Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-18-1988 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT DATE: Tuesday, October 18, 1988 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Community Center Arts & Crafts Room, 19655 Allendale Ave. TYPE: Committee-of-the-Whole Roll Call - Present: Commissioners Harris, Tucker, Guch, Tappan, Burger Absent: Siegfried, Kolstad I. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION A.. SD-88-007, DR-88-036 - Zimmerman, 14190 Palomino Way The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. The applicant, Mr. Zimmerman; his designer, Scott Cunningham; and his engineer, Bill Heiss, were all present. A letter from the applicant's geotechnical consultant was presented which stated, in essence, that the landslide which had been identified could be repaired within the property lines; it would not be necessary to involve adjacent neighbors. The applicant noted that Mr. Giannini, the neighbor, had not responded to letters sent regarding the landslide repair. The applicant's designer presented three (3) diagrams showing the massing of the proposal and two (2) alternatives. One option which would reduce the amount of grading would be to separate the garage from the house by lowering it and reducing the amount of excavation for the house. This would reduce the amount of grading by about half. The original proposal called for 1,000 cu. yds. of cut and 1,400 cu. yds. of fill, while the alternatives would involve approximately 800 cu. yds. each of cut and fill. Mr. Rossi, a neighbor expressed his concern about slope stability in the area and also agreed with the Commissioners that the original proposal was massive in appearance com- pared to other'homes in the neighborhood. Commissioner Burger noted that she was not so concerned about the amount of grading, particularly if reducing it meant raising the elevation of the house. The grading was primarily necessary to create the required fire truck turnaround. Her main concern was the bulky appearance of the home on such a visible site and its compatibility with adjacent homes. The other Commissioners concurred. Discussion followed on ways to reduce the perception of bulk. The Commissioners suggested the following: Committee-of-the-Whole Report 10/18/88 1. Using natural materials (wood, stone) to break up the stucco facade; 2. Breaking up the long, continuous roofline by varying peak and ridge heights; 3. Reducing the height of portions of the structure where possible; 4. Planting substantial landscape screening; 5 Adding a trellis or arbor structure; and 6. Using a dark exterior color. Commissioner Harris emphasized that trim and treatment may not be enough to reduce the bulk and substantive change in the design may be required before she would be able to support the proposal. To summarize, the concensus of the Commissioners was that the amount of grading was not an overriding concern and all agreed that the landslide issue appeared to have been addressed. The most important thing was for the applicant to revise the plans in order to substantially reduce the perception of bulk and increase compatibility in the manner discussed previously. The applicant agreed to do so. The item will be discussed at the December 14th Planning Commission regular meeting. B. Conceptual Development Plan - Paul Masson, 13150 Saratoga Ave. Messrs. Oliver, Reichardt and Tucker were present representing the applicants. Mr. Oliver discussed the history of Dividend Development in Saratoga. He then went on to address the following issues that had been raised by the Commissioners at the previous meeting with regard to the Residential Care Facility: 1. Gardening Areas - small, raised plots would be provided. 2. Chapel - to be provided. 3. Underground Parking - will be concentrated under common area for residents for security purposes. Visitor parking will be elsewhere. The number of spaces to be provided for staff will meet the Planning Commission's requirements, but application for a variance for the number of resident spaces would probably be necessary. 4. Covered walkways - to be provided. Committee-of-the-Whole Report 10/18/88 5. Freeway - Caltrans will have to mitigate any impacts whether or not there is an interchange. With regard to the Residential portion of the development, the following issues were discussed by the applicant: 1. Name of Development - are willing to change it and include reference to Paul Masson, if possible. 2. Preservation of Mural - will do with a series of pictures and/or insets into recessed areas of the wall along Saratoga Avenue. 3. Height of structures - would like 28 ft. maximum at peaks with no flat-roofed areas over 26 ft. 4. Sidewalk Safety and Width - will use vertical curbed walk, 4.5 to 5 ft. wide tht will weave away from street at landscaped areas. 5. Staggering of Units - setback from street varies from 20-23 ft. 6. Guest Parking - at least two (2) spaces on each driveway apron and periodic guest parking bays along street. 7. Recreation Area - added sport court and tot lot. Open Space - suggested 50 ft. setback to one-story elements, 70 ft. setback to two-story elements along Saratoga Avenue., similar to proposal along rear property line. This open space at the perimeter of the project would equal approximately one (1) acre and would be most visible to the community. In general, the Commissioners reacted favorably to all of the comments made, and were satisfied with the Conceptual Development Plan with the additions/changes as presented tonight. However, they also remained very concerned about the overall density of the development, particularly the Residential portion. They urged the applicant to consider reducing the number and size of units in exchange for more consolidated open space. It was also suggested that the height of units be varied and reduced so that not all units achieved the maximum height; a true mix of one and two-story units was desired. This item will be discussed again at the regular meeting of November 12, 1988. 3 Committee-of-the-Whole Report 10/18/88 I I. ADJOURNMENT Respectfully submitted Kathryn Caldwell Associate Planner 4