Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-22-1991 Planning Commission minutes• CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: May 22, 1991 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Roll Call: Vice Chairperson Durket and Forbes. absent. Caldwell, Commissioners Bogosian, Commissioners Moran and Tucker were Pledge of Allegiance Minutes - 4/24/91 Chairperson Caldwell requested that the second to last paragraph on page 8 be amended to read: "Commissioner Caldwell directed the staff that at numerous public hearings...structure. She could not make the finding...including the vertical elements..." On page 9 she requested that Commissioner Bogosian's comments reflecting his belief that the building was extremely bulky, etc., include the phrase "coven the prominence of the site." She also requested that Chairperson Moran's question regarding whether adequate findings were made and staff's indication that they were be included. On page 13 she requested that the third line from the bottom in the motion be amended to read "responsible for providing a potable water supply to the users of those wells on an interim basis and those determined to be the responsible parties would ultimately bear the cost of providing the interim supply of water." She requested that the deliberations after the close of the public hearing on page 14 be "close to verbatim." FORBES/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 22, 1991 AS AMENDED. Passed 4-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS' Ms. Jensen of Quito Road requested that the Commission consider the issue of water and questioned why permits are being issued for new water hookups when there is currently not enough water to keep the trees alive. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on May 17, 1991. i • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 2 Technical Corrections to Packet Material: Planner Walgren noted a correction on Item 3 (Noonan, DR-91-017). He indicated on that pages 2 and 3 of the staff report the total square footage is indicated as 5,312 square feet but is actually 4,312. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. DR-91-012 Yan, 13566 Cocciardi Ct., request for design review approval to construct a new 5,784 sq. ft. two-story, single-family residence on a 1.05 acre parcel in the NHR zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code (cont. to 5/28 study session and 6/12/91 public hearing). -------------------------------------------------------------- 2. DR-90-082 Williams, 21272 Chiquita Way, request for design review approval to construct a new two-story, 7,440 sq. ft. residence on a 10-acre parcel within the NHR zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The subject property is Lot #3 of the Chadwick Place subdivision (Tract #7770) (cont. to 6/12/91). FORBES/DURKET MOVED CONTINUANCE OF ITEMS 1 AND 2. Passed 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS Commissioner Forbes stepped down on the following item because it is in his neighborhood. 3. DR-91-017 Noonan, 19651 Glen Una Dr., request for design V-91-004 review approval to construct a 921 sq. ft. one- story addition to an existing single family residence for a total of 4,312 sq. ft. on a 1.3 acre site in the R-1-40,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Variance approval is also requested to allow a portion of the addition to encroach 5 ft. into the 25 ft. required exterior side yard setback (cont. from 5/8/91). -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Walgren presented the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 8, 1991. The public hearing was opened at 7:45 p.m. Mr. John Noonan, 19651 Glen Una Drive, addressed the Commission regarding the proposal. He circulated photographs of homes in the area which he considered to be more massive and bulky than his proposal. i 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued DURKET/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:50 P.M. Passed 3-0. Chairperson Caldwell noted the receipt of a letter from Dr. and Mrs. Prolo. DURKET/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO APPROVE V-91-017. Commissioner Bogosian stated he reviewed the variance application, visited the site and oriented the building the plans. He said he was unable to make Finding No. 2 for the variance that there are extraordinary physical circumstances on the lot that would make the variance necessary. Commissioner Durket said he was in support of the variance, agreed with the staff report and was able to make all the findings. Chairperson Caldwell agreed with Commissioner Durket's comments and said she was able to make the variance findings in accordance with the staff recommendation. The motion carried 2-1 (Bogosian opposed). DURKET/CALDWELL MOVED TO APPROVE DR-91-017. Commissioner Durket stated he was in agreement with staff and noted the unanimous support of the neighbors for the design. Commissioner Bogosian indicated that since he was unable to make the variance finding, he was unable to approve the design as presented. Chairperson Caldwell agreed with the staff analysis regarding the design review. The motion carried 2-1 (Bogosian opposed). Commissioner Forbes was reseated on the Commission at 7:55 p.m. 4. A-632.1 Bellemo, 18578 Prospect Rd., request for modification to an approved sign program at Westgate Corner commercial development to allow the monument sign to extend from 4 ft. in height to 10 ft. in height per Chapter 15 of the City Code (cont. from 5/8/91). -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Walgren presented the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 8, 1991. ~ • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued The public hearing was opened at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Richard Ellis of Maple Sign appeared for the applicant. He expressed the applicant's concern that the tenants would not be able to use their logos on the sign. Ms. Marie Wise appeared for Togos Eatery. She requested that Togos be allowed to keep its logo on the sign. BOGOSIAN/FORBES MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:04 P.M. Passed 4-0. BOGOSIAN/FORBES MOVED TO APPROVE A-632.1. Commissioner Forbes requested an amendment to the motion that there be no pruning of the eucalyptus tree in front of the sign. Chairperson Caldwell suggested a condition stating that if any pruning is required it be done in accordance with ISA procedures for pruning and be done by a licensed tree pruning company. Commissioner Bogosian stated he would accept an amendment to the resolution with a condition that any pruning done on the eucalyptus would be done in conformance with ISA procedures. Commissioner Durket felt there may be safety concerns involved in not using the logos of the businesses in that those driving past the sign would not be able to read it quickly to determine if a certain business is there. He said he was in favor of the resolution but questioned the importance both from the City's perspective and the Commission's perspective to deny the corporations the opportunity to have their logos on the sign. Planning Director Emslie stated that staff's concern was aesthetic as well as practical. He felt the signs should be kept as simple as possible. All the colors should be consistent as well as lighting, font, background and letters. Commissioner Durket questioned whether the style could be changed but not the color or the size. Chairperson Caldwell noted that other signs along Prospect Avenue between Lawrence Expressway and Saratoga Avenue bear individual enterprises' logos. She agreed with Commissioner Durket's comments and said she would be comfortable approving the request but would allow individual companies to have their logos on the sign as long as consistent colors were retained. i PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 i Page 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Bogosian indicated that an amendment to his motion to allow individual tenants to retain their corporate logos would be acceptable and felt it would be a good idea from a safety standpoint. Commissioner Durket suggested the following wording for the amendment: "Signage for tenant identification shall be of the same height and color but able to retain corporate identity through their logo." Commissioner Forbes questioned whether someone else renting in the shopping center would be allowed to put their corporate logo on the sign which may not be readily accepted to be in the best taste. Chairperson Caldwell responded that in the interest of equity that would have to be allowed. Commissioner Forbes indicated he wished to separate the main motion from the amendment. Mr. Emslie restated the motion as follows: "To approve A-632.1 with the amendment to add a condition that there shall be no removal of the eucalyptus tree and if any pruning is done it be done by a licensed arborist using International Society of Arborists methods." Chairperson Caldwell restated the amendment as follows: "To alter Condition No. 3 to read 'Signage for tenant identification shall be at the same height and color allowing for individual enterprises to retain their corporate identity on the sign."' DURKET/BOGOSIAN MOVED THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION STATED ABOVE. The motion carried on a 3-1 vote (Forbes opposed). The original motion carried on a 3-1 vote (Forbes opposed). Commissioner Forbes indicated that since the amendment to the original motion carried it would make no sense for him to be opposed to the amendment but approve the motion. 5. DR-90-044 De La Cruz, 21210 Chadwick Ct., request to construct a new 4,987 sq. ft., two-story single- family residence on a 1.17 acre parcel within the NHR zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code (cont. from 5/8/91). -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Walgren presented the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 8, 1991. c: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Forbes suggested continuing this item to a study session. In response to Chairperson Caldwell's question, Mr. Walgren responded that a ridge analysis was performed and the property is not listed on the map indicating major ridges and it did not turn out to be a minor ridge either. The public hearing was opened at 8:22 p.m. Mr. Mike De La Cruz, 12221 Brookglen Drive, addressed the Commission and reviewed the proposal in detail. He said he agreed with some of the points in the staff report but did not agreed with most of them. He requested that the item be continued to a study session. Chairperson Caldwell requested that staff provide clarification of Item 7 and the ruling regarding setback. Mr. Emslie responded that at one time there was ambiguity regarding the terms of where the setback is measured from for structures that exceed 22 feet in height. There was a Commission study session held to discuss Mr. De La Cruz' problem. He said the Planning Commission looked at the issue again and reinterpreted it to mean that the structure itself needs to be set back not just the roof. That was discussed at subsequent hearings and is the latest direction used. The idea is to get more articulation in the wall not just the roof in terms of a building's mass and bulk and that the intent behind the increased setback was to move the vertical elements not the roof elements back from the property lines. FORBES/DURKET MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:31 P.M Passed 4-0. BOGOSIAN/DURKET MOVED TO DENY DR-90-044 WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Commissioner Durket expressed concerning regarding the Streamlining Act in that unless something is brought to the Commission that is a drastic change would the Commission be able to vote appropriately. He said if the applicant's plans were close he might be willing to go to a study session but noted that he agreed with every one of the staff's concerns especially the relationship to the vertical elements. He expressed disappointment that the vertical elements have not been changed prior to this hearing. He did not feel there was enough time to go to a study session and did not feel there was a willingness on the part of the applicant to make any drastic changes to the proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Bogosian agreed with Commissioner Durket's comments. He said the proposal appeared to be a long way away from something that could be workable given the constraints of the site. He felt the site is a prominent one and felt the building was bulky, especially the south elevation. Commissioner Forbes agreed with the previous comments but felt the applicant was owed another chance to design his house and that the Commission was operating under speculation in not believing he could do so. Chairperson Caldwell pointed out that most of the recommendations reflected in the staff report have been made to the applicant for some time, and the applicant has had a significant amount of time to address the concerns but has chosen not to. She said she visited the site and could not agree with the applicant's characterization of the site as not being prominent. She felt that some of the policies and objectives set forth in the NHR specific plan apply in this case and did not feel the application meets those policies and objections. She could not make the design review findings. She felt a total redesign would be necessary and felt the applicant would be done a disservice by going to a study session. The motion carried on a 3-1 vote (Forbes opposed). Break 8:40 p.m. - 8:55 p.m. 6. R-OS City of Saratoga, consideration of a proposed ordinance for Residential and Open Space Zone District (R-OS), which may be applied to properties within the City's Sphere of Influence as a prezone district. -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Emslie reviewed the staff memorandum dated May 10, 1991 and answered Commissioners' questions. The public hearing was opened at 9:10 p.m. Ms. Jensen of Quito Road addressed the Commission. She felt that the purpose of the ordinance should be set out very clearly and did not feel that had been done. She suggested that the purpose of the hillsides was not as a scenic backdrop, not a place for housing, not an extension of the urbanized area but is the watershed. She felt that if development is allowed in that area water will be lost and felt that should be spelled out very clearly. She suggested that the language "to preserve water supply by protecting the watershed" be included in the ordinance. She also discussed • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 • Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued the problem of ancillary structures and suggested language that no right of conversion to any residential, commercial or industrial use be included. She suggested that a setback of 100 feet be included in Item E of Section 15-20.020. Regarding Item F of 15- 20.020, she pointed out there are not many flat areas in the hillsides and that a 10% slope restriction should be included for swimming pools. She felt that the allowance of clustering would allow the County to do as it pleases and it will not serve the purpose of the ordinance. She suggested removal of Section 15- 20.060(d). Ms. Jensen provided her notes for the use of the Commission. Mr. John DiManto, 1991 Leanne Place, San Jose, 1554 Madrone Hill Road, addressed the Commission. He stated his opposition to the provision of a maximum of 6,000 sq. ft. for single family residences because of the financial impact. He felt a provision should be included for a guest house and a larger garage. He commended Ms. Jensen on the comments she provided to the Commission. Mr. William Brooks, 20230 Merrick Drive, addressed the Commission. He commended the Commission and staff on their sensitivity to the equestrian community. Ms. Giberson, 15561 Glen Una Drive, addressed the Commission. She provided the following questions: What is the criteria for the application of the district to land in Saratoga and would the District be limited to the acres Saratoga would annex or has consideration been given to making the district an overlay district; is the district consistent with the County General Plan as it relates to lands to be annexed and to urban service area additions; regarding clustering, would it be a good idea to keep the density and traffic closer to already settled areas and could it be a good way to provide for low income housing. She expressed concern that there be a system of "checks and balances" in the ordinance. She felt checks and balances would be necessary to the way the City should be making its land use decisions and questioned if that should be addressed in the ordinance. Ms. Giberson provided her notes for the use of the Commission. DURKET/FORBES MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:34 P.M. Passed 4-0. Commissioner Bogosian noted correspondence from Marjorie Ottenberg and Pamela Lavin regarding the ordinance. In response to Chairperson Caldwell's question regarding the notes received by the speakers, Mr. Emslie suggested that the Commission • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 • Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued direct staff to prepare an analysis of any suggestions made orally or in writing and include them in the Commission's report to the City Council. Mr. Emslie responded to Ms. Giberson's questions. He stated that it is intended to be a comprehensive zone to apply to areas that are currently outside the sphere of influence. The analysis that would be applied would occur at the time the boundaries were considered but it is open for application to any of the western and southern hillsides. Staff believes the zone is consistent with the County General Plan policy. The County General Plan policy is to preserve the greenbelt around the valley through extremely low density development. Staff feels the ordinance is equal to or more restrictive than the zoning currently applied in the County. He responded that clustering is intended to provide traffic close to existing streets. The idea is to keep development as close to areas that already have services rather than extend services throughout the hillsides. Regarding whether clustering is intended to provide affordable housing in Saratoga, Mr. Emslie stated that is not a direct goal of the R-OS zone. If it would occur, it would occur voluntarily and it would be unlikely that development would occur in the hillsides that would meet the qualification limit for affordable housing. Regarding the suggestion for a system of checks and balances, he replied there are a number of locations where significant discretion is only exercised by the Planning Commission and the only areas where there is a unilateral staff decision is on the technical side. Chairperson Caldwell proposed a page-by-page review of the ordinance. Page 1- Commissioner Caldwell suggested a recommendation from the Commission to the City Council that staff prepare some analysis with regard to the development of criteria that could be used for applying this zone to individual properties. It would increase the clarity that exists with respect to that and make it easier for individuals to understand the basis on which property may be prezoned R-OS. She also suggested inclusion of a reference to the hillsides as a regional watershed. Commissioner Bogosian concurred with adding the reference to the watershed. Commissioner Durket felt the watershed inclusion is incorporated in the health, safety and general welfare of the community and did not w PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 • Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued need to be placed specifically in the ordinance. He did not feel he had enough information to include that provision. Page 2: Chairperson Caldwell noted that the City Council at its last meeting indicated preference for combining HC-RD and NHR districts so that would probably be reflected in the ordinance when adopted. Page 3' Commissioner Durket suggested that item (b) under Section 15-20.020 be amended to allow for accessory structures of 400 square feet. Chairperson Caldwell noted that if the above suggestion were agreed to, Section 15-20.030(a) would no longer be necessary. Commissioner Bogosian felt the section should be left as written. Commissioner Forbes said his preference also was to leave the section as written. Chairperson Caldwell discussed the point raised by one of the speakers regarding Section 15-20.020(b) that there be no right of conversion to commercial or industrial use of accessory structures. Mr. Emslie pointed out that conversion of any structure would have to be consistent with permitted uses only. If it were converted without a conditional use permit or converted to a nonconforming use, it would be a violation of the ordinance. Commissioner Durket did not feel a separate provision was necessary because it would be incorporated in the practice and procedures for the City; Commissioner Bogosian concurred. Page 4- Chairperson Caldwell noted one of the speakers raised the issues of increasing the setback from 50 feet to 100 feet and the loo slope for swimming pools. , Commissioner Bogosian was inclined to leave the language as written. Mr. Emslie responded that the definition used is from the Santa Clara Valley Water District and it provides the maximum amount of control or distance from drainage facilities. • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 C7 Page 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioner Forbes said he would like to have a 100 foot setback. Chairperson Caldwell suggested that staff provide additional analysis on this issue to the Council. Chairperson Caldwell suggested that the speaker might have additional information to justify the 10% slope for swimming pools. Page 5- Chairperson Caldwell recalled a previous Commission consensus regarding Item (f) that there be one recreational court. Commissioner Bogosian said he would be inclined to ask that Item (i) be eliminated as one of the uses because of the fact that there would be some negative impacts on the hillside because of parking associated with the facilities. Regarding Item (k), he suggested that overnight accommodations run counter to the intentions of the ordinance and would like to see Item (k) eliminated. He suggested that Item (j) be amended to eliminate the words "overnight accommodation." Commissioner Durket stated he was in favor of leaving Items ( i ) and (k) in the ordinance because they were conditional uses that the Commission would have say in. Commissioner Forbes was in favor of removing Items (k) and (j). Chairperson Caldwell reiterated her previous concerns regarding (i) and (k). She agreed with Commissioners Bogosian and Forbes regarding (k). She felt that ancillary activities that go along with bed and breakfast lodging would add to the environmental impact. She said it was her initial understanding that Item (i) was initially included to accommodate the Mountain Winery and felt that the nonconforming uses section would take care of the problem. She had difficulty including this section on the basis of the economic incentive argument that staff provided. The arguments against including bed and breakfasts apply equally to conference facilities. Page 6' Regarding subsection (a)(4) on page 6, Chairperson Caldwell encouraged staff to look into application an objective criteria. • • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 12 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Page 7- Chairperson Caldwell noted a comment was raised by one of the speakers regarding subsection (5) concerning how grading might affect adjacent properties. She said she would be interested in having staff pursue the issue. She suggested that the section read: "Recommendations for appropriate grading procedures,... potential damage to the proposed project and to eliminate potential damage to adjacent properties and otherwise to insure safe development of the property." There was Commission consensus to include the proposed amendment. Regarding Section (c), Chairperson Caldwell suggested that the determination of whether or not additional studies are required should be made by the City Engineer and the City Geotechnical Consultant. Page 8- Commissioner Bogosian stated he was inclined to retain subsection (e). He felt that if there were a situation where a person could suffer some financial loss as a result of not playing according to the rules that they would be more apt to play according to the rules to start with if these financial assurances were included. Commissioner Durket suggested the following language: "The applicant shall post security deposit or a bond of an amount determined by the City Engineer as one measure to ensure the completion of all required geological and geotechnical reports and corrective work. This shall not preclude enforcement by other means." City Attorney Faubion indicated that the way the provision is written it is very limiting. It is the only means of security and does not allow for any other kind of leverage. She stated that the suggestion of making this one among many options is a good idea. Chairperson Caldwell suggested development of language that would codify the City Engineer's current policy and that staff include that in the proposal to the City Council. There was consensus to include the amendment. Page 9' No comments. • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 13 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Page 10• Regarding Subsection (6) Caldwell said it was her would be reviewed by both Valley Water District. at the top of the page, Chairperson understanding that the 50 foot setback the City Engineer and the Santa Clara There was consensus to delete the word "or." Under "Grading," Chairperson Caldwell suggested that recommendation for a maximum of 1,000 cubic yards but providing additional grading it certain findings can be made. Under "corrective grading" she suggested that the Commission include the findings the Commission had consensus on for corrective measures on page 9 which are (i) and (iii) from (f)(2) on page 9. Page 11' No comments. Page 12• Commissioner Bogosian indicated his support of the clustering alternative as developed. Chairperson Caldwell expressed concern regarding the open space remaining after approval of a cluster development. She requested that it be made clear that no further subdivision of remaining open space be possible. Ms. Faubion responded that it is not necessarily inherent in that if there was a large enough parcel there was no reason a party could not request a subdivision as long as other standards are met. She stated that conditions of approval could be added on the tentative map that require the final map recorded to say that no further subdivision is permitted. Chairperson Caldwell requested that staff pursue language to be included in the ordinance. Commissioner Bogosian suggested further language for dedicated open space to further clarify the intention. Commissioners Durket and Forbes were in agreement with the other Commissioners. f PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 • Page 14 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Page 13 Chairperson Caldwell was not in favor of the condition of 2,400 square footage for structures in the zone. Mr. Emslie said the idea was to eliminate the possibility of having a small structure next to a larger structure creating any inconsistency in the neighborhood. Chairperson Caldwell felt the design review findings might take care of that situation. Commissioners Bogosian and Durket agreed with Chairperson Caldwell. In subsection (8), Chairperson Caldwell suggested language after the colon in the fourth line to read: "length of driveway, reduction in building height, reduction in allowable floor area, reduction in site coverage, reduction in site dimensions and increase in setbacks. Page 14- Chairperson Caldwell referred to the reference in Section 15-20.080 to Section 15-20.50(g) and noted that should read "Section 15- 20.050(g)(2)." She requested clarification regarding the last clause of that paragraph. Mr. Emslie indicated that phrase dovetails into (8) on the previous page. Chairperson Caldwell requested that be made as explicit as it is on the previous page if that is the intent. Page 15 No comments. Page 16- No comments. Page 17' No comments. Page 18- No comments. s PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 r Page 15 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued FORBES/DURKET MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE MODIFICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AGREED TO AND TO REQUEST THAT STAFF PROVIDE ANALYSIS OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED THIS EVENING. Passed 4-0. 7. City of Saratoga, Noise Ordinance and recommendations regarding the Village Noise Issues. The Village Noise Committee which was appointed by the Planning Commission to study the Village noise issues prepared recommendations for the Planning Commission's review and consideration. Some of the recommendations include modifications and/or additions to the new Noise Ordinance prior to adoption by the City Council. Mr. Emslie reviewed the staff memorandum dated May 22, 1991. The public hearing was opened at 10:34 p.m. Mr. Alan Giberson, 15561 Glen Una Drive, addressed the Commission. He suggested that under Section 30.060 the hours of construction be amended to 9:00 to 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. He also suggested in Section 30.080 that the time for a permit to allow exceptions be limited to 60 days rather than 120 days and the Planning Commission should have approval or notification of the issuance of the permits for exceptions. Mr. John Campbell, 13759 Saratoga Vista Avenue, addressed the Commission on behalf of the Saratoga Cemetery District. He expressed concern regarding the elimination of leaf blowers. He explained the procedure for cleaning leaves from the cemetery and requested that an exception be made so the cemeteries could use the leaf blowers. He said it would be a hardship to the Cemetery District if it were necessary to change the method of cleaning the cemetery. Mr. Andy Bogart addressed the Commission in support of the Cemetery District. DURKET/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:42 P.M. Passed 4-0. In response to Commissioner Durket's question regarding an exception permit for the Cemetery District, Mr. Emslie responded that this might be an issue where staff could be directed to provide a series of alternatives. One is dealing with this as a s PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 16 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued specific issue, dealing with it as a noise measurement at property lines or establishing limitations on the hours and days of the week that leaf blowers could be used. Commissioner Durket suggested that be done because he felt the cemeteries have a unique situation and it would create a hardship on them to not be allowed to use the leaf blowers. Commissioner Bogosian indicated that there are people residing in the convent near the cemetery and there are neighbors near the cemetery who could be disturbed by the leaf blowers. He did not feel the cemetery has exhausted the other alternatives to the machines and felt that if the restrictions were going to apply to individual homeowners they should apply to the Cemetery District. Commissioner Forbes said he was not prepared to vote on this item because he did not have the time to study the proposal. He requested the item be continued. If that was not possible, he would abstain from voting. FORBES MOVED CONTINUANCE OF THE NOISE ORDINANCE. The motion died for lack of a second. DURKET/CALDWELL MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE SUGGESTION THAT THE CEMETERY DISTRICT BE TREATED SEPARATELY. Chairperson Caldwell indicated she was in favor of the recommendation made with respect to the cemetery. She felt the Council would be well served by a more thorough analysis by staff of the options that would be available to the City in accommodating the cemetery's unique situation. She was in favor of one of the speaker's suggestions that hours for construction on weekends (Section 7-30.060) be from the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and suggested modifying the motion to include the changes in hours. Commissioner Durket agreed to accept the above-mentioned amendment to his motion. Chairperson Caldwell also suggested that the initial term of the exception permit be shortened to 30 days (Section 7-30.080) and allowing Planning Director approval of exception permits up to 30 days and then requiring Planning Commission approval of exception permits in excess of 30 days. • Commissioner Durket was agreeable to the amendment. i PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 17 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued The motion carried 3-0-1 (Forbes abstained). CALDWELL/BOGOSIAN MOVED THAT THE SUGGESTIONS MADE BY THE NOISE COMMITTEE THAT THE COMMISSION FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY STAFF THAT THE CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN LAID OUT BY THE NOISE COMMITTEE AND AGREED TO BY THE COMMITTEE BE INCORPORATED IN USE PERMITS AND FURTHER SUGGESTING THAT PERHAPS SOME FORM OF LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ENTERPRISES IN THE CITY BE USED TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUGGESTED MEASURES. Passed 3-0-1 (Forbes abstained). 8. Annual review of Capital Improvement Program for consistency with the General Plan. -------------------------------------------------------------- City Engineer Perlin reviewed the program and the staff memorandum dated May 16, 1991. Commissioner Durket stated he was unclear what the Commission was to do with the projects and felt more time was needed to look at each individual project. Mr. Emslie responded that determining whether the projects go forward or not is not within the Commission's purview. Secondly, the environmental review is most often completed at the time the project is formulated. He explained that the only thing the Commission had to deal with is that one of the Commission's responsibilities in terms of maintaining the General Plan and the zoning ordinances is to review the City's capital improvement projects for consistency with the General Plan. In response to further questions, Mr. Perlin described the program in further detail. Commissioner Bogosian agreed with Commissioner Durket's comments regarding the fact that more time was needed to review the program. Chairperson Caldwell suggested a study session with the City Engineer to obtain further background documentation for some of the items. Mr. Perlin indicated that the update to the General Plan is being done simultaneously with adoption of the two-year budget. When the budget is adopted, funds are appropriated for capital projects and the capital projects need to be part of the capital improvement plan so funds can be appropriated. ~ • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 18 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Commissioners Bogosian, Durket and Forbes all indicated they would abstain from voting on this item due to the fact that they required more information regarding the program. City Manager Peacock indicated that before the City Council can adopt the plan a finding has to be made by the Commission that the projects proposed are consistent with the policies of the General Plan. The City Council will not officially adopt the plan until June 19. Commissioner Durket requested copies of the minutes of the study sessions and public hearings regarding the program. Ms. Faubion suggested the Commission indicate the items it wished to address at the study session. Commissioner Durket stated he wished to have further information on Project No. 951, requested the minutes from the public hearings and an analysis of the item with respect to the circulation element. Commissioner Bogosian said he wished to review the entire proposal at the study session. Commissioner Durket requested further information on Project No. 9101 and Project No. 9110. Chairperson Caldwell requested background discussion on Project No. 9109. Commissioner Bogosian requested information on the money being set aside for consultants and questioned whether there were other sources for the funds. DURKET/FORBES MOVED TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO JUNE 12, 1991 WITH A STUDY SESSION ON JUNE 4. Passed 4-0. Due to the lateness of the hour, Chairperson Caldwell indicated the Commission would hear Item 9 and continue the remainder of the agenda. The attorney for Mr. Emami expressed concern regarding the time limitations for the project; he was assured that there was time to hear the item before the time limit expired. FORBES/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO CONTINUE ITEMS 10, 11, 12 AND 13 TO JUNE 12, 1991. Passed 4-0. • • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 19 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued 10. SM-91-005 Craik, 20959 Hidden View Ln., request for consideration to enclose greater than 4,000 sq. ft. of a 2.1 acre site with fencing within the HC- RD zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. - ----------- 11. DR-91-003 ------------------------------- ------------------- Pliner, 15257 Hume Dr., request to construct a 6,928 sq. ft. one-story, single family residence on a 2.36 acre parcel in the R-1-40,000 zone ----------- district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. --------------------------------------------------- 12. DR-90-065 Emami, 20760 Wardell Rd., Parcel 2, request to construct a 3,708 sq. ft., two-story, single family residence on a 13,000 sq. ft. parcel in the R-1-12,500 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. ----------- 13. DR-90-067 --------------------------------------------------- Emami, 20728 Wardell Rd., Parcel 1, request to construct a 4,823 sq. ft. two-story, single family residence on a 32,535 sq. ft. parcel in the R-1- 12,500 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The agenda was moved back to Item 9. 9. SD-90-010 Vidanage, 12585 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd., request for tentative map approval to subdivide a 1.87 acre lot into five new parcels ranging from 12,524 to 14,043 sq. ft. in area within the R-1-12,500 zone district per Chapter 14 of the City Code. The proposed subdivision would be accessed by a cul-de-sac. An environmental initial study has been prepared for preliminary review per the CEQA guidelines. -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Walgren presented the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 22, 1991. The public hearing was opened at 11:43 p.m. Mr. Warren Heid, 14630 Big Basin Way, appeared for the applicant and review the proposal in detail. Mr. Paul Campbell, 12578 Wardell Court, addressed the Commission regarding his concerns relative to what will be built on Lot 4. He supported a 16-foot, one-story home so that his view will not be obstructed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 • Page 20 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Paul Taylor, 12553 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, addressed the Commission regarding his privacy concerns. Mr. Fred Zilmer, Wardell Court, addressed the Commission regarding the noise and traffic on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. The owner of the property addressed the Commission and commented on the traffic at the nursery. Mr. Heid distributed a map of the area with the two-story houses outlined and addressed the noise and traffic issues raised by the speakers. BOGOSIAN/DURKET MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 12:02 A.M. Passed 4-0. BOGOSIAN/DURKET MOVED TO CONTINUE SD-90-010 TO MAY 28, 1991 STUDY SESSION. Commissioner Durket said he was not opposed to the subdivision the way it is. He agreed with the staff requirement of the addition to the flag lot although he was not sure it was necessary. He expressed concern regarding the privacy aspects but believed that would be sufficiently taken care~of by eliminating the height or limiting the style. He was also in favor of the 10-foot buffer zone. Commissioner Bogosian expressed concern regarding the flag lot and said he would like to see a four-lot configuration on the subdivision, would like to address the privacy concerns, would like to see a building footprint on the four-lot configuration, and would like to follow the staff recommendation regarding the 18-foot height. He said he would also like to see the homes one-story. Commissioner Forbes indicated that his preference would be to act on the proposal at this meeting with a modification that ranch style, single-story house be placed on the lot not to exceed 20 f eet . Chairperson Caldwell expressed concern regarding the functional flag lot. She felt the lot was unique in that it had a crescent- shaped frontage which provides additional frontage to technically meet the requirements for a normal lot but the lot still functions as a flag lot. She said she would also like to see a proposal that would acknowledge Lot 5 as a flag lot. She was in favor of a one- story with an 18-foot height and the buffer zone. The motion carried 4-0. s ~ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1991 Page 21 DIRECTOR'S ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS COMMUNICATIONS Written 1. Heritage Preservation Minutes - 5/8/91 2. City Council Minutes - 5/1/91 oral City Council ADJOURNMENT' The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 12:25 a.m. Rebecca Cuffman