Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-1988 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA .PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: Tuesday, January 19, 1988 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Community Center Arts & Crafts Room, 19655 Allendale Ave. TYPE: Committee-of-the-Whole Roll Call - Present: Guch, Burger, Kolstad, Tucker, Clay, Harri's Absent: Siegfried Staff: Hsia, Caldwell, Harper, Toppel, Young The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. I. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION A. DR-87-048 - Cunningham, 14230 Paul Ave. Planner Caldwell reviewed the concerns regarding privacy and view brought out at the 1/13/88 Planning Commission meeting. She presented three diagrams requested by the Chair showing the change in location of the foundations, change in roof height and pitch and a line of sight drawing between the two residences. Steve Harper, Chief Building Inspector, explained that the finished floor was not raised; moving the house lowered the floor levels approximately 6". Fran Barnett, representing Cunningham, proposed the installation of latticework approximately 1' from the windows and around the balcony, planted with Bougainvillea to address the privacy. Mr. Bevans was concerned that the lattice and landscaping would not be maintained and wanted the rear deck and windows eliminated. Obscure glass in the bath was acceptable. Trees along the rear property .line would block the sun to his residence. Ms. Barnett presented photographs of homes in the neighborhood with similar rooflines and submitted a petition of support for the home. City Attorney Toppel instructed the Committee to give the applicant guidance regarding mitigation measures to be included in the modification application. The Committee gave their views on the project and generally agreed that the pitch of the roof was acceptable, since view was not a problem. The.balcony should be reduced in size and not utilized and the second story windows should include etched glass to address the issue of privacy. Landscaping which is mutually acceptable to both neighbors would be acceptable to the Commission. Committee-of-the-Whole Minutes 1/19/88 B. DR-87-021.1 - Murco Devel~opment Co., 13276 Glasgow Ct. Planner Caldwell reviewed the project and presented a plan showing comparative sizes., heights and roof pitches of the neighborhood. Mr. Don Coffey, applicant, explained that the basement had been eliminated, the home was moved back on the lot approximately 5' and that 500 sq. ft. of the home was attic spaces spread over the den and entry. He pointed out that the home is only about 100 sq. ft. larger than the other homes after excluding the attic portions. The Committee generally agreed that if the footprint of the home is similar in size to those in the neighborhood, the item could be placed on the consent calendar. C. Review Draft Noise Element Commissioner Guch gave some introductory remarks, and consultant Dick Arjo proceeded with discussion on the Issue Identification/Goals, Policies, Implementation section of the Element. He stated this section was the most important because it set forth policy, assigned responsibility and established work programs. for the future. Issue #1 - Mr. Arjo said this issue dealt with enforcement of the noise ordinance and the revision of standards. Commissioner Burger was'concerned about proactive rather than reactive enforcement. Commissioner Harris felt there was a need for more enforcement, not more ordinances. Mr. Arjo suggested that the CSO's could be asked to add "noise" to their list of sensitive items for enforcement. Issue #2 - It was recommended that policy 2.2 be made first, as policy 2.1, because it was more important. There was discussion on the difference between policies 2.2 and 2.3, and what decibel level should be used for determining when acoustical studies would be required. After clarification on the technical issues by Mr. Pack, it was determined that the noise level in Implementation 2.3 should read "55 dBLdn." Issue #3 - This issue relates to awareness and education. There were no suggested changes. Issue #4 - This issue relates to traffic noise. There was concensus to add stronger wording to the end of Implementation 4.2, to read" .... to the standards acceptable to the City of Saratoga." Under Implementation 4.3, there was consensus to add the'words "or efforts" to the end of the sentence. There was also concensus to add policies and implementation regarding vehicle maintenance and speed limits to this section. 2 Committee-of-the-Whole Minutes 1/19/88 Commissioner Tucker asked the consultant to compare Saratoga to cities that were similar, such as Atherton, Los Altos Hills, etc. Mr. Arjo stated that, in terms of noise standards, the average acceptable level was 55-65 dBa. Commissioner Guch emphasized that the standard for Saratoga, on page 6, would be stated as one standard only, not "preferred" and "acceptable" standards. Commissioner Tucker was concerned about the projected noise contour map for 2005 reflecting the Caltrans configuration for Hwy. 85 and not the Saratoga alternative. She said it may give the public the wrong impression that those contours are acceptable to the City. Carol Machol, resident, expressed the same concern. She suggested that the map be kept as a separate document for information only. Commissioner Guch was concerned that the freeway design isn't final yet, so that projected contours cannot be made at this time. Consultant Pack said the contours were based on the information available from Caltrans and that Noise Elements are required by State law to contain noise projections for the future based on estimated conditions. There was concensus among the Commission to ask the Planning Director to communicate the Commission's concerns to the Council and ask for direction on how to proceed. The Commission also decided' that further discussion on the Element be postponed until more knowledge of the freeway design was obtained. The Commission further directed that the noise contour projection map be revised to reflect contours from the approved freeway design when it is finalized. II. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at. ll:05 p.m.