HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-25-1989 Planning Commission Minutes PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA
MINUTES
DATE: October 25, 1989
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
Roll Call: Chairperson Siegfried, Commissioners Tucker, Burger,
Tappan, Moran; Commissioners Kolstad and Harris,
absent.
Pledge of Allegiance:
Approval of the Minutes: Deferred.
Chairperson Siegfried informed the Commission of the unexpected
death of the Recording Secretary.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. E. T. Barco, citizen, addressed the
Commission regarding height of flag poles along Big Basin Way, and
noted the Light Ordinance applying to security lights in
residential neighborhoods.
The Planning Staff advised the Commission that the Sign Ordinance,
currently under revision, includes flag pole regulations, and is
expected to be completed by December.
TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE PACKET MATERIAL: None.
PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. DR-89-046 Naghavi, 20233 Seagull Way, request for design
review approval to demolish and existing single-
story residence and construct 3,197 square foot
two-story in the R-l-10,000 zone per Chapter 15 of
the City Code. Continued to November 8, 1989.
2. DR-89-082 Lohr, 14904 Gypsy Hill Road, request for design
review approval to construct a two story, 5,722
square foot single-family dwelling in the R-1-
40,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City
Code. Continued to November 8, 1989.
1
3. DR-89-090 Sato, 21282 Tollgate Road, Resolutions denying a
request for design review and variance to allow the
construction of a 900+/square foot first and second
story addition to an existing one story residence
in the R-1-40,000 zone district. Variance approval
would allow a 4 foot encroachment into the sideyard
setback area (public hearing closed on 10/11/89).
4. SUP-89-003 Pronger/Eagleston, 20600 Lomita Avenue, request
for second unit use permit approval to legalize an
existing 297 square foot second unit in the R-1-
20,000 zoning district per Chapter 15, Section
56,110 of the City Code. Continued to November 8,
1989.
5. AZO-89-003 City of Saratoga Vehicle Repair Ordinance, An
ordinance of the City of Saratoga amending Section
9-50-010 of the City Code concerning repair of
vehicles on residential property. Continued to
December 13, 1989.
6. AZO-89-055 City of Saratoga, a proposed ordinance to amend
fencing requirements in the NHR zone district. The
current provisions permit a maximum of 4,.000 square
feet enclosure of open wire fencing. The proposed
amendment would enable a petition from 60 percent
of property owners within a given neighborhood to
request Planning Commission approval for increased
fencing. Continued to November 8, 1989.
Chairperson Siegfried noted that Consent Items 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6
were being continued. The Public Hearing was opened for Items 3
and 7, at 7:39 p.m. No one wished to speak.
7. DR-89-081 Lohr, 14565 Chester Avenue, request for design
review approval to construct a two-story, 5,002
square foot single-family dwelling.
TUCKER/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 3 AND
7. Passed 5-0-2, Commissioners Harris and Kolstad being absent.
8. DR-89-068 Lohr, 14858 Gypsy Hill Road,. request for design
review approval to construct a one-story, 5,573
square foot single-family dwelling in the R-1-
40,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City
Code.
The staff reported that design review was requested for Lot 7, for
a structure 20 feet in height. He noted that the Commission placed
the height limitation at 21 feet on this home and it meets the
setback and floor area requirements. He suggested an additional
Condition that states "prior to the zone clearance, the plan should
be reviewed by the City Horticulturist and the results of this
review, including all tree preservation measures shall be included
into the Applicant's Landscape Plan.
2
Chairperson Siegfried opened the Public Hearing at 7:42. No one
wished to speak.
MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED
5-0-2.
MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WITH THE ADDITION OF A
CONDITION TO REQUIRE REVIEW, TO INCLUDE ALL TREE PRESERVATION
MEASURES, BY THE CITY HORTICULTURIST, WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED ON
ROLL CALL VOTE 5-0-2, COMMISSIONERS HARRIS AND KOLSTAD BEING
ABSENT.
9. SM-89-012 Welsh, 20324 Saratoga Vista Court, request for site
modification approval to permit alternation of
approved plans (DR-87-045) in the R-l-10,000 zone
district per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
Staff reported that the project was red-tagged by the Building
Department because of unauthorized construction on the second
floor. Staff has reviewed the project and feels it does comply
with the maximum floor area, and that an added ridge line across
the front of the house can be mitigated with the natural
landscaping that currently exists. Staff recommended approval.
Chairperson Siegfried opened the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m. No
one wished to speak.
MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING CARRIED 5-0-2.
MOTION TO APPROVED, AS PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION UNANIMOUSLY
CARRIED ON ROLL CALL VOTE. 5-0-2.
10. DR-88-092 Manro, 13475 Cocciardi Court, request for design
review approval for a new 5,631 square foot two-
story single-family dwelling in the NHR zone
district.
Staff reported that the request meets all setback requirements and
complies with building height. Staff expressed concerns that
visually the south elevation is too bulky and would request
installation of windows and other openings to the southside,
subject to the Planning Director's approval, and that this
requirement was incorporated into the resolution. Staff
recommended approval.
Chairperson Siegfried opened the Public Hearing at 7:47 p.m. No
one wished to speak.
MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING CARRIED 5-0-2.
MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, INCLUDING REVISIONS TO THE
SOUTH ELEVATION, UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED ON A ROLL CALL VOTE OF
5-0-2.
11. DR-89-013 Velinsky, 15839 Hidden Hill Road, Planning
Commission review of revised plans referred by the
City Council. The purpose of the pubic hearing
will be to take public testimony relative to a
Commission report to the City Council regarding the
design review approval of a single-family residence
in the HC-RD zone district pending before the City
Council.
Director Emslie updated the Planning Commission on the status of
the project and summarized the Council's instructions for
consideration in reviewing the revised plans as follows: 1) The
building be located above the 660 foot elevation, 2) The plans
should-be one story, 3) The drainage should be directed to Hidden
Hill and not into the ravine. The specific Council Resolution was
included in the Commission's Staff report. He stated that the
Planning Commission would be making a recommendation to the City
Council, who in turn will vote on the appeal.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:53 p.m.
Ira Velinsky, Applicant, stated that after speaking with Mayor
Clevenger, he went to his neighbors on the north and the east,
Mr. Haggland and Mr. Wang to discuss how to locate the home in that
corner in a way agreeable to them. Mr. Velinsky then had his
architect draw up a new design. he also stated that letters had
been submitted by both Mr. HWang and Mr. Haggland (see attached).
Mr. Kurt Anderson, applicant's Architect, summarized his impression
of the Council's concerns: 1) The drainage problem; this has been
designed and is indicated on the plans prepared by JMH Engineering.
The plans show the drainage going completely to Hidden Hill Road;
2) The house should be one-story; they have been redesigning the
home in that corner in a way agreeable to them. Mr. Velinsky then
had his architect draw up a new design. He also stated that
letters had been submitted by both Mr. Hwang and Mr. haggland (see
attached).
He also stated that the design of the house has been simplified so
it will make it seem much less massive and impacting on the
neighborhood. As part of the application, they would also like to
get the pool approved as par.t of the variance. He summarized to
say that they feel they have satisfied the direction of the Council
and area looking for the Commission's recommendation for Council
approval of the revised plans.
Wanda Alexander, 15879 Ravine Road, Los Gatos, stated that she
wanted to discuss the geology of the area. She presented overhead
projections that depicted where the Berrocal fault is generally
located in the area and where landslide areas also were located.
She commended Mr. Velinsky for his efforts but felt that the facts
4
were contradicting the spirit of the City Council's direction to
reduce the mass and bulk of the residence. She stated that the
limits of size, bulk and compatibility, and disruption of the
ravine were still not addressed in the new plan. She felt that the
Velinsky home. should be more compatible with other homes in the
area in terms of size and bulk. She was also concerned that the
road be an endangerment to all the residents. Commissioner
Siegfried clarified that Mr. Velinsky is required to do very site
specific geotechnical surveys. She had one last question regarding
the calculation of the footprint of the house. She didn't
understand how it could be calculated accurately because they still
do not have an accurate survey of the slope of the property.
Richard Sogg, 19262 Hidden Hill Road, Los Gatos, stated that he had
four concerns; 1) Earthquake dangers. he felt that there .should
be a moratorium on building until the seismic safety standards are
evaluated. he feels that the priority should be the restoration
of the homes on the Hill and not the building of any new homes;
2) He wanted the drainage pattern to be addressed; 3) He had
concerns regarding the integrity of his historical house and
grounds; 4) He would like to be reassured that there would be no
driveway or right-of-way constructed along the flag portion of the
Velinsky lot.
William Robson, 15891 Ravine Road, Los Gatos, stated that he is
still concerned about bulk and compatibility on an infill
situation. He pointed out that a comparison of the original plans
rejected by the Commission and the present proposal reveals that
the visible elevations are 55 percent larger. He also wanted the
Commission to consider the Comments made by the majority of the
Council when they asked that the house be made smaller and less
bulky. He does not believe that the bulk can be mitigated by
landscaping which is specifically prohibited by the City's Design
Handbook.
Chairperson Siegfried asked the Applicant to summarize the drainage
plan.. The Applicant stated 'that according to his engineer, Bill
Heiss, they would have to trench down the existing driveway to get
to the water supply. He stated that as long as they have to trench
to get water and sewer, they can use the same trench to provide
drain facilities to bring the rainwater from the gutters and
driveway into the storm sewers on Hidden Hill. He stated that no
water from the house or driveway will go down into the ravine.
Commissioner Moran asked the Applicant if he had talked to the
neighbors who sent the letters about the pool. The Applicant
stated that the neighbors had seen the plans presented tonight.
Chairperson Siegfried recommended that the neighbors concerned
about the drainage meet wi~h the Planning Staff to review the
plans.
Commissioner Moran asked staff if it was their view that the
findings for the variances could be made? Planning Director Emslie
answered affirmatively.
5
Commissioner Burger extended her apologies to the Velinskys for the
ordeal they have had to go through over the past months. She felt
that the City of Saratoga should be ashamed of itself for putting
the Velinskys through this ordeal. She stated that she believes
that the City Council's, so called improvements, resulted in a
project that is inconsistent with long-standing City policy in four
(4) specific areas: 1) The movement of a proposed home to a
ridgeline, which increases its visibility from the valley floor;
2) The setback; 3) The requirement of the removal of ordinance
size trees; and, 4) The increase, once again, or the impervious
coverage. She feels that the Planning Commission's approval of the
plan consistent with the Council's directions would be nothing less
than dereliction of duty. It amounts to a total disregard of sound
land-use planning in favor of an ill-considered political solution.
The Commission has always scrupulously removed itself form politics
and has always maintained its integrity. She stated the
Mr. Velinsky's original project was carefully scrutinized before
the Commission approved it originally and the current changes are
not in the best interests of anyone in this community. She also
stated that it was morally unacceptable for her to personally
recommend approval of these revised plans. She stated that she
would not be voting to recommend approval of the revisions.
Commissioner Tappan also extended his apologies to the Velinskys.
He stated that in looking back 0n all of the meetings and all of
the input from the neighbors, that quite frankly the neighbors want
nothing built on that lot. He stated that the Council was specific
as to the three (3) areas of concern they had when they sent the
project back to the Commission and that the Velinskys have bent
over backwards to answer each of these issues, and now the
neighbors have come up with new issues. he stated that he would
recommend approval of the revised plans as submitted and that he
felt all Council's concerns were addressed.
Commissioner Tucker agreed that we have very tough geologic
standards here in Saratoga and that it would not be a concern of
hers. She stated that this has been a very difficult project for
all concerned because of the piece of property. She feels that it
does meet the size requirements, but that the proposed home has
always appeared larger due to the topography of the property. She
stated she has no problem with the project, as revised per Council
direction.
Commissioner Moran thanked the neighbors for continuing to show up
and expressing their concerns. She stated that she does not think
that the plans have been improved because we now have two (2)
variances and the home is jammed into one corner. She felt that
the house as they saw it at the study session on 10/3/89 raised
fewer variance and design problems and that she was hoping the
Council would reconsider. She feels the house has been moved up
higher on the ridgeline where it will have a much bigger impact on
the whole community.
Chairperson Siegfried asked for the Commission's input if the
Council will approve the project and if it comes back to the
Commission for consideration of the variance. Commissioner Moran
said she would have a hard time with the findings for the variance.
Commissioner Burger stated she would not make the findings on the
variance issue. Commissioner Tappan said he would be able to make
the variance findings, although he would lean toward the plan that
the Commission approved. Commissioner Tucker stated that she would
have no comment since she did not see the plans that went to the
study session.
Chairperson Siegfried stated he was not at the study session but
he feels that this is a reasonable solution and that it meets the
requirements of the Council. It moves the home dramatically away
from the ravine. He stated he appreciates the concerns of the
neighbors as well. He is prepared' to recommend approval to the
City Council and that he could make the variance findings. He
asked the Attorney if there were some appropriate methods of
handling the variance other than bringing it back to the
Commission? City Attorney Toppel stated that they are trying to
work out the procedure for the variance to be heard and the
findings to be made by the Council when the matter goes back up
before them on 11/1/89. He thinks the spirit and intent of the law
in terms of hearing and discussion on a variance has been
satisfied. Chairperson Siegfried emphasized that if the Council
is going to make the decision on the location, the Council should
make the decision on the variance. he believes it puts the
Commission in a very difficult position to do anything otherwise.
City Attorney Toppel stated that he could not guarantee that the
variance would not come back to the Commission.
/
Chairperson Siegfried summarized by stating that what they have is
a split recommendation. Two out of five Commissioners approved of
the revised, although it is not the best solution; one Commissioner
speaking very clearly against the current plan and that the
original proposal should be approved; and one Commissioner likes
the study session plans. He stated that the one point that the
Commission is united on is that if the Council is going to decide
where the home is, they should make the variance findings as well.
12. DR-88-065 Harbor Builders, (Rosendin) 13506 Cocciardi Court,
request for design review approval for a new 5,024
square foot home in the NHR zone district.
Variance approval is also requested to allow
maximum height of 29 feet 6 inches in lieu of 26
maximum.
Staff reported that the variance relative to height, proposed at
29'6" maximum, currently 26' are allowed. Staff recommended
approval based upon 1) Exceptional circumstances related to the
property in that the access to the lot must be made less steep,
which has to be achieved by filling in the slope and it has to be
measured by code, therefore, the practical application of the 26'
height limit has resulted in an undo hardship on the Applicant in
that a two-story house, which is allowed in this subdivision,
7
cannot be constructed without variances; and, 2) Massing has been
reduced by building articulation.
Further, Staff contends that the elevations comply since the fill
causes the height problems.
Commission discussed the street grade, building pad and the
vegetation on rear easement where there are a number of trees are
adjacent to the project.
The Chairperson opened the Public Hearing at 8:55 p.m.
Willem Kohler, 21842 Via Regina, Saratoga, concerned neighbors
expressed concerns regarding:
- too few trees where once a forest stood
- slop, rain and erosion
Chairperson Siegfried informed the Mr. Kohler that the Commission
had every intent of saving the existing trees and that applicants
are required to submit landscape plans to the Commission for
approval.
MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED (5-0-2).
DISCUSSION
Discussion ensued between Commissioners relative to height and fill
for street access, elevation of proposed home below street level,
building pads and adjacent southeast surrounding.
Staff satisfies the Commission's concern by reading the findings
attached to the Staff Report.
MOTION TO APPROVE V-89-032 AND DR-88-065 CARRIED 4-1-2, BY THE
FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Commissioners, Tucker, Burger, Tappan and Siegfried
NOES: Commissioners, Moron
ABSENT: Commissioners, Harris and Kolstad
13. DR-89-083 Gregory, 20602 Lomita Avenue, request for design
V-89-037 review and a variance to allow the construction of
· a 3,783 square foot, single-story residence, in the
R-120,000 zone district, per Chapter 15 of the City
Code. Variance approval would allow the height of
a detached garage to exceed the 12 foot height
limit.
Staff reviewed the Staff Report from early 1989, and noted those
concerns were relative to:
- compatibility
- the McCarty House
8
Design review for the new residence indicated an 18 foot height
request for the garage, where 12 feet is maximum allowed. The
floor area complies, but the height of the single-story is 24 feet.
Further, Staff recommends the following:
- reduction of the pitch of the roof
- meet the variance requirements
- continue to redesign and revise the height per Staff ~
Discussion ensued between Commissioners regarding the location,
elevation, landscaping and surrounding properties.
The Chairperson noted a letter from the Gregory's of 139100 River
Road, Saratoga and a letter from the applicant's designer.
Chairperson Siegfried opened the Public Hearing.
Jim and Shirley Gregory, Applicant's addressed the Commission
noting the following:
- that the City Ordinance does not place restrictions on
height of single-story residences
that the proposed project follows hill side slope to
eliminate visual obstruction to neighboring properties
- that massing concerns have been mitigated
- that the height has been reduced to 22 feet .met all
recommendations
- that the variance was due to the preservation of the Oak
Tree and the provision for a detached garage
- that the requested 12 foot height limitation on the garage
is not adequate and that it is not compatible with
neighboring lots
- that the property was purchased with full knowledge of City
Codes, which made no specifications relative to heights
- that the application process has lasted approximately four
months
- that the amount of money invested has risen due to delays
in the process
- that applicants requested approval.
Commissioners discussed the walkway to the garage reflecting a flat
roof.
The Applicant was amenable to changing the covered walkway.
John Darlington, 2064 Lomita, Saratoga, addressed the Commission
noting that their residence is above the proposed project. He
expressed concerns relative to the bulk of the home.
Beverly Darlington, 2064 Lomita, Saratoga, noted her major concern
that the proposed sideyard setback is in her front yard and
inhibits her view, making her feel "hemmed in," and encumbering her
privacy.
Mr. Gregory illustrated that the location of the trees will
mitigate the privacy issue.
The Commission expressed concern regarding the unattached garage,
sloping of the roof and the neighborhood compatibility.
On direction of the Chairperson, there being no objections, it is
ordered that Item No. DR-89-083 and V-89-037 be continued to the
November 8, 1989, meeting to provide the Applicant with time to
work with Staff to reduce the height.
14. AR-89-027 Cole, 12661 Holyoke Court, Saratoga, appeal of an
administrative review application to allow a 40
foot amateur radio tower in the R-1-12,500 zone
district, per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
Staff addressed the appeal of Mr. Cole's proposed radio antenna,
City requirements for such, and landscaping of the westerly side
of the home.
Further, Staff reviewed the location and compatibility of adjacent
properties.
The City Attorney reviewed regulations that the City places on the
construction of an antenna relative to the FCC (Federal
Communication Commission) requirements.
The Chairperson opened the Public Hearing at 9:45 p.m.
John Cole, Applicant, requested approval since he is retired and
amateur radio is his sole hobby. Further discussed were the hours
of use.
Bruce Hilton, 12637 Plymouth Drive, Saratoga, addressed the
Commission citing Section A(14) of the Deed of Records, 5804, page
580, County Recorders Office, that stated "no short wave radio
antenna or support to be erected in this development," and he
stated that the title deed is passed to the new owner in that
particular project.
The City Attorney informed the Commission that the burden is on the
neighbor to seek enforcement.
MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AR-89-027 UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED
5-0-2.
Commissioners reviewed the location and retraction of the proposed
antenna.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST WITH ANADDED CONDITION TO ALLOW ONE
ADDITIONALANTENNA TO REMAIN, WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING
THE LANDSCAPING AND LOCATION, UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED 5-0-2, ON THE
FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE:
10
AYES: Commissioners: Tucker, Burger, Tappan, Moran, Siegfried
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Harris, Kolstad
COMMUNICATIONS
Staff reported relative to a transmittal to the Planning
Commission, from Hansen School Site concerning increased parking
on Titus Avenue; parking regulations are not being adhered to; and,
a request for revocation of the McCullough Program (program where
approximately 35 parents per day attend school with their
children).
The Staff noted a preliminary solution and discussed expansion of
the parking area into the current grassy area beyond the school.
Further, Staff noted the review of this issue is scheduled for
December.
George Plumbly, Director/Manager, Cupertino School District,
expressed desire to be good neighbor, however, the increased street
parking is from McCullough School. He noted he intends to proceed
with plans to increase parking by 25 spaces and to increase the
loading zone. He contends that McCullough visitors are going all
they can do to minimize the parking shortage by car-pooling, etc.
He projected that the parking expansion could be completed in six
weeks.
Letter to the Commission, dated June 5, 1989, relative to multiuse-
occupancy. Staff responded with an investigation and the tenants
were notified of the violation, however, there has been no
response.
Further, a request was made that Staff be authorized to prepare a
memorandum cancelling two of the regularly scheduled meetings of
the Planning Commission; the last meeting in November and the last
meeting in December.
MOTION TO ADJOURN TONIGHT'S MEETING IN HONOR AND' MEMORY OF CAROL
A. PROBST-CAUGHEY, BELATED REPORTING SECRETARY, UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED
5-0-2.
APPROVED BY:
Chairperson
Siegfried
ATTEST:
Planning Director Steve Emslie ,
Respectfully Submitted by:
Karon Shaban, ReportingISecretary
11