Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-14-1989 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: June 14, 1989 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Roll Call: Chairperson Siegfried, Commissioners Burger, Harris, Tucker, Kolstad, Tappan Pledge of Allegiance: Approval of Minutes: Meeting of May 24, 1989 Com. Harris asked that Page 3, be amended to read, "Ms. Fitzsimmons cited the financial costs which might result from the additional architectural drawings; the building could be left exactly as it now existed, but her desire was to make improvements so long as the cost was not excessive. Com. Burger noted that on DR-89-038, Commissioners Harris and Tappan dissented. HARRIS/BURGER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 24, 1989, AS AMEND- ED. Passed 4-0-2, Commissioners Tucker, Kolstad abstaining. .., ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. REPORT ON POSTING OF AGENDA: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this Meeting was properly posted on June 9, 1989. Technical Corrections to Packet Material: Planning Director Emslie asked that in DR-89-038 an additional Condition on landscaping and two Conditions added by the Sanitary District. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. DR-89-030 Lohr, 14825 Gypsy Hill Rd., request for design review approval to con- struct a two-story, 5, 172 sq. ft. single-family dwelling in the R-1-40,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to June 28, 1989. 2. DR-89-024 Bray, 21456 Saratoga Heights, request for approval of a 2-1or subdivision SD-89-004 in the R-l-40,000 zone district per Chapter 14 of the City Code. Design re- view approval is also requested for a new 3,720 sq. ft. one-story single family dwelling on the new lot per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to June 28, 1989. 3. DR-89-014 Kim, 13355 Fontaine Drive, request for design review approval to con- struct a 1,303 sq. ft. first and second story to an existing 1,604 sq. ft. single story residence in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to June 28, 1989. 4. DR-89-020 Heath, 18681 Kosich Dr., request for design review approval to construct a 1,212 sq. ft. first and second story addition to an existing one-story home for a total floor area of 3,370 sq. ft. per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to June 28, 1989. 5. DR-89-017 Nolle, 19935 Herriman Ave., request for design review and variance ap- V-89-006 proval to construct a one and two-story, 959 sq. ft. addition to an existing home for a total of 3,773 sq. ft.; the variance is to encroach into an existing non-conforming front yard setback per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to June 28, 1989. 6. DR-89-031 Thorsch, 14199 Saratoga Ave., request for design review approval for a 1,308 sq. ft. two-story addition to an existing two-story single family dwelling in the R-l-12,500.zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to June 28,1989. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 2 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued 7. DR-89-019 Woolworth Construction, 14836 Three Oaks Ct., request for design review V-89-010 approval to construct a single story, 7,606 sq. ft. single family residence in the R-1-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Variance approval is also requested to exceed the allowable square footage for this site by approximately 1,576 sq. ft. Continued to June 28,1989. 8. DR-88-081 Jayakumar, 18846 Ten Acres Rd., consider modification to subdivision SDR-1507.1 SDR-1507 to narrow the width of an access easement which exists on the lot from 35 ft. to 20 ft. Design review approval is also requested for a new 5,410 sq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the R-1-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Continued to June 28,1989. 9. DR-88-062 Luthra, 14151 Teerlink Way, request for design review approval for a new 5,149 sq. ft. two-story single family dwelling in the NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the city Code. Continued to July 12, 1989. 10. DR-88-093 Lohr, 14751 Gypsy Hill Rd., request for design review approval to con- struct a two-story, 4,816 sq. ft. single-family dwelling in the R-1-40,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 11. DR-87-049.1 Besemer, 13917 Albar Ct., request for extensions of previously approved SM-87-006.1 design review and site modification applications that allowed the construc- tion of a 4,853 sq. ft., two-story residence in the NHR district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 12. DR-89-035 Waller, 20416 Pleasant Ave., request for design review approval to con- struct a two-story, 4,198 sq. ft. single-family dwelling and pool in the R-1- 20,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. 13. DR-89-038 Fitzsimmons, 14410 Big Basin Way, request for design review approval to renovate an existing commercial building in the C-C zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The applicant proposes a new dry cleaning business at this location. Commissioner Tappan requested removal of Public Hearings Consent Calendar Item 13. HARRIS/TUCKER MOVED APPROVAL OF PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 10, 11, AND 12. Passed 6-0. 13. DR-89-038 Fitzsimmons, 14410 Big Basin Way, request for design review approval to renovate an existing commercial building in the C-C zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The applicant proposes a new dry cleaning business at this location. Commissioner Tappan requested information on the proposed materials for the planter boxes. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:40 P.M. Mr. Warren Heid, Architect, responded that the existing planters were natural redwood; the large square planters located to the front parking lot would be removed. The building frontage would have new construction, except for the existing redwood planter. HARRIS/BURGER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:47 P.M. Passed 6-0. Commissioner Tappan felt the renderings presented were an improvement over the Elevation Plans previously submitted; however, he felt the architectural design for the remodel was very modest and did not make an impressive statement at this site which was at the entrance to the Village. Secondly, the Village Task Force recommended that a kiosk be located at this site; he agreed with this recommendation and felt that such would enhance the tenant's business. Commissioner Harris noted that Condition 12 of the Model Resolution required a "pedestrian serving amenity"; such was sufficiently vague that the Village Task Force could work with the Applicant on the kiosk at this intersection. Furthermore, the Applicant had indicated she was willing to work with the Task Force. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 3 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued Commissioner Burger cited the smallness of the lot; if the building were enhanced, a parking vari- ance may be required. Secondly, she noted the landscaped triangle-shaped piece of land across the street; this building took on the flavor of the adjacent parcel. Commissioner Kolstad agreed with Commissioner Tappan and recommended that architectural detail be added to enhance the building. As one approached the building, a large expanse of black top was apparent, which was not visually appealing. He asked that a plan be submitted for the planter boxes and wished to see the adjacent triangle-shaped parcel improved. Mr. Heid responded that the plants would provide the visual attractiveness in this area. Commissioner Tucker stated that while she understood the concerns expressed above, she leaned toward approval of this Application. She agreed that the triangle-shaped parcel across the street softened the impact of the building. Chairperson Siegfried agreed with the majority view of the Commissioners. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE DR-89-038 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 4-2, Commissioner Kolstad, Tappan dissenting. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 14. AZO-89-001 City of Saratoga, amendments to zoning ordinance Article 15-19 and other ZC-89-001 related City Code sections to implement the Saratoga Village Plan and to revise certain regulations pertaining to the commercial zoning districts; the application also involves the rezoning of certain Village properties in accor- dance with the Village Plan (from the C-C, C-V, P-A, R-M-3,000 and R- M-4,000 to the CH or CH-2 districts; and from the C-C district to the P-A district) as shown on map on file in the Saratoga Planning Department. A Negative Declaration has been prepared tbr this project. The City Attorney presented his Memorandum of June 6, 1989. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:57 P.M. Mr. Lee S. Grey, President, Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association, requested information on various Village properties; Planning Director Emslie provided the information requested. The property adjacent to the Adriatic Restaurant, with nine condominiums on-site, was referred to by him as "Saratoga's ghetto"; this was the most deplorable situation he had seen; he would not like to see a similar density at another location. He asked the City Council and the Planning Commission to carefully review the zoning in the Village area. Mr. R. Anderson, representing Mr. and Mrs. Anderson, Big Basin Way, Saratoga, requested information on parking standards applied in Parking District 1, floor area ratios versus gross area and the applicable Ordinance that allowed the same parking standard to be applied to different uses. The City Attorney provided the information requested. Mr. Anderson added that there were properties in Parking District I that had sufficient land to provide their own parking on-site; Chairperson Siegfried responded that these property owners had participated in the Parking District with an understanding that the Parking District could yield certain uses for their property. Ms. Holly Davies, Big Basin Way, Saratoga, felt the proposed Ordinance was positive for the City; however, she still had concerns about Section 15-19.050 C-H District Rec,ulations. (e~ (1~ Coverage; pedestrian open space, namely, the 20% designated open space requirement. She'~sl~ed this requirement be reduced or specified to allow the 15 ft. front setback to be counted in the 20%. She suggested the definition of open space be expanded to include front property lawns. Finally, she was concerned that the proposed Ordinance would discourage the building of covered front porches and asked that porches be allowed to slightly encroach into the front setback area. Mr. Jim Ross, Quito Village area, cited Section 14 which stated that "the Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty days after its passage and adoption" and asked what would be grandfathered. The City Attorney responded with the information requested. Judge John Rastetter, Springer Court, Saratoga, asked whether R-M 4,000 zoning would be eliminated; the City Attorney provided the information requested. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 4 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued An unidentified speaker requested information on the Village zoning; information was provided. HARRIS/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:20 P.M. Passed 6-0. TUCKER/HARRIS MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARA- TION. Passed 6-0. TUCKER/BURGER MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AZO-89-001 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 6-0. TUCKER/HARRIS MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ZC-89-001 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 6-0. 15. UP-89-003 Odd Fellows Home of California, 14500 Fruitvale Ave., request for a con- ditional use permit to allow outside groups to use the picnic grounds at the Odd Fellows Home. This use permit would be for a limited term, for the 1989 picnic season only. After the 1989 season, use of the picnic grounds would be limited to the Odd Fellows only. Commissioner Burger offered to report on the land use visit; no report was requested. Planning Director Eroslie presented the Report to the Planning Commission, dated June 14, 1989. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:29 P.M. Mr. Lawrence Wilkinson, Executive Director of the Odd Fellows, commented as follows: - Noted that the Picnic Schedule for the Summer of 1989, inadvertently included ten exempt events for Odd Fellows/Rebeccas; an updated schedule would be provided the following day - Refuted the implication that picnics were scheduled in violation of the City's Guidelines; picnics were scheduled in the summer of 1988, whereas the Guidelines were received April 21, 1989 - A recent letter accused the Odd Fellows of using amplified sound; the only event that fell within the time frame alluded to was a resident's 90th birthday party with residents and friends - Reminded the Commission that Fellowship Plaza satisfied the General Plan Housing Element requirements; in addition, this land had been frequently used by the City - Cited sound meter readings taken during picnics; standard background level ranged between 52- 56 decibels with 58-64 decibels for the direct reading Wished to be good neighbors; however, they were a community in themselves with 400 people Mr. Tony Dellimonico, UNICO Charity Organization, presented a signed contract for use of the site Sunday, June 18th and reviewed their efforts toward a successful fund raiser; it would be impossible to cancel the event now. Mr. B. L. Martinson, Past Master, Charity Lodge, noted plans for a Sunday, August 271h picnic; they had no objection to any other Guideline imposed. Mr. Norman Bowman, Past Commander, Post 89, noted their use of the Odd Fellow's property for many years and questioned the prohibition on Sunday picnics. Mr. Ray Clark, President, Fleet Reserve Association, noted that on Memorial Day he received a rejection of his application to hold a picnic. Mr. Richard Murphy, President, United Veterans Council, noted that the proposed action would disrupt the Odd Fellows recreational area; the Odd Fellows pre-dated the incorporation of the City. Mr. Galinsky, Past Commander, Post 89, noted that veterans had put their life on the line for this country; he contended that the City's action in this matter was stepping on his right to assemble. A representative of the Hungarian Church asked that they be allowed to hold the picnics scheduled. Ms. Wanda Allinger, Fellowship Plaza, asked why the Odd Fellows were discriminated against. Mr. Jeff Schwartz, San Marcos Rd., Saratoga, thanked Mr. Emslie for facilitating negotiations between the various parties; he favored the Guidelines established by the City Manager. Mr. Don Richiuso reviewed the situation and contended the City directed the Odd Fellows to stop holding picnics as early as October 1988; compliance was the responsibility of the Odd Fellows. He did not object to a reasonable number of participants at picnics if the Guidelines were enforced. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 5 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Ralph Borelli did not object to picnics under the Guidelines established by the City; he cited recent noise violations, parking overflow into the neighborhoods and questioned what regulations were in place to regulate the hook-ups required by RV's. Finally, he noted an apparent contra- diction that the Odd Fellows, who did not wish impacts from a through road on their property, were willing to put up with renting the site for large picnics. Mr. Vie Monia, Granite Way, Saratoga, suggested the use of an escalating fee schedule for fines imposed when requirements were not complied with; he commended the proposed agreement. Mr. John Rulay, UNICO, questioned the purpose of an attractive community without any heart; he reviewed their efforts to organize a successful fund raiser on June 18th. An identified speaker reminded the Commission that the Odd Fellows had been there 76 years; residents in the area should have known about the Odd Fellows activities when they moved in. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:04 P.M. Passed 6-0. Commissioner Burger noted that from June 17th to Labor Day weekend, if the private events and Odd Fellows/Rebecca's picnics were eliminated from consideration, there were only nine dates. Planning Director Eroslie confirmed that Sundays were prohibited due to the lack of CSO's on duty. Commissioner Kolstad citing the difficulty of arranging large events, favored allowing picnics on Sundays for pre-scheduled events; a reasonable transition for eliminating the picnics was required. Chairperson Siegfried suggested a set number of picnics be allowed. Commissioner Burger agreed this was a transition period of a long-standing use. Only nine picnics were under consideration; she favored the Guidelines established by the City Manager, with the exception of a prohibition of Sunday, and a prohibition on holding picnics on consecutive days. The commitments made should be honored. Commissioner Tucker agreed. BURGER/TUCKER MOVED TO APPROVE UP-89-003 PER THE LIST SUBMITTED BY THE ODD FELLOWS FROM JUNE 17; 1989, TO AUGUST 27, 1989, PER THE "CITY OF SARATOGA'S INTERIM RULES FOR OPERATION OF THE ODD FELLOWS PICNIC FACILITIES" WITH DELETION NUMBERS 3, 4 AND 12. Passed 6-0. Break 9:15 - 9:30 P.M. 16. DR-89-041 Dividend Development, 13150 Saratoga Ave., request for consideration of SD-89-006 a final development plan, vesting tentative subdivision map and a lot line ad- LL-89-001 justment to create a mixed-use housing project consisting of 75 townhomes and a senior housing facility. The senior housing facility would consist of 23 patio homes, 185 condominium units, a 32 bed personal care facility and a 45 bed skilled nursing facility. This site is zoned multiple use planned development district. An Environmental Impact Report has been certified for this project. Planning Director Emslie presented the Report to the Planning Commission, dated June 14, 1989. Planner Graff reviewed the Staff Report, Analysis of Issues. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:35 P.M. Mr. Dick Oliver, Dividend Development Company, presented renderings, Site Plans and a color board. Applicants were now considering naming the project "Vineyards of Masson" and "Villas of Masson". They were not authorized to use the name "Paul Masson"; however, the use of the emblem was permitted. He requested a decision on the Lot Line Adjustment Application. Per previous discussions with the City, the number of townhouses was reduced from 84 to 75, the front entry space was reconfigured to create more open space, the number of cottages reduced from 25 to 23 and the number of condominium reduced from 190 to 185. The condominiums were redesigned from one-bedroom units to two-bedroom units without changing the square footage. Mr. Oliver asked that studies on the carbon monoxide levels not delay the project approvals; the required market analysis had now been contracted out. Finally, an operator for the senior facility could not be found without knowing the Conditions of Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 6 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Oliver added that financing for the project could not be found without commencing the town- house development; the senior housing facility required an additional eighteen month State review and approval period; in addition, Cal Trans could tie the project up for an eighteen month period. It would be very difficult for the Applicant to hold the property for this period of time without any movement on the development. Chairperson Siegfried noted the unresolved issues surrounding the senior housing facility and added that the City had no assurance this facility would ever be built; he suggested consideration of bonding the project. Mr. Oliver responded this was a valid concern; however, he questioned how anyone could provide a guarantee that the facility would be built. Applicants were committed to completing this project; they wished to contract with someone like, if not Northern California Presbyterian Homes, to operate the facility. Chairperson Siegfried cited the recent study session wherein expert testimony raised questions about the project viability in terms of density, type of housing and payments. In response to Commissioner Tappan's question, Mr. Oliver confirmed that the only viable alter- native was Staff Report Analysis of Issues, 3, "If the market analysis is favorable, allow the developer to proceed, without a contract with an operator, but require that construction of the senior facility begin within 36 months of the townhomes." Commissioner Kolstad was favorable to the overall appearance of the project; his experience with the residential real estate market was that one-bedroom condominiums were not selling. Mr. Andrew Beverett, Senior Coordinating Council, expressed appreciation for the inclusion of the Senior Council in planning this facility; they also had concerns that the senior housing facility would not be built. He suggested consideration of options in addition to those listed in the Staff Report Analysis of Issues. Mr. Passintino requested information on the walls surrounding the project and the driveways. Mr. Oliver provided the information requested. Ms. Laurel Smith, The Vineyards, suggested the name "Vineyards of Masson" may be confused with "The Vineyards". The Public Hearing remained open. Commissioner Tappan favored taking action on a Lot Line Adjustment per request of the Applicant. TAPPAN/BURGER MOVED TO APPROVE LL-89-001. Passed 6-0. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CONTINUE DR-89-041, SD-89-006 TO JULY 26, 1989. Passed 6-0. 17. TR-89-031.1 Kwong, 20221 Herriman Ave., request for reconsideration of the Planning Commission's decision to deny a tree removal permit per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The request for reconsideration is made to present additional information to the Planning Commission. Planning Director Emslie presented the Report to the Planning Commission, dated June 14, 1989. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:30 P.M. Ms. Kwong, Applicant, reviewed their request for a tree removal permit and cited the expert testi- mony given regarding the hazard this tree posed. TAPPAN/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:32 P.M. Passed 6-0. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO RECONSIDER THIS ITEM. Passed 6-0. TAPPAN/HARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE TR-89-031.1. Passed 6-0. 18. DR-88-107 Hernandez, 14626 Big Basin Way, request for building site approval for one SD-88-023 lot and design review approval for a three (3) unit apartment complex within the R-M-3,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 7 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Planning Director Emslie presented the Report to the Planning Commission, dated June 14, 1989. Commissioner Tucker reported on the land use visit. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:35 P.M. Mr. Dennis Burrow, Architect, make himself available for technical questions. Commissioner Tappan cited the Irwins' letter, objecting to the balcony; Mr. Burrow responded that the balcony was positioned such that it would only be used off of the master bedroom; mature trees and shrubs would mitigate privacy impacts. In addition, a solid balcony railing could be installed to further prevent any impacts; however, Applicants wished to retain this amenity. Ms. Hernandez, Applicant, had questions regarding a tree removal permit; item referred to Staff. Ms. Leanne Hernandez, Property Co-owner, reviewed the site history and requested approval of the Application, which would improve the property. Mr. John Irwin, 13813 Saratoga Vista Ave., Saratoga, reviewed his letter of May 23, 1989. Mr. Art Jensen reviewed the history of the property and noted the privacy impacts from develop- ment of another piece of property; this project would further impact his privacy. Mr. Paul Hernandez, Property Co-owner, noted that the tree removed had a double trunk and was diseased; pictures taken from a ladder were presented showing the existing landscape screening between the Applicant and the Irwins. The balcony viewed the Village, not adjacent properties. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:45 P.M. Passed 6-0. Commissioner Burger noted that the balcony was positioned to face the neighbor, not the Village; she was favorable to the design proposed but suggested that the balcony be eliminated. Commissioner Tucker agreed; the properties were so close that a balcony would be impactful. Commissioner Harris concurred and noted the Commission's concern about privacy impacts. TUCKER/HARRIS MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-88-107 AND SD-88-023 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION WITH REMOVAL OF THE BALCONY. Passed 6-0. 19. DR-89-033 McLaughlin, 12470 DeSanka Ave., request for design review approval to convert a one-story residence into a two-story residence, consisting of 3,137 sq. ft., in the R-1-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Planner Graft presented the Report to the Planning Commission, dated June 14, 1989. Commissioner Burger reported on the land use visit. Chairperson Siegfried noted the letter of David and Jo Ann Robinson, 12415 Desanka Ave., requesting approval of this Application. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:51 P.M. Mr. McLaughlin, Applicant, reviewed the Application and noted Staff Recommendation for ap- proval; they had attempted to be sensitive to the neighbor's concerns and comments. TUCKER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:56 P.M. Passed 6-0. Commissioner Tucker commended the Applicants for their sensitivity to the neighbors; the second story element was designed in such a manner as to reduce the impacts of the addition. HARRIS/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF DR~89-033 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 6-0. 20. SD-89-005 Espeseth, 20271 Merrick Dr., request for building site and lot line adjust- LL-89-003 ment approval on parcels of record in the R-l-10,000 zone district per Chapter 14 of the City Code. The lot line adjustment involves the transfer of approximately 16,081 sq. ft. from Parcel "A" to Parcel "B"; building site approval is requested for Parcel "A". Planning Director Emslie presented the Report to the Planning Commission, dated June 14, 1989. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 8 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Tucker reported on the land use visit. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:13 P.M. Mr. Sam Espeseth, Applicant, reviewed the new Application for this site; an Alternative B was submitted for consideration. The Applicants wished to reach a compromise agreeable to all parties. Mr. Bill Heiss, Consulting Engineer, commented as follows: - Reviewed the site history and called attention to the existing landscaping; in addition, the house was shielded from the view from the street, nor did the structure look like a farmhouse any more - Noted the area was not rural in character anymore; this was a fully developed neighborhood - The Application was for a lot line adjustment of two legal lots, not a subdivision - Applicant wished to maintain the character of the house, even though it straddled the lot line - Preservation of the existing home on a one acre lot, with a second structure on a 10,000 sq. ft. lot, did more for the conservation of open space, than having two homes on half acre lots - The Heritage Preservation Commission wished to preserve the farmhouse - This proposal had only a minor increase in the amount of impervious coverage; only one on- street parking space would be lost on Merrick Dr.; adequate on-site parking would exist - The addition of one home to a developed neighborhood would have a negligent impact on traffic; however, there would be some impact to the view of the existing home - This proposal was reasonable and represented a compromise by the Applicant Ms. Barbara Seacrist, 20270 Merrick Dr., Saratoga, reviewed her letter of June 8, 1989. Ms. Lela S. Wilson, 20251 Merrick Dr., Saratoga reviewed her letter of June 6, 1989. Mr. Michael Kenrich, 20270 Merrick Dr., Saratoga reviewed his letter of June 9, 1989. Mr. Tom Wyant, 13282 Saratoga Vista Ave., Saratoga, reviewed his letter of June 7, 1989. A resident of Calle Tacuba noted the complexity of the situation. Mr. Bill Hitchpath stated he was in favor of this Application; he noted the quality of the homes built by the Applicant. Ms. Janice La Motte 13700 Calle Tacuba, Saratoga, reviewed her letter. Mr. Bill Seals cited the Applicant's rights; this parcel had two legal lots on it. It was important that any development on this site be handled with responsibility. Mr. Herbert La Motte, 13700 Calle Tacuba, Saratoga, reviewed his letter. Ms. Karen Davis, Via Regina, Saratoga, stated she lived in the first home Mr. Espeseth built; considering the mandate to preserve the rural character and open space of the hills, she questioned what the large developers were doing in the Mt. Eden Rd. area. Ms. Yaeger questioned if the Applicant were allowed to build a second house now, what assurance did citizens have that he would not further subdivide the property. Mr. Warren Heid, Architect, stated he tried to design a house that fit with the neighborhood. Mr. Joseph J. Rodrigues, 20232 Saratoga Vista Ct., Saratoga, reviewed his letter of June 4, 1989. Mr. Curtis Wilson, 20251 Merrick Dr., Saratoga, reviewed his letter of June 9, 1989. Ms. Lynn Prendergast reviewed her letter of June 8, 1989. Mr. D. H. Murphy, Merrick Dr., Saratoga, reviewed his letter of June 8, 1989. Mr. Dick Toesell, Saratoga, felt the Applicant had a right to develop his property. Mr. Espeseth commented that there were a number of letters supporting his Application. Mr. Lawrence Klose, Attorney for Mr. Espeseth, reviewed his letter of June 13, 1989. BURGER/HARRIS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 11:45 P.M. Passed 6-0. : PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 9 JUNE 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued The City Attorney stated that with respect to Mr. Klose's letter, the City Code Section on lot line adjustments reflected current State law, i. e., a provision was included dealing with consistency with the General Plan; this was the provision relied upon by the Staff. The City can review an Application and deny such, if the Commission found that there was a violation of the General Plan. While he had not had the occasion to investigate whether two legal lots of record existed, there was no reason to assume that there were not two lots. Furthermore, this house was on the heritage inventory adopted by the City, it had not been designated a heritage resource. Commissioner Tappan stated he would have trouble making a Finding that the lot line adjustment was not consistent with the General Plan, as recommended by Staff. He did not feel parking impacts would be significant from the addition of one house in this developed neighborhood; the value of surrounding properties would be enhanced by the restoration of the farm house and the addition of a new house. Visual impacts from parked cars in the driveway could be addressed by landscape screening; furthermore, the existing house was not especially visible now. Commissioner Burger noted that the question was a lot line adjustment, not a subdivision. The City Attorney added that this was the critical difference. Commissioner Burger agreed with much of Commissioner Tappan's comments, however, the proposed lot line adjustment (placing the second parcel on Merrick Dr.) would be very poor land use planning and would squeeze in a second lot. She would not vote in favor of Alternative A. She suggested the best use of the land was to leave the lot line as it presently existed; such would entail drastic changes to the existing home. The original portion of the home did not extend over the lot line and would not be affected; only the addition crossed the lot line. Commissioner Tucker agreed there were two legal lots of record; this Application was a matter of choosing one alternative. She asked whether Alternative A had less impervious coverage or not? Commissioner Kolstad felt the neighbor's issues were not as significant as first appeared; he felt the Applicant had a right to develop the property and would vote in favor in Alternative A.. The placement of the new house on Merrick Dr. was appropriate; issues of privacy impact could be addressed by landscape screening. Chairperson Siegfried agreed there were two legal lots of record; the question then became what was the best lot line adjustment in order to allow this project to proceed. He favored Alternative A which he believed would be less intrusive to the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Harris stated she could not Find that the lot l:ine adjustment was inconsistent with the General Plan; however she asked that the Model Resolutions be brought back with an added provision that the driveway to the farm house will be as far removed from the adjacent property owners to the east as possible. Commissioner Burger noted that she was voting against the adjustment of the lot line, not against the fact that there were two legal lots of record. If Alternative B was chosen, the lot could be lowered to conform with the surrounding properties. Commissioner Harris responded that the driveway for Alternative B would still impact the adjacent property owners to the east. TAPPAN/TUCKER MOVED TO APPROVE LL-88-003 AND SD-89-005 WITH THE MODEL RESOLUTIONS BROUGHT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND CONTAIN THE ADDED PROVISIONS THAT THE DRIVEWAY DRIVEWAY TO THE FARM HOUSE WILL BE AS FAR REMOVED FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE EAST AS POS- SIBLE AND WITH A LANDSCAPING PLAN TO SCREEN THE DRIVEWAY. Passed 5-1, Commissioner Burger dissenting. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS 1. Upcoming Planning applications and projects. COMMISSION ITEMS: 1. City Council Report Commissioner Burger reported on the City Council Meeting of June 7, 1989. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 10 JUNE 14, 1989 COMMUNICATIONS: Written: 1. Heritage Preservation Commission, Minutes of May 17,1989, - Noted and filed. Oral by Commission: None. ADJOURNMENT: The Meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 12:12 A.M.