Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-14-1988 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: September 14, 1988 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Roll Call: Present: Chairwoman Guch, Commissioners Siegfried, Burger, Harris, Tucker, Kolstad, Tappan Approval of Minutes: Meeting of'August 16, 1988 and August 24, 1988 HARRIS/TUCKER MOVED APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 16, 1988, AS PRESENTED. Passed 7-0. Commissioner Harris asked that in the Minutes of August 24, 1988, Page 3, forth paragraph from the bottom, to read, "...added that the open space issue was her only concern..." HARRIS/TUCKER MOVED APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 24, 1988, AS AMENDED. Passed 6-0-1, Commissioner Siegfried abstaining. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Ms. Carol Paviakos, Representing the Building Industry Association, asked that members of the Association be able to participate in the discussions on the Design Review Ordinance. Technical Corrections to Packet Material: Planner Caldwell noted the following changed in DR-88-049: Revised Elevation Plans had been submitted Condition 16 to read in part, "...The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review..." Staff Analysis, Grading Required Cut: 815 Cu. Yds; Fill: 117 Cu. Yds. REPORT QF CLERK QN POSTING OF AGENDA: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this Meeting was properly posted on September 9, 1988. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR; 1. SD-88-010 Kirkeby and Associates, Mt. Eden Road, consider tentative map approval for a two (2) lot subdivision of 7.2 acres of undeveloped property in the NHR zoning district, pursuant to City Code, Article 14-15. Property is located on the west side of Mt. Eden Road approximately 1,500 ft. west of Pierce Road. Continued to September 28, 1988, for additional information. 2. SD-88-006 Bowie, 13602 Pierce Road, Consider granting approval of subdivision of approximately 11 acres of undeveloped property into 3 lots. Each lot is proposed to be approximately 3.6 acres in size. The property is located · on the southeast side of Pierce Road, immediately southwest of the intersection with Surrey Lane. NHR zoning (Northwestern Hillside Residential) General Plan designation RHC (Residential, Hillside Conservation). Continued to October 12, 1988, for further information. 3. DR-88-128 Hao, 21771 Heber Way, request for design review approval of a new SM-88-016 5,615 sq. ft. two-story home on a 1.8 acre site in the NHR district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Also consider granting site modification approval for the location of the proposed pool. 4. DR-88-049 Alff, 14185 Teerlink Way, request for design review approval of plans to construct a new 5,562 sq. ft. two-story home in the NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued from August 24, 1988. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued 5. DR-88-052 Pan Cal Development, 12419 Crayside Ln., Resolution Dr-88-052 approving design review of plans to construct a new 4,784 sq. ft. two- story home in the NHR zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Chairperson Guch noted that Public Hearings Consent Calendar Items 1 and 2 were Continued Mr. Jim Zeid requested removal of Public Hearings Consent Calendar Item 3. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 4 AND 5. Passed 7-0. 3. DR-88-128 Hao, 21771 Heber Way, request for design review approval of a new SM-88~016 5,615 sq. ft. two-story home on a 1.8 acre site in the NHR district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Also consider granting site modification approval for the location of the proposed pool. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission, September 14, 1988. The Public Hearing was 7:40 P.M. Mr. Jim Zeid, 4795 Lage Dr., Saratoga, was concerned about height of the one story element of the Applicant's house; such might block his view and he asked that the height be reduced. Mr. Garrison, Architect, questioned how the Applicant's house would block the view of the prospective neighbor; the footprint was not large and there was an 8 ft. difference in elevation. Plans were made available to Mr. Zeid for review. The Public Hearing remained open. PUBLIC HEARINGS; 6. UP-88-010 Cupertino Union School District/Primary Plus, 12211 Titus Avenue, request for Use Permit approval of plans to provide child care services to approximately 175 children (reduced from 350 originally requested) at the Hansen School site. The Commission will consider a new, secondary access off Prospect Road, west of the playing field. Property is zoned R- 1 - 10,000 General Plan CFS. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission, September 14, 1988. Correspondence from the following individuals was noted: - Mr. George Plumleigh, Cupertino Union School District, September 12, 1988 - Mr. Terence Ward, Chairman, Parks and Recreation Commission, September 13, 1988 - Ms. Carole J. Freitas, Primary Plus, September 9, 1988 Signed petition opposing the granting of the Use Permit, September 10, 1988 McAuliffe (formerly Hansen) School Area Residents, September 10, 1988, Re: Response to Permit Application for Primary Plus at Mc Auliffe School and Alternative Traffic Handling Proposals - West Driveway and Melinda Circle Booklet presented by Primary Plus showing their operation The Public Hearing was opened at 8:00 P.M. Mr. George Plumleigh, Assets Manager, commented as follows: Reviewed the project's history and noted that the school had become an attractive nuisance Primary Plus was selected as the best choice for the District as well as the community Reviewed the Traffic Study, traffic circulation patterns, parking, safety and noise impacts Applicants had cooperated fully with the City and had improved the school Proposal was the best balance of community needs and a wise use of tax dollars Reiterated that the District would use this facility even if the Use Permit was denied Answered questions addressed by the Commission Mr. Pang, Traffic Consultant, commented as follows: Reviewed the Traffic Report Level of Service (LOS) Ratings Discussed the excellent safety record at the Prospect Rd./Titus Ave. intersection Stated that traffic speed on Prospect Rd. was approximately 44 mph. - Access on Prospect Rd. would be unsafe and would not provide an adequate sight line PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Ms. Carole Freitas, Primary Plus, reviewed the booklet showing their operation and noted the changing patterns of school activity; Primary Plus served many children of working parents. She presented a chart entitled Hansen School Traffic Projections. Ms. Nancy White, 1446 Glenmoor Way, San Jose, encouraged the City to grant the Use Permit and deny the secondary access proposed. She noted the benefits from high quality child care and the maintenance and use of the site; the Traffic Study reported a worse case seniario. Mr. Fred Cole, 12091 Country Squire Ln., Saratoga, counted traffic on September 6th which showed 230 cars in 35-40 minutes; he asked for consideration for residents of the area. Ms. Carol PavloVas, Primary Plus, stated that she planned to open an office in the school to tutor students; she reviewed the benefits of one-to-one services offered. Mr. Lois Olsen, Teacher for Academic Excellence, reviewed the program benefits. Mr. Jerry Feroliola, Principal, Blue Hills School, added that there was a need for the operation proposed; he recommended that the Use Permit be granted. Mr. Dave Evans, 12088 Kristy Ln., Saratoga, referenced his September 10, 1988, letter. Mr. Tom Deirch, Saratoga Soccer Club, noted that schools had students who commuted; he urged that the recreational facilities on site be preserved and utilized. Mr. Bill Moir, 12211 Country Squire Ln., Saratoga, commented as followed: No one objected to use of the school or the recreational/sports facilities on-site Residents were concerned about noise, pollution, traffic They were concerned about a commercial operation in their residential neighborhood If the facility served the citizens of Saratoga and/or the people who lived in the community that would be one thing; a commercial operation would change the community's outlook Noted on-site improvements already made; in addition, Primary Plus advertised services Mr. Gene Craig, Titus Ave., commented as follows: Six families would be directly impacted by this proposal Objected to teachers connected with the operation who testified on the operation Cited a recent, serious traffic accident at the Prospect Rd./Titus Ave. intersection Noted traffic congestion from parked tracks which were blocking the local streets Had no objection to a traditional operation of a school Mr. Earl Johns, 12070 Kristy Ln., Saratoga, noted that Proposition 13 had kept the com- munity very stable over the years; he cited the recent changes in the neighborhood. He suggested that the need for a neighborhood school may be nearer than shown in studies. Ms. Jean Shiles, Saratoga, spoke on behalf of the working parents. It would be ideal to have public systems which provided extended child care; if such operations were not welcome in the neighborhood, where should such services be provided. Ms. Vicki Evans, 12088 Kristy Ln., Saratoga, considered the school proposed a commercial enterprise; she questioned whether such should be allowed in Saratoga. Ms. Sheila Goldstein, 12041 Country Squire Ln., Saratoga, commented as follows: Did not question the quality of Primary Plus nor the need for such services However, residents did not want a day care operation at the times proposed, in their area; such was an entirely different operation than a school operation Previous petition signers had been rescinded by many who signed it A commercial day care center for infants/small children would greatly increase the noise in a residential are; suggested a commercial area be utilized for such an operation Suggested that the school be left vacant until neig!iborhood children could utilize it Ms. Janet Clinton, San Jose, stated that statements contained misinformation; examples cited. Ms. Vivian Euzent, 1502 Dominion Ave., Sunnyvale, provided information on the Alternative School and noted that a number of children could walk, take public transportation or car pool after completion of a study to determine whether a crossing guard was needed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 4 SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Ms. Kathleen Brondyke, 15957 Country Squire Ln., Saratoga, commented as follows: The neighborhood did not object to the Alternative School Questioned whether other Primary Plus sites were comparable this area; examples cited Summarized that everyone benefited but the residents of this area Ms. Margaret Laycock, 10090 Byme Ave., Cupertino, commented as follows: So called commercial operation served the needs of families, especially working parents Questioned the appropriateness of hours proposed and noted the commute time required in Santa Clara Valley; suggested that 6:30 A.M. - 6:00 P.M. operation was not unreasonable Ms. Jerri Steinberg, Property Consultant, Cupertino School District, commented as follows: The School District had made every effort to follow the rules set by the City It was the need for open space that was the driving force in retaining the Hansen School site The District participated with the City in setting the criteria for an acceptable tenant Community meetings held had raised no resistance to this proposal; Applicants were willing to work with the neighborhood on the issues of traffic, noise and safety District favored a community based committee the to address any concerns Requested approval of the Use Permit requested Mr. Edward Hages, 12050 Country Squire Ln., Saratoga, commented as follows: Felt that the economics of the School District should not have any bearing on the decision Hazardous conditions would not be remedied by shifting the traffic hazard onto Titus Ave. Any control retained by the City in approving the Use Permit would be limited to a one year period of time since the School District had a cancellation clause with any lease agreement Residents would accept a neighborhood school when such reopened Ms. Louise Shaeffer, 19844 Park Dr., Saratoga, commented as follows: Day care center would operate 12 months of the year and have extended hours of operation Cited the tremendous appreciation in cost of their homes--approximately 26% since January Such was primarly due to a reputation of excellance in education In addition, trends in education had changed; children were driven to school When public programs were closed during August, parents had to utilitze private services Primary Plus had outreach residents of other areas to work out difficulties and had crated an exceptional program for children Mr. Frank Priscaro, 554 Bevans Dr., San Jose, commented as follows: While he sympathized with residents, the days of the neighborhood school were over Cupertino Union School District was asked to do more services with less money every year Cited the crises in child care and the economics of families requiring both parents to work SIEGFRIED/MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 9:52 P.M. Passed 7-0. Commissioner Siegfried commented as follows: Concurred with the above speaker on the dramatic demographic changes School with full enrollment would have a traffic impact similar or equal to this proposal Noted his concern regarding the imposition on this residential neighborhood of a use which exceeded the hours of operation and traffic generated by a traditional neighborhood school Commissioner Harris commented as follows: Expressed surprise at the suggestion that neighborhood school no longer existed; felt that both Saratoga and Cupertino continued to have such While it was realistic to assume that more traffic would be generated than in the past, she objected to an assumption that the City could never return to typical neighborhood schools - If the District felt it was worth reopening and improving the facility, she hoped that they could find a way to make this facility a neighborhood school at some time in the future and not so determental to the residential neighborhood A recent letter from the School Dislrict had not addressed the concerns regarding noise Noise impacts between 6:00 and 8:00 A.M. was unreasonable for this neighborhood area If only 3% of the children arrived between 6:00-6:30 A.M. why was the center open so early; a compromise could have been offered in the light of the concerns raised Stated she would not approve the Use Permit requested PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Kolstad commented as follows: Objections to this proposal included traffic, question of availability of facilities and the possible redistribution of school children, question of a commercial operation on-site, noise Professional experience in real estate demonstrated that potential home buyers had to made a decision whether or nor they wished to live next to a school and deal with the inconvenience While the inactivity at this school may have been a benefit to the area, there were community and social needs/responsibilities for schools and primary care facilities Furthermore, the School District had lease agreements with an escape clause; in addition, the City would have some limited control over any use permit granted The District's decision that the school would be used was not a threat, but rather reality Would vote for approval; the Use Permit would be reviewed in four months and he would not hesitate to change his vote if problems arose Commissioner Burger fully concurred with Commissioner Kolstad's comments. She reiterated that the School District had the authority from the State to fill the school to capacity; a Prospect Rd. access would only shift the traffic impacts, not eliminate them. Commissioner Tucker considered the alternative of residential development on the site; traffic impacts of such would be greater than the use proposed. In addition, Primary Plus would have less enrollment than the Alternative School and the Commission could review this operation. She reaffirmed her sensitivity to the concerns of the residential area. Commissioner Tappan concurred with statements of the above Commissioners. He agreed that the District could use the site as they wished and suggested that Primary Plus may have less traffic impacts than other uses. He favored review of the Use Permit, including a traffic study. Chairwoman Guch concurred with Commissioner Kolstad°s comments and favored review of the operation; she felt that traffic impacts could be reduced and asked the District to review the complaint regarding trucks on Titus Ave. Regardless of use, there would be traffic impacts. She was not favorable to a Prospect Rd. access and cited safety hazards. Consensus reached that traffic volumes and safety hazards would be of particular concern in reviewing the Use Permit; however, the entire operation would be carefully reviewed. City Attorney advised that the Commission's involvement with the Citizen/School District Committee be limited to a statement that the SchoOl District shall endeavor to resolve problems by meeting with interested parties. BURGER/KOLSTAD MOVED APPROVAL OF UP-88-010 PER THE MODEL RESOLU- TION, EXHIBIT A. AND DIRECTING STAFF TO MONITOR TRAFFIC IMPACTS ON AN ON-GOING BASIS, AMENDING CONDITION 4. TO REQUIRE REVIEW OF THE USE PERMIT FOUR MONTHS AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF THE PRIMARY PLUS OPERATION AND ADDING A CONDITION REQUIRING AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE USE PERMIT. Passed 6-1, Commissioner Harris dissenting. Chairwoman Guch returned to the Consent Calendar Item held over. 3. DR-88-128 Hao, 21771 Heber Way, request for design review approval of a new .SM-88-016 5,615 sq. ft. two-story home on a 1.8 acre site in the NHR district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Also consider granting site modification approval for the location of the proposed pool. Mr. Garrison, Architect, stated that Mr. Zeid could not remain until the completion of the previous Public Hearing and had withdrawn his objections; Mr. Garrison had agreed to meet the speaker on-site to provide any additional information requested. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-88-128 PER THE MODEL RESOLU- TION. Passed 7-0. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED APPROVAL OF SM-88-016 PER THE MODEL RESOLU- TION. Passed 7-0. Break 10:22 -10:37 P.M. The Chair returned to Public Hearings. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued 7. SD-87-019.1 Saratoga Partners, 12902 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, request for tentative subdivision approval for a 10 lot subdivision of 2.7 acres to accommodate a townhomes and a common area lot, and a 1.29 acres retail parcel. Property zoned C-N. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission of September 14, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:35 P.M. Mr. Norm Hulburg, Saratoga Parmers, stated that the issue of note in this Application was the density of the townhouse project; he reviewed the project proposal and requested approval with the following amendments to Conditions of Approval: 5.c. Utilities could not be undergrounded on Cox Ave. per P.G.& E. requirements 22. Amended to read, "...A curb should be installed three feet back from the guardrail..." BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 10:43 P.M. Passed 7-0. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Passed 7-0. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED APPROVAL OF SD-87-019.1 PER MODEL RESOLUTION, AMENDING CONDITION 5.C AMENDED TO READ "UNDERGROUND EXISTING UTILITIES ON SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE RD." AND CONDITION 22 TO READ, "...A CURB SHOULD BE INSTALLED THREE FEET BACK FROM THE GUARDRAIL..." Passed 7-0. 8. DR-87-123.1 Saratoga Partners, 12902 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, request for design review approval of plans to construct a 12,789 sq. ft. retail building on a 1.29 acre parcel in the N-N zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. In addition, design review approval of the proposed sign program is also requested. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission of September 14, 1988. In response to Commissioner Harris' question, the City Manager suggested that lighting, with the exception of necessary lighting, be required to be turned off 30 minutes after closing. Commissioner Harris suggested that signage be located south of the driveway. Commissioner Siegfried noted in the previous Application, Resolution 2504, 2. language remained regarding the potential safety problems; such seemed inconsistent. City Attorney concurred that language inserted concerning the driveway in Resolution 2504, 2., was inconsistent and should have been modified. He reviewed Council proceedings and noted that paragraph (c) had been deleted from the Resolution by the Council. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:52 A.M. Mr. Norm Hulberg, Saratoga Partners, presented revised plans for review and commented: Location of signage: Applicants were concerned regarding the visibility of any sign placed; visiblity of alternative locations was discussed Visibility at the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd./Cox Ave. intersection; redesign of the site with one retail/commercial building eliminated any visual impacts Questioned the limitation of an 8 A.M.opening; requested a 6 A.M. opening be allowed Concurred that security lighting was necessary; he cited concern regarding loitering and safety. However, Applicants did not wish glaring lights all night either Mr. Gary Black, Barton-Ashmann Traffic Consultants, reviewed the Report and assurred the Commission that the driveway design proposed was safe; reference materials were presented. Mr. Mike Gillman, Landscape Architect, reviewed the revised landscape and lighting plans proposed by the Applicant. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 11:19 P.M. Passed 7-0. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 7' SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Harris stated that she would no longer oppose the driveway; without the proposed driveway, congestion may occur in the parking lot. She noted that placement of the trees in the revised plans appeared unbalanced. With respect to hours of operation, she was concerned regarding night lighting and favored the City Manager's suggestion. Commissioner Tucker asked that signage be the same color as the adjoining building. Commissioner Burger had no objection to the configuration of driveways proposed; lighting as determined by Staff with an opening hour of operation at 7 A.M. The City Manager suggested that shops opening early be located toward the southern half of the building so as to not impact the adjacent residential area. Commissioner Siegfried did not feel that such was necessary given that Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. divided the residential area and the retail/commercial complex. He complimented the Architect on the comer landscape design. Consensus reached on lighting as stated above; opening hour of operation 7:00 A.M. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87-123.1 PER THE MODEL RESO- LUTION AMENDING CONDITIONS: 5. TO REQUIRE TREES TO BE ADDED ALONG THE FRONT ELEVATION AT THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING NEAR THE HANDICAPPED PARKING SPACE; 15. TO STATE THAT HOURS OF OPERATION START AT 7 A.M. AND REQUIRE THAT STORE AND SIGN LIGHTS BE TURNED OFF A HALF HOUR AFTER THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS EXCEPT FOR SECURITY LIGHTING, AND 16. SIGNAGE TO BE THE SAME COLOR AS THE BUILDING FASCIA. Passed 7-0. 9. UP-87-017.1 Saratoga Partners, 12902 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, request for use DR-87-124.1 permit approval and design review approvals of plans to construct eight (8) townhouse units in a C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) zone district. Planner Catdwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission of September 14, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 11:30 P.M. Mr. Norm Hulberg, Saratoga Partners, reviewed changes made to the Application. Mr. Mike Gillman, Landscape Architect, reviewed the lighting concept proposed. HARRIS/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 11:38 P.M Passed 7-0 BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED APPROVAL OF UP-87-017.1 PER THE MODEL RESOL- UTION. Passed 7-0. BURGER/SIEGFRIED MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87-124.1 PER THE MODEL RESO-' LUTION AMENDING CONDITION 19 TO READ, "LIGHTING TO BE INSTALLED PER PLAN APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR." Passed 7-0. 10. V-88-021 Markowski, 19326 Protos Ct., request for variance approval to allow a detached accessory structure to be 17 ft. 4 inches in height where 12 ft. is the maximum allowed in the R-1-15,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission of September 14, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 11:45 P.M. Mr. Stan Markowski, Applicant, commented as followed: Felt the existing height limitation was not in effect in July 1987, when permits were requested; applicable Ordinance was in effect in November, 1987 Since the garage was designed as a three car garage with bathroom, storage was added to the roof area, raising the roof height Urged the Commission to approve the Application as presented; the storage area was needed Adjacent neighbors had no objection BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 11:53 P.M. Passed 7-0. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 8 SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Chairwoman Guch had difficulty making the Variance Finding of special circumstance. Commissioner Burger concurred and suggested use of the breezeway for storage required. Mr. Markowski cited the safety hazard from chemical stored in the garage area; if a lute started, a connected roof would quickly transport the fire. Applicants wished the house separate. Commissioner Tucker informed the Applicant that she had difficulty making the Findings and suggested the Applicant consider alternatives; Commissioner Siegfried concurred, suggesting that a breezeway might meet the needs of the Applicant, eliminating the need for a variance. Design alternatives and construction requirements were communicated to the Applicant; consensus reached to Continue the Application for two weeks for consideration of the above. HARRIS/BURGER MOVED TO CONTINUE V-88-021 TO OCTOBER 12, 1988. Passed 7-0. 11. V-88-028 Blair, 13303 Paramount Drive, request for a variance from Ordinance 15-45.030 to allow an expansion of an existing single family dwelling up to 4,200 sq. ft. Property is located in the R-1-12,500 zoning district. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission of September 14, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 12:06 A.M. Mr. Robert Blair, Applicant, read into the record his letter. Mr. Alex Lesepar, Architect, provided information requested on Exhibit A: setbacks shown, placement of the fence and elevations. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 12:20 A.M. Passed 7-0. Commissioner Siegfried commented as follows: Situation was unusual in that the right-of-way was not used It would be within the intent of the Standards to grant the request made Did not feel that special privilege would result Commissioner Burger stated that one could argue that exceptional, physical circumstance existed in the 17 ft. public right-of-way which was 6 ft. above the street; in addition, the lot was boardered on two sides by side streets. Chairwoman Guch questioned whether granting a Variance would be precedent setting; she cited the unusual lot shape and the roadway on two sides. She did not feel that there was another similar lot; Commissioner Harris concurred regarding the uniqueness of the lot. Commissioner Siegfried summarized discussion stated that there was street on three sides of the property, excess public right-of-way existed; figuring in the public right-of-way, allowable floor area would be 4,128 sq. ft., which was proximate to the 4,050 sq. ft. allowed. SIEGFRIED/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF V-88-028 MAKING THE FINDINGS: 2. THAT EXCEPTIONAL PHYSICAL CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTED IN THAT THE LOT WAS AN UNUSUAL SHAPE, SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY STREET, AN UNUSED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WAS 6 PT. ABOVE THE STREET 3. THAT ONLY MIMIMAL SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS REQUESTED, EXCEEDING THAT ALLOWED. 4. GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT CONSTITUTE A GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE SINCE ALL SETBACKS HAD BEEN OBSERVED AND A MINIMUM EXCESS SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS REQUESTED. Passed 5-2, Commissioners Kolstad, Tucker dissenting. Commissioner Tucker could not make the Finding allowing square footage over that allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued 12. SD-88-007 Zimmerman, 14190 Palomino Way, request for building site approval of DR-88-036 one lot with an average slope of 26% and design review approval to construct a new 6,003 sq. ft. two-story home. Parcel is 2.125 acres in size, zoned NHR (Northwestern Hillside Residential) General Plan designation RHC (Residential, Hillside Conservation) Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Planner Caldwell reviewed the Report to the Planning Commission of September 14, 1988. The Public Hearing was opened at 12:30 A.M. Mr. Scott Cunningham, Architect, reviewed the Application, site and the history of the project; photographs of the site were presented. Primary issues were grading and preception of bulk. Mr. Bill Heiss, Civil Engineer, commented as follows: - Noted the site characteristics and questioned the requirement to preserve the natural site when such was essentially a "dirt slope" without vegetation - Excavation figure was related primarily to creating an area to nestle a house into the hillside - Excavated material would then be placed to the front of the proposed house in an attempt to compliment the natural terrain of the land Noted the existing difficulties negotiating the site if such were left in its natural state ~ Driveway would basically be fill material; without such, a retaining wall would be required Questioned whether stepping the house into the hillside would reduce perception of bulk; felt that notching the house into the hillside was more effective in reducing its visibility Conditons for SD-88-007: 5. a. Widing to the 20 ft. required would create an unsafe situation; suggested a deferred improvement agreement would be more appropriate c. Currently there were no poles on the site; questioned the undergrounding of lines 20. Stated that there was a fire hydrant within 500 ft. of the property 27. Request6d information on the prohibition of pool or recreational courts on-site Mr. Cunningham summarized issues addressed above and design of the proposed house. Mr. Gioneni, Adjacent Property Owner, commented as follows: Was not opposed to the request for building site approval Was concerned regarding soil instability after construction and the amout of cut proposed Questioned the compatibility of the size of home proposed for this neighborhood Concerned that views and privacy would be impacted by a structure of the size proposed Mr. Cunningham provided information on the differing elevations of the proposed house and the speaker's house; additional soil analysis would be provided. Adjacent homes were at differ- ing elevations and/or heavily screened; the Applicants had worked within City perameters. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 12:59 A.M. Passed 7-0. Commissioner Harris felt the house would appear boxy and impacfful due to size proposed; in addition such was out of character with the neighborhood. Commissioner Burger did not feel the proposed house was appropriate for the lot in question; such would be too impactful; in addition, she had concerns regarding the cut and fill. She requested reduction in cut and fill and design more compatible with surrounding homes. Commissioner Siegfried concurred. Commissioner Kolstad felt that the Applicants were attempting to create a fiat pad on this hillside lot. Chairwoman Guch questioned whether the site was fully considered when the house was designed; as presented, she would not approve this Application. She felt it was reasonable to defer improving Pierce Rd; however, she was uncertain of the appropriate action to be taken at this time with regard the the potential sliding in the area. Commissioner Burger felt that Staff Recommendation was appropriate, namely, that the Applicant repair any existing slide. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 10 SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Cunningham requested a Study Session to further address these issues. The City Attorney made it clear regarding the repair of the slide that the burden was on the Applicant; it was the right of the Commission to determine whether the site was buildable. HARRIS/TUCKER MOVED TO CONTINUE SD-88-007 AND DR-88-036 TO NOVEMBER 9, 1988, WITH A STUDY SESSION TO BE HELD OCTOBER 18, 1988. Passed 7-0. COMMUNICATIONS: Written: 1. Committee-of-the-Whole Report - August 16, 1988, - Noted and filed. 2. Heritage Preservation Minutes - August 3, 1988, - Noted and filed. 3. Letter from Beck, Iverson, Philbrick, dated September 3, 1988, - Noted and filed. 4. Letter from Mrs. Helen Costello and Mr. & Mrs. Bert Martel, Re: Water seepage from 19431 San Marcos Rd., - Noted and filed. 5. Memo from V. Young, Re: Resolution HP-14, - Noted and filed. Oral by Commission: Commissioner Tappan reported on the Meeting of the City Council, September 7, 1988. AD.IOURNMENTi The Meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 1:20 A.M.