to this meeting; he stated that at the time of the Heating, he was operating under the assumption that an easement existed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page AUGUST 12, 1987 : PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued Ms. Holly Davies, 14478 Oak Place, Saratoga, f~lt that the only concession made by Applicant was the relocation of the garage door. In addition, she noted the following: - The new driveway cut - Apparently plans called for retaining the horseshoe driveway across the property; she suggested that once a building permit had been issued, the Protiva's would grant themselves an easement across the front yard of this property - Large size of the proposed structure on an infill lot on an old street; - The adjacent home, which was approximately 700 sq. ft. larger than would currently be allowed on a 6700 sq. ft. lot and encroachment of the side yard setbacks. She suggested a reduction of the proposed structure by 700 sq. ft. to maintain the proper proportion between structure and yard and: prevent the overbuilding of Oak Place. The City Attorney suggested consideration of a Condition of Approval stating, "The driveway access shall not be widened or relocated; no additional driveway cuts shall be made on this lot." He added that the City required a cancellation of the easement. Mr. Pines responded that the Applicants had fully complied with the Commission's requests; he noted the approval of a nearby two-story house, with 1270 square feet more space in the same historic neighborhood. BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:43 P.M. Passed 4-0. TUCKER/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87~043 WITH THE ADDITION OF CONDITION 9. Passed 3-1, Commissioner Clay opposed. 16. DR-87-064 Terborg, 12334 Crayside Ln., request for design approval of plans to construct a new 5,093 sq. ft. two-story home in the NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Chairwoman Harris asked that Exhibit "A", 8., read, "Landscaping for screening along the north and west elevations next to the structure to help soften this elevation shall be installed prior to final occupancy." Commissioner Clay questioned the calculation of square footage; Planner Caldwell responded that the only exceptional circumstance was the 210 square foot covered porch. The Public Heating was opened at 7:47 P.M. Mr. John Terborg, Applicant, stated that he intended to landscape to the rear of the property; he had no objection to the amended Condition 8. ~ BURGEREUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEAR/NG AT 7:49 P.M. Passed 4-0. BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO APPROVE DR,87-064 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION, CONDITION 8 AS AMENDED. Passed 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS; 17. GPA-87-1 City of Saratoga, Consideration of revised Safety Element of the General Plan. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this application. Planning Director Hsia presented the Memorandum of August 5, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 6 AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued City Attorney Toppel presented the Safety Element: Revised language for Pages 20-21 and noted the following changes in Fire Hazards: ' - 4.1 (Imp) to read, "Implement through continuation of existing subdivision, zoning and building regulations as contained in the City Code." - 4.2 (Imp) to read, "Implement through co.ntinuation of existing subdivision, zoning and building regulations as contained in the City Code." - 4.3 (Imp) to read, "Implement by continuation of existing provision in the building regulations allowing voluntary installation~" The Public Hearing was opened at 7:55 P.M. Mr. William Kohler, 21842 Via Regina, Saratoga, was pleased to see reference to the Specific Plan for the Northwest Hillside in the Safety Element; however, he felt that the summary was not sufficiently complete. He emphasized that the Specific Plan was designed for safety and that slope density was an important element in the Plan. He questioned when the Specific Plan would be implemented. Planner Young cited the discussion of General Plan, Specific Plans and suggested the addition of a sentence to emphasize the creation and integration of the slope density formula. The City Attorney reviewed the application of the Specific Plan, noting the exception of certain subdivisions which were allowed a higher dens. ity than the Specific Plan allowed as part of litigation settlements. He added that the slope density formula now applied to all hillside zoning districts and suggested the addition of a sentence to read, "Subsequent to the adoption of the slope density formula, the same standard was later applied to the balance of the hillside areas and the HCRD zone." BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:12 P.M. Passed 4-0. Chairwoman Harris felt that the Commissions concerns had been adequately addressed in the draft presented. TUCKERBURGER MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF GPA-87-1 AS AMENDED. Passed 4-0. 18. V~87-014 Slavin/Cicero, 14345 Paul Ave., request for a variance to allow an LL-87-002 existing home to maintain. a 10 ft. front yard setback where 25 ft. is required in order to accommodate a lot line adjustment to construct a new residence on one of the lots.. Continued from July 8, 1987. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. Planner Caldwell reviewed lot line adjustments in response to Commissioner Clay's question. Chairwoman Harris noted her consideration of the Staff Report and cited the Commission's efforts to prevent non-conforming lots, especially. substandard lots. She noted that the existing house was to be remodeled; such would be an opportunity to bring these lots into conformity. Commissioner Burger noted her difficulty in making the required Findings to allow a reduction in front setback; she concurred that Staff's arguments opposing this request were well stated. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:18 P.M. Ms. Cymbent, Westfall Engineers, referring to Staff Report, Issues, a., commented that since a structure existed on the two lots and both owners agreed on upgrading the portion of the existing structure which was in better shape (the portion which extended over the property line), requiring removal of this section would be tantamount to requiring the removal of the whole house. She felt that such would be a hardship for the owners. Extraordinary physical circumstances existed since the house straddled .the property line, which was very unusual. She felt that the necessary Findings could be made and noted the setback variances already allowed on Paul Ave. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 7 AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued In response to Chairwoman Harris's question, Ms. Cymbent stated that the setbacks for Parcel B would determine the building envelop. Mr. Bob Coche, 14314 Paul Ave., Saratoga, favored improvement of the neighborhood. He was originally concerned regarding the proposed 10 ft. setback; however, upon review of the site plan, he had no opposition. Mrs. Margaret Shetrill, 14290 Paul Ave., Saratoga, reviewed the history of this property and the Slavin home; she favored the variance requested and added that the best part of the existing structure extended over the property line into Parcel B. She stated that this proposal would be an asset to and in conformity with the neighborhood. Ms. Cymbent stated that the density would not change with the requested lot line adjustment; in addition, the current owners agreed that the proposed plan was the most workable. BURGER/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:38 P.M. Passed 4-0. Commissioners Burger and Tucker noted the difficulty of making the required Findings. Commissioner Clay felt that until Parcel B was sold, there was no need to make a lot line adjustment. Chairwoman Harris stated that assuming the existing house was built with the proper permits, requiring removal of a legally built structure would be creating a hardship for the owners; in addition, this house would have been grandfathered in when Saratoga was incorporated. Mrs. Shetrill reviewed the history of the area and noted that these lots were legal lots of record. Commissioner Tucker felt that this proposal would grant special privilege and noted that this Application only addressed the current problem.' Chairwoman Harris suggested conditions of approval which would limit the building of Parcel B. Planner Caldwell commented that the 10 ft. setback area covered half of the living area of the remodeled house; while this was currently the garage, the remodeling the house would move the access to the opposite side of the house. If the house was to be demolished and reconstructed, Staff contended that neither a variance nor a lot line adjustment was required. Ms. Cymbent interjected that plans for the house on Parcel A called for an enclosed patio/deck area in the area adjacent to and to the rear of the 10 ft. setback area. Commissioner Clay noted that efforts to correct' this situation would create a hardship in the future; he favored the lot line as it currently existed; Commissioner Burger concurred with reluctance. BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO DENY V-87-014. Passed 3-1, Chairwoman Harris opposed. BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO DENY LL-87-002. Passed 3-1, Chairwoman Harris opposed. The Property Owner objected to denial of this Application and stated that this decision caused her a hardship and would force her out of her home. Break 9:00 - 9:15 P.M. 19. SD-87-011 Cummingham, 14234 Paul Ave., Saratoga, request for building site and DR-87-048 design review approval of a new 3,080 sq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the R-1-10,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code. Continued from July 22, 1987. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. Chairwoman Harris called attention to letters previously received on this Application. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 8 AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued The Public Hearing was opened at 9:21 P.M. Mr. Dave Cunningham, Applicant, stated that neighbors were pleased to have the lot improved; pictures of other two-story homes in the area were presented. He noted that square footage of the proposed house was increased by: The 10 ft. storage area added to the rear of the garage; however, the garage was to the rear of the property and barely visible from the sn'eet The porch area (covered with a hip style roof) was calculated at approximately 300 sq. ft. in calculations of the house. The porch. roof was essentially a design element. Mr. Bob King, 14271 Paul Ave., Saratoga, stated that he did not perceive the proposed house as bulky and supported this Application. Mr. Joseph Kovacs, Paul Ave., stated that the house was aesthetically pleasing and noted that the porch cover was an important element of the design. Commissioner Clay noted that subtracting the. square footage of the detached garage and covered porch area brought the remaining square footage into line with that allowed; he questioned whether the garage, which was detached and set behind the house contributed to the perception of bulk. BURGER/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THEi PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:37 P.M. Passed 4-0. The City Attorney noted that the Revised Design Review Ordinance would exclude a covered porch, if not enclosed, from the calculation of square footage. Chairwoman Harris felt that the porch cover was a design element. CommiSsioner Clay noted that when considering perception of bulk, inclusion of a separate structure would result in not reaching the desired conclusion. BURGER/CLAY MOVED APPROVAL OF SD-87-011 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 4-0. BURGER/CLAY MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87-048, MAKING THE FINDINGS THAT THE 304 SQ. FT. COVERED PORCH AREA WAS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE WHICH MINIMIZED THE PERCEPTION OF BULK, ADDING THAT DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE GARAGE WAS DETACHED, LOCATED TO THE REAR OF THE LOT AND OFFSET IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE HOUSE, WAS NOT COMPLETELY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND MINIMIZED THE PERCEPTION OF BULK. Passed 3-1, Commissioner Tucker opposed. 20. DR-87-027.1 Casabonne, 14435 Big Basin Way, request to modify three conditions of a previous design review. approval of plans to expand an existing commercial building in three conditions relate to the restriction of vehicular access through a rear roll-up door, a requirement to install fire sprinklers along a side wall .and the specification of a rear driveway arch height and width. Continued from July 22, 1987. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. He noted a change in the Application, the Applicant was requesting modification to one of the conditions of a previous design review approval of plans to expand an existing commercial b~ilding in a C-C zone. Changes and modifications to Conditions of Approval were reviewed. Planner Caldwell noted the letter received from Mr. Warren Heid of August 12, 1987; Condition 6a. 2., was reviewed. Originally, Staff had opposed the roll-up door since the grade difference between adjoining lots was so great that the roll-up door could not be used. The City Engineer agreed that the grade difference would no longer be a problem and Staff concurred. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued However, Staff did not concur that the proposed roll-up door was practicable nor usable. The Site Plan was highlighted to show the relationship between the required 45 ft. back up space for a loading dock and the roll-up door; it was 'noted that four parking spaces would be lost when the parking district was built. In addition, the turning radius for a truck encroached on adjacent property. Thus, Staff concluded that there was insufficient room for truck access or use. Finally, the suggested hours of operation were unenforceable. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:50 P.M~ Mr. Warren Heid, Architect, reviewed the requested modifications to Conditions of Approval: 16 ft. wide gate was on private land, not Parking District land; thus the driveway could be widened. The gate and the arch were impracticable at this time. Phase II of this project would occur when the Parking District was formed. - Fire Sprinklers: Fire Chief has suggested that sprinklers be to the top of the block wall and spray up. Applicants were agreeable to this. He summarized that the Applicant wished to build and remodel this building for their own use. Presently, trucks could access this area and deliveries were minimal. He cited the revised elevation drawings. Finally, the Applicants were both owners and occupants of the Village. BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO CLOSE THE .PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:57 P.M. Passed 4-0. The City Attorney suggested requiring the Applicant to record an agreement stating that, "Upon formation of the Parking District, if determined that the doors were incompatible with the design of the District or traffic circulation patterns, the City reserves the right to then require a discontinuance or removal of the doors." CLAY/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87-027.1 ADDING THE CONDITION AS STATED ABOVE AND LIMITING HOURS OF OPERATIONS TO 7:00 - 9:00 A.M. Passed 4-0. Commissioner Burger noted the benefit derived from removal of tracks and deliveries off Big Basin Way and to the rear of the buildings. 21. SD-87-014 Heeter, 14293 Springer Ave., request for tentative building site and DR-87-046 design review approval of plans to construct a new 2,499 sq. ft. two-story home in the R-1-10,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:12 P. M. Mr. Bob Rockwood, Designer, reviewed the Site Plan and the proposed design. He noted: - Compatibility of the proposed design with the lot Roof was 25 ft. in height at only one point ' Design which was stepped down in consideration of reducing the bulk of the house Mr. Doug Heeter, Applicant, stated that his intent was to build a beautiful home; he reviewed design elements of the house. Mr. Rick Deignan, 14291 Springer Ave., Saratoga, was strongly opposed to the building of a two-story house on a substandard lot which would destroy his view; placement of the decks and windows on the second story would impact his privacy. Pictures were presented. Mr. Tom McKenna, 14256 Springer Ave., Saratoga, complimented the Applicants for development of the lot; however, he noted the following concerns: Building of large homes on small lots; he cited fire hazards and lack of emergency access Area two-story homes were nestled in the. trees; this lot had no vegetation Impacting of views from a two story home PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 'l 0 AUGUST 12, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. George Wallington, 14250 Spfinger Ave., Saratoga, felt that a fine job on a narrow lot had been accomplished; however, many homes in the area had narrow lots. In addition, this particular lot was on the crest of the hill; he noted loss of his view. Mr. Don Schwartz, 14271 Spfinger Ave., SaratOga, concurred with the above. Mr. Veto Shulper, speaking on behalf of his mother, noted privacy impacts on her property. Ms. Cynthia Powell, 14300 Paul Ave., Saratoga, noted concem for olive and pine trees in her yard; she noted privacy impacts if these trees wei'e destroyed. Letter from Mrs. Margaret Shetrill, dated August 7, 1987, noted for the record. BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:34 P.M. Passed 4-0. Commissioner Burger noted the severe privacy .impacts of the proposed design; these impacts were exasperated by the narrowness of the lot. She favored a one-story house for this lot. Commissioner Clay concurred and noted the incompatibility of the proposed house with other homes in the neighborhood. Commissioner Tucker favored reducing the size of this house; she noted that applications for renovation were being received and suggested consideration of the size of the lot in comparison with the proposed size of the house. Commissioner Burger was favorable to the design proposed; she questioned requiring compatibility with existing neighborhoods for new structures in older neighborhoods being upgraded or on infill lots; the original homes were summer cottages and would not be duplicated at the present time. She noted concern regarding privacy impacts. The Applicant was agreeable to submitting revised plans for a one-story house; he was favorable to attending a Study Session on August 18, 1987. CLAY/TUCKER MOVED TO APPROVE SD-87-014 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 4-0. : CLAY/TUCKER MOVED TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONTINUING DR-87-046 TO SEPTEMBER 23, 1987. Passed: 4-0. 22. UP~87-013 Wachter, 20472 Glasgow Dr. request for use permit approval of plans to construct a two-story (19.5 ft.) 1,160 sq. ft. accessory structure (artist studio) 3 ft. from the rear property line and 5 ft. from the right side property line in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of August 12, 1987. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:47 P.M. Mr. Joe Wachter, Applicant, stated he was willing to modify the proposed design in that: - Reduction of the height of the roof to 16 ft. which in turn would reduce square footage - Elimination of the second floor - Reduction of floor area to 600 sq. ft. - Assurance that minimal chemicals were used in this woodworking/glass work studio - Landscaping in the neighbors yard would screen the proposed accessory structure; another neighbor also had an existing separate workshop on his property. The third neighbor had not expressed any complaints to the Applicant. - Proposed design was to compliment the house - Would adhere to standard setbacks Mr. Jeff Harrog, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd., Saratoga, strongly objected to the 16 ft height due to the proximity of the rear yard fence and visual impact. He noted that the home was already large for a small site; this request would not be compatible with the neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page AUGUST 12, 1987 : PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued The Project Designer questioned the view from" across Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd; he offered to install landscaping as needed. He stated that the 'Applicant was favorable to a Study Session. Commissioner Burger recalled that the Commission, at the time of the approval of the house, felt that the maximum square footage was allowed on the site; she asked for significant reduction in height and square footage of the accessory structure, relocating it further from rear and side yard property lines. Chairwoman Harris noted the Commission's concern at the time of the previous Public Hearing regarding the crowding effect of two two-story houses adjacent to each other. She asked that the accessory structure not be visible from outside the property. The Public Hearing remained open. CLAY/BURGER MOVED TO CONTINUE UP-87-013 TO SEPTEMBER 23, 1987. Passed 4-0. COMMUNICATIONS: Written: 1. Planning Commission Committee-of-the-Whole Minutes of July 14, 1987. - Noted and filed 2. Minutes of Heritage Preservation CommisSion of July 22,1987, - Noted and filed. Oral by Commission: None. ADJOURNMENT: The Meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 11:07 P.M. Res tfully s/~Z, /': / Carol A. Probst-Caughey /