Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-10-1988 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: August 10, 1988 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Roll Call: Chairwoman Guch, Commissioners Siegfried, Burger, Harris, Kolstad, Tappan present; Commissioner Tucker absent. Approval of Minutes: Meeting of July 27, 1988 Commissioner Harris asked' that Page 4, ninth paragraph to read: "...Recalled that the Commission's feeling in general was that there would not be fencing in the over R-1-40,000 zoning district; anyone could claim that more fencing was needed for safety. If the Commission were going to make exceptions, they should do away with the Ordinance." In the following sentence, "...this fencing..." Commissioner Kolstad noted that on Page 7, the Motion was to deny DR-88-012. The City Manager noted in GPA-88-004, an Environmental Assessment had been done. His comment on SD-87-020. 1 to read, "The City Manager suggested that the recipient property owner have responsibility for maintaining the wall. in its entirety with an easement being granted to the property owner..." HARRIS/KOLSTAD MOVED APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 27, 1988, AS AMENDED. Passed 6-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. David C. Bremmer addressed concerns regarding Application DR-88-027; he noted the Continu- ances of this Item and requested that renoticing occur in instances where plans had been changed. REPORT ON POSTING AGENDA: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this Meeting was properly posted on August 5, 1988. Technical Corrections to Packet Material: Planner Caldwell noted in DR-88-046, Planner's Worksheet, all items should be checked. In DR-88-044, Amended Condition 10 to add, "Hydrant, if required, shall be installed and accepted prior to construction of any building." Eliminate Condition 11, Condition 12 renumbered. Applicant had been notified and agreed with the above changes. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR; 1. DR-88-027 Walker, 12469 Lolly Ct., request for design review approval for a new 1,111 sq.ft. first and second story addition to an existing one-story dwelling, per Section 15-45.060 (a) (2) of the City Code. The total proposed floor area is 3,3.66 sq. ft. The home is located in the R-I- 10,000 zoning district. Continued to September 28, 1988 for revised plans. 2. SM-88-019 McVay, 21779 Congress. Springs Lane, request for site modification approval to allow the construction of a swimming pool in the NHR zoning district per subdivision condition. Continued to August 24, 1988. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 2 AUGUST 10, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued 3. DR-88-048 Frankel, 19123 Via Tesoro Court, request for design review approval V-88-012 for a new 6,010 sq. ft. two-story single family home in the R-i-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Also consider granting a variance from Ordinance 15-12 for 34 ft. height in lieu of 26 ft. maximum height allowed. Continued to August 24, 1988, at request of the applicant. 4. DR-88-046 O'Dell, 21363 Saratoga Hills Road, request for design review approval of plans to remodel and construct a 1,943 sq. ft. second story addition and add 38 sq. ft to the ftrst floor of an existing single family home in the R-I-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 5. DR-88-040 Lohr, 14672 Gypsy Hill Road, request for design review approval for a new 5,358 sq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the R-l-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 6. DR-87-134 Samson, 19691 Farwell Avenue, request for design review approval for a 1,479 sq. ft. two-story addition to an existing one-story single family dwelling in the R-l-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 7. DR-88-044 James, 14781 Vickery Avenue, request for design review approval for a new 5,27 1 sq. ft. two-story home on a .697 acre site with an average site slope of 5% in the R-l-20,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 8. Hwang Appeal 19288 Bainter Avenue, approval of resolution denying Planning Director's decision to allow fencing in the hillsides. Continued from July 27, 1988. 9. DR-88-047 Chang, 12749 Star ridge Court, request for design review approval for a new 5,148 sq. ft. two-story home on a 1.555 acre site with an average slope of 28% in the NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Commissioner Harris requested removal of Public Hearings Consent Calendar Item 4. Mr. Ron Jess requested removal of Public Hearings Consent Calendar Item 7. HARRIS/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 AND 9. Passed 6-0. 4. DR-88-046 O'Dell, 21363 Saratoga Hills Road, request for design review approval of plans to remodel and construct a 1,943 sq. ft. second story addition and add 38 sq. ft to the first floor of an existing single family home in the R-1-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planner Catdwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission dated August 10, 1988. The City Attorney responded to Commissioner Harris' question that fence design would be the concern of the City; the alignment and any encroachment of such on adjacent property would be a property issue. Planner Caldwell confirmed that the Wise's had been contacted and were agreeable to evergreen planting. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:50 P.M. Mr. Gary O'Dell, Applicant, stated he was not familiar with the grandfather clause; the Wises could realign the fence if they so wished. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 7:52 P.M. Passed 6- 0. SIEGFRIED/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-88-046 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 6-0. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 3 AUGUST 10, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued 7. DR-88-044 James, 14781 Vickery Avenue, request for design review approval for a new 5,27 1 sq. ft. two-story home on a .697 acre site with an average site slope of 5% in the R-I-20,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission, dated August 10, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:52 P.M. Mr. Ron Jess, Adjacent Property Owner, commented as follows: Stated that the address of the subject property was out of sequential order Felt that the proposed location of the garage would create noise impacts for his property Noted the problem with the underground water table in the area Felt that the proposed house appeared bulky Mr. Richard James, Applicant, responded as follows: Designed both homes and gave consideration to potential privacy and visual impacts; thus homes had side garages, side setbacks were doubled and only one (bathroom) window existed on this wall - Felt that the house was designed in the best manner possible - Stated that he would have to rely on the Soils Engineers to design the proper foundations for the site; both he and the engineers knew about the underground water - Reviewed dimensions of the property and adjacent lot, proposed design and existing landscaping BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 8:05. P.M. Passed 6-0. Commissioner Harris felt that placement of the garages was ideal; resiting the house would result in having the garage off of Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. which was undesirable. She asked that a Condition be added requiring landscape screening along the eastern elevation. With regard to the size of the house, the added screening would help mitigate such. Commissioner Burger concurred with the above. SIEGFRIED/HARRIS MOVED MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-88-044 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION AND ADDING A CONDITION THAT A LANDSCAPING AND FENCING PLAN BE SUB- JECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. Passed 6-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10. V-88-026 Barr, 13914 Camino Barco, request for variance approval of plans to construct a 6 ft. high fence, set back 24 ft. from an exterior side yard property line where a 25 ft. setback is required in the R-I-40,000 zoning district. In addition, variance approval is requested to permit a 7 ft. high rear yard fence where a 6 ft. high fence is allowed per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission dated August 10, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:14 P.M. Mr. Robert Barr, Applicant, commented as follows: - Presented pictures and a petition signed by neighbors not opposed to his request for a variance Reviewed the construction of the fence; when built by a previous property owner, there was no need for a higher fence, since the adjacent parcel was a residential yard Applicants understood that lattice work in excess of the 6 ft. was not in violation of the Cede Noted the difficulty and potential cost of removing the lattice work from the fence Adjacent property was formerly a commercial use; currently the gravelled area was used for parking Church activities extended into the late evening hours A 30 ft. light pole had been erected to prevent vandalism; cited the light, noise and trash problems Noted an approved 10 ft. fence for the tennis courts on an adjacent parcel PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 4 AUGUST 10, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Col. E. T. Barco, Camino Barco, Saratoga, commented as follows: Presented a copy of the Zoning Map for review and concurred with the Applicant's comments Parcel to the rear was zoned in one manner while a commercial and quasi public facility uses existed on another Noted the noise impacts from the quasi public zoning; examples were cited of Church activities - Felt that landscape screening of Monterey Pines would not mitigate the light intrusion Mr. Rich Lohr, Church of St. Archangel, Michael, commented as follows: - Wished to put in a good work for the Applicant; they had no objection to the 7 ft. fence requested - Surprised to hear complaints about noise; however, he confn'med that various activities were held - Noted efforts to control noise and stated that trees were planted to the rear and east property lines - Noted the presence of the Church for over 20 years and their efforts to be good neighbors - Floodlights were installed at the request of Parents without Partners; height of these poles was less than 30 ft. and less than the height of the telephone poles across the street - Reviewed the site plan and stated that 18930 Allandale was a home purchased by the Church - Confirmed that the Church would look into the allegation that floodlights were on till 3 A.M. In response to Commissioner Burger, Mr. Barr stated that they had tentative landscaping plans. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 8:29 P.M. Passed 6- 0. Commissioner Burger questioned whether the one foot extension on the fence height would have any impact on the concerns raised, namely, noise, vandalism and light intrusion. Commissioner Siegfried originally concurred with Staff Recommendation; however, a 7 ft. fence would deter vandalism. He noted the unique situation in that a residential lot abutted a quasi public use. Chairwoman Guch suggested the Applicant and Church work out an agreement on lighting since the fence proposed would not prevent lighting impacts; she concurred that a unique situation existed. While she originally had reservations about the exception, she agreed that impacts would result from the parking area and suggested the Applicant install landscape screening along the fence. Commissioner Harris stated that originally she could not make the findings; the only instance she had been able to make the such findings was in the case of very heavy traffic. The City Attorney responded that the current use was not inconsistent with the characterization and activities of the Church property. Commissioner Harris continued stating that the fence did not address the problem; she had reservations regarding the making of the required findings. SIEGFRIEDBURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF V-88-026 ALLOWING THE FENCE IN THE EXTERIOR SIDE YARD ALONG ALLENDALE AVENUE, 24 FT. FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND TO ALLOW A 7 FT. FENCE IN THE REAR YARD MAKING THE FINDINGS THAT THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS TO THE CHURCH PROPERTY AND TO ALLENDALE AVE. WAS A UNIQUE SITUATION, THAT THE FENCE WOULD NOT IMPACT OTHER RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS AND THAT THERE WAS A HIGH TRAFFIC AREA WHICH REQUIRED ADDITIONAL SECURITY MEASURES. THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE SPECIAL PRIVILEGE NOR PRECEDENT SETrING. Passed 6-0. 11. UP-88-010 Cupertino Union School Disuict/Primary Plus, 12211 Titus Avenue, request for use permit approval of plans to provide child care services to approximately 350 children at the Hansen School Site located in the R- 1-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. A Negative Declaration has been prepared. Continued from July 13, 1988. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 5 AUGUST 10, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission dated August 10, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:45 P.M. Mr. George Plumleigh, Director of Asset Management, Cupertino Union School District, stated that this Application was part of a district wide plan to upgrade some schools, sell surplus sites and designate others as reserve schools for future needs. He answered questions addressed by the Commission. Mr. David Burke, 12176 Titus Ave., Saratoga, read into the record a petition and commented as follows: Stated that he represented a number of households in the area Residents were excited to see the school used for educational purposes; however, their concern was that school was designed as a neighborhood facility with very little traffic impact Plan would significantly increase traffic on Titus Ave. (2.6 per child/1350 trips per day) Traffic Analysis Report: Level of Service Ratings, Peak Hour Volumes were cited Conclusion that there would be no adverse impacts from this proposal was refuted Residents wished an agreement wherein the site would be utilized while traffic impacts were mitigated Specific concerns included the Titus Ave./Prospect Rd. intersection at peak commuter hours and that traffic would be diverted onto adjacent residential streets - Saff parking requirements; existing on-site parking would be filled with the overflow on Titus Ave. - Parking would be required for parents dropping off small children for the day care operation - A parking prohibition on Titus Ave. would inversely impact residents - Suggested standards for any new sign to be posted with a prohibition of signage on Titus Ave. - Asked that a prohibition of left hand turns on Prospect Ave. during specified hours be implemented - Suggested a second access to the site be provided on Melinda Circle to promote traffic flow Mr. Gene Craig, 12123 Titus Ave., Saratoga, commented as follows: - Was happy for the proposed use of the Hansen School site - Stated that he had not received notification of this hearing - Noted existing traffic impacts on Prospect Rd.fritus Ave. intersection which were hazardous - Proposed use would magnify the existing traffic problems contrary to Traffic Report Conclusion - Suggested installation of a stop sign and consideration of a limitation of 175 students at the site Ms. Shiela Goldstein, Country Squire Ln., Saratoga, commented that while favorable to an alternative school, she objected to day care due to noise from 6 A.M. to dinner- time and traffic safety hazards to the children; cited accidents at Prospect Rd./Titus Rd. intersection Mr. Andy Bougard, Titus Ave./Prospect Rd., Saratoga, reemphasized the existing traffic problems, reviewed the history of the site and compared the previous use of Hansen School with the proposed use. He favored the use of Melinda Circle to provide egress for the site. Mr. Chris Hague, 12198 Titus Ave., Saratoga, commented as follows: Favored reopening the school with an alternative program and noted the importance of day care Asked that the City approach this Application with reason, sense and responsibility to allow the school to perform a necessary and vital function while protecting the residents from undue impacts Noted previous traffic impacts on rainy days when children were driven to school Citing the increased student number, stated that parking impacts would have to be addressed - Residents wished to have ingress/egress to their driveways with parking on Titus Ave; objected to the suggestion to a no-parking zone on Titus Ave. which would hurt the residents Mr. Frank Leonardo, Saratoga, suggested use of a school bus to transport the children. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 6 AUGUST 10, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Franklyn Clerk, 12584 Titus Ave., Saratoga, commented as follows: - Compared the previous hours of operation with the proposed extended hours from 6 A.M. to 6 P.M. - Noted the exhaust fumes resulting from traffic. Mr. Plumleigh responded as follows: - Introduced Mr. Pang who prepared the Traffic Analysis Report - The School District did not anticipate reaching the maximum number of students at this time - Noted the requirement to have a directory in front of the school for emergency purposes - Provided additional information on the alternative school and the Primary Plus program - Compared previous use of Hansen School site with the proposed use Commissioner Siegfried noted the increased traffic from a day care center as opposed to a grade school. Commissioner Harris questioned the use of car pools to transport children; such may not be practical. Mr. Plumleigh stated that the District was concerned regarding making more than one application in order to increase the number of students allowed; thus they petitioned the maximum number to be allowed even though they did not intend to implement such in the immediate future. Commissioner Kolstad questioned whether consideration had been given to access off of Prospect Rd. Commissioner Tappen asked the Applicants to address the concern of noise from the children. Mr. Pang, Pang & Associates Traffic Consultants,.reviewed the Traffic Analysis Report. Ms. Geraldine Cockshaw, Saratoga, cited the children's noise from early morning till evening; while residents were familiar with school children on-site, they were not prepared for a 365 day operation. She questioned the projected number of students and noted the impacts from this increase; in addition, there were traffic, parking and safety impacts to consider. An unidentified speaker questioned the origin of the influx of cars and suggested consideration of a traffic signal at the Prospect Rd./Titus Ave. interchange. He noted potential traffic circulation patterns. Mr. Burke asked that traffic impacts be shared by residents on Melinda Circle. He reiterated the request to initially limit the number of students to 175 children and noted that Primary Plus anticipated a 5 year period to reach the anticipated number of students; he questioned the request for 350 students at this time. Ms. Kathleen C. Brondyke, 12057 County Squire Ln., Saratoga, noted the need for traffic crossing guards; the area did not have sidewalks nor a traffic signal at the adjacent intersection. Mr. Plumleigh noted the time constraints in order to open in September; Applicants were willing to accept a condition requiring a review of the use at an appropriate time; he acknowledged the resident's concern about traffic impacts and would meet with the neighbors on this issue. He urged the Commission to make a decision at the hearing. Ms. Nancy Criegton, Titus Ave., Saratoga, commented as follows: Cited traffic impacts from a small day care operation in an adjacent home While she understood the need for day care, she questioned the location of such a facility Questioned the potential economic impacts of the proposed operation on adjacent homeowners Asked that the Sheriff's Deparunent be consulted for potential traffic impacts Noted that Titus Ave. was not safe for children at the present time SIEGFRIEDBURGER MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 10:01 P.M. Passed 6-0. Commissioner Siegfried noted the unfortunate timing of this request in view of serious traffic concerns; he felt that 3.5-4 trips would be required per day for each child. He noted the change in the nature of the school and stated that he could not vote in favor of this application at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 7 AUGUST 10, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Kolstad commented as follows: Concurred that he could not vote in favor of this Application at this time - Noted surprise that an ingress/egress off of Prospect Rd. had not been considered; nothing had been presented to show why such an access should/should not be used - Was unfavorable to consideration of access off of Melinda Circle - Noted the change in the mode of transportation; Applicant should not be penalized for such Commissioner Burger stated she would not vote at this time; she was concerned regarding the number of children and significant traffic impacts. She asked that alternative traffic circulation patterns be presented Ms. Gerri Steinberg, Property Consultant, Cupertino Union School District, offered to accept a limitation of 175 students as requested by the neighbors; she noted that income must be generated during the com- ing year in order for the school to remain open. Mr. Plumleigh thought that submitting an application in April would be sufficient time; the application was delayed a month due to the required traffic study. Commissioner Harris questioned whether limiting the number of students addressed the concern; she was unable to vote on the Application at the time and suggested the District and residents meet. Commissioner Tappen concurred with comments of Commissioner Burger and felt that he could not vote on the Application at this time pending further study. Chairwoman Guch was concerned regarding traffic impacts and felt that Titus Ave. could not bear the whole of traffic generated. The proposed use was very different the previous one on this site and such would impact the neighborhood. Ms. Steinberg reiterated the length of time for Primary Plus to reach enrollment of 175 children; she asked that an accommodation be made to allow the income to be maintained at this site during the coming year. Consensus reached to Continue the Application to an Adjourned Regular Meeting. KOLSTAD/HARRIS MOVED TO CONTINUE UP-88-010 TO AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEET- ING AUGUST 16, 1988, AND THEN TO AUGUST 24, 1988. Passed 6-0. MISCELLANEOUS: None COMMUNICATIONS: Written: 1. Minutes of Heritage Preservation Commission of July 20, 1988, - Noted and filed. 2. Committee-of-the-Whole Report - July 19, 1988, - Noted and filed. 3. City Council Meeting Schedule - 1988-89, Noted and filed. Or,-d by Commission: 1. City Council Report. Commissioner Burger reported on the City Council Meeting of August 3, 1988. ADJOURNMENT: The Meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:25 P.M. Probst-Caughey~ · /