HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-03-1987 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DATE: Tuesday, November 3, 1987 - 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: Community Center Arts & Crafts Room, 19655 Allendale Ave.
TYPE: Committee-of-the-Whole
I. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
A. DR-87-082 - Mangalick,"12846 Star Ridge Ct.
The meeting was opened at 7:05 p.m. s~aff gave a brief
summary of the concerns expressed by the Commission at the
Oct. 14th regular meeting. Specifically, the Commission
felt that the original submittal, which was 7,412 sq. ft.
and 28.5 ft. in height, was excessively bulky in relation to
surrounding homes and too large to be accomodated by the
relatively narrow lot. The cumulative impact of three large
homes so close together on the ridge overlooking Diamond
Oaks Ct. was also a concern.
The applicant presented revised plans which addressed these
concerns by:
1. reducing the overall size of thehome by approximately
1200 sq. ft. to a total of 6,200 sq. ft.;
2. reducing the upper floor from 2,100 sq. ft. to 1,600 sq.
ft.;
3. reducing the length of the house by about 20 ft. and the
width by about 8 ft.;.and
4. changing the orientation of the home so that the living
areas will no longer.overlook the adjacent home to the
south which is lower in elevation.
The consensus of the Commissioners present was that the
revisions to the plans adequately addressed their original
concerns. The applicant had substantially reduced the size
of the home which resulted in a less massive appearance.
The height, which remained at 28.5 ft., was no longer
objectionable since the majority of the roof area
(approximately 96%) was actually no higher than 26 ft. The
applicant was instructed to prepare more complete plans for
the next regular meeting and to contact staff to discuss
scheduling deadlines.
B. Agenda topics for joint meeting with Heritage Preservation
Commission, December 1, 1987.
There was a consensus that the agenda for the meeting should
be limited to a few specific items. One item recommended
1
for discussion is a review of each Commission's powers,
duties and limitations, as written in the City Code.
Another item suggested was recommendations from the Heritage
Commission for financial and other incentives for
preservation.
C. Review of Draft Noise Element
Planning Director Hsia gave a brief presentation on the
Noise Element, then introduced Richard Arjo, Community
Planning Consultants, who had prepared the document. After
a few brief remarks, it was decided that the document should
be gone through section by section, with questions and
responses by the Commission and consultant.
The acoustical standards proposed on page 6 were discussed.
There was concern that there should be one standard only,
not "preferable" and "acceptable" levels, and that Figure 2
be revised to reflect lower levels. Commissioner Tucker
asked if it was possible for the consultant to bring samples
of different levels of sound.
In regard to the projected noise contours for the year 2005,
Mr. Arjo noted that there were no projected significant
changes on existing streets, even with Hwy. 85 construction,
because traffic levels would even out. He regretted that
Mr. Pack, acoustical consultant, was not present to answer
questions regarding the' noise measurements and technical
data.
In regard to community noise complaints, Planner Young noted
that the list of complaints was as of December, 1986. The
Commission asked that the list be updated and that barking
dog and juvenile party complaints be included.
Mr. Arjo then went. thorugh the Land Use Planning
Implications and Existing Regulations sections.
The Commission then asked members of the public present to
express their views and concerns.
Gregg Catanese, owner of a landscape maintenance business,
expressed concern that too much emphasis was being placed on
leaf blowers when other power equipment may have just as
high a decibel rating.
Yves Casabonne stated that many problems could be solved by
the use of newer, quieter equipment and training the users
of leaf blowers.
Leonard Liccardo expressed concern about noise levels on
Highway 9, and suggested there be a policy regarding
assistance to property owners in dealing with Caltrans. He
questioned who had authority over Highway 9 noise levels,
2
Caltrans or the City.
Bernard Sims expressed his opinion that most gardeners wore
ear muffs when using leaf blowers and not other power
equipment because they know leaf blowers are loud.
Commissioner Siegfried suggested the Commission hear a
demonstration on new leaf.blowers.
Ann Bond said that for her, the quality of life in Saratoga
was plummeting because of noise pollution. She told of her
experiences hearing leaf blowers for more than 30 minutes at
a time, of blowing debris, and of not being able to work at
home or take walks without hearing power equipment. She
said the problem was with enforcement, and that people were
afraid to complain about their neighbors.
Mr. Arjo suggested the Commission consider self-policing
programs and policies, particularly through gardener's
associations.
Mervyn Solt, landscape contractor, said the leaf blower
issue is an economic one,'and that most gardeners would not
be able to earn a living without them. He favored training
in leaf blower etiquette.
Don Marchuso stated his property borders the Oddfellows Home
and expressed concern about noise every weekend from spring
to fall from the renting of their picnic grounds. He said
he recently lodged a complaint and the Planning Department
was looking into it.
Mr. and Mrs. Carlo stated. they live adjacent to Saratoga-Los
Gatos Road and were concerned about vehicle sirens and truck
noise in that area.
Annette Casabonne stated she knew manufacturers of leaf
blowers who were willing to demonstrate new products.
There being no further comments from the public, the
Commission decided to continue the item to another study
session, scheduled for Tuesday, December 15 at 7:30 in the
Arts and Crafts Room of the Community Center.
II. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting ended at 9:00 p.m.