Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-25-1991 Planning Commission Minutesr • n CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: September 25, 1991 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave. TYPE: Regular Meeting Roll Call Planning Commissioner Caldwell called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. Present: Commissioners Caldwell,; Forbes, Tucker, and Durket Absent: Commissioners Moran, Favero and Bogosian Pledge of Allegiance Minutes - 8/28/91 Commissioner Caldwell asked for confirmation of her statement_ ; page 3, middle of third paragraph, strike the words "..:work on..." and insert "...the uncertainty geologic condition of..."; page 11, item 7, first paragraph, the last word of that sentence/paragraph should be "applicants property". MOTION to approve the minutes of August 28, 1991 as corrected. M/S Tucker/Forbes Ayes 3 Noes 0 Abstain 1 (Durket) Absent 3 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS RESERVED FOR PERSONS DESIRING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY MATTER NOT ON THE AGENDA. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. A MAXIMUM OF 15 MINUTES WILL BE ALLOWED FOR THIS ITEM.) Chair Caldwell invited members of the audience to address the Commission on any item not on the agenda. There were no requests. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on September 20, 1991. Technical Corrections to Packet Planner Walgren noted that regarding item #6 on the Public Hearing agenda, DR-91-026 (Ruehle), staff had received a letter from the applicant requesting the continuance of this item until an October meeting to allow them to review some of the technical aspects of some of the conditions contained in the resolution. • s MOTION to move DR-91-026 (Ruehle):to the consent calendar. M/S Durket/Forties Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT CALENDAR THESE ITEMS WILL BE ACTED UPON REMOVED FROM THE.CONSENT CALENDAR OR ANY INTERESTED PARTY. IN ONE MOTION UNLESS THEY ARE FOR DISCUSSION BY COMMISSIONERS 1. DR-91-040 - Guido, 13861 River Ranch Circle, request for design review approval for a 630 sq. ft. one- story and 607.sq. ft. second story addition to an existing ,1,617 sq. ft. single family residence in the R-1-10,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code (cont. from 8/14/91, application withdrawn by applicant). ----------------------------------------------------------- 2. AR-91-016 - GTE Mobilnet,~ 14375 Saratoga Ave., appeal of denial of Administrative Review to construct a 40 ft. tall monopole cellular transmission tower within the Professional and Administrative Office (PA) zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code (cont. to 10/9/91; application expired 8/16/91). Commissioner Forbes requested this item be pulled from consent. ----------------------------------------------------------- 3. DR-91-021 - Blackwell, 20011 Bella Vista, request for design review approval to construct a new 6,175 sq. ft. one-story residence on a 1.075 acre parcel within the R-1-40,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code (cont. to 10/23/91; application expires ---------- 12/16/91). ---------------------------------------------------- 4. DR-91-044 - Lin, 20170 Rancho Bella Vista, request for design review approval to construct a new 4,440 sq. ft. two-story residence on a 20,033 sq. ft. parcel within the R-1-20,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code (cont. to 10/9/91; application expires 12/24/91). MOTION to approve the consent calendar as amended with the deletion of item 2, GTE Mobilnet, and the addition of item #6, DR-91-026 (Ruehle). M/S Tucker/Durket Ayes 4 2 • i Noes 0 Absent 3 Commissioner Forbes inquired as to why GTE Mobilnet requested a continuance to the October 9 meeting and Planning Director Emslie responded that the applicant wants to submit landscape plans and alternative antennae designs and staff has not yet received those plans. MOTION to grant a continuance to October 9, 1991 to GTE Mobilnet, AR-91-016. M/S Forbes/Durket PUBLIC HEARINGS ** Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 (THE PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY RELATIVE TO PUBLIC HEARINGS IS THAT THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION SHALL BE LIMITED TO 10 MINUTES, AND OTHER SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 3 MINUTES). 5. SD-91-002 - Woolworth, 15425 Monte Vista Dr., request for tentative map approval to subdivide a 4.34 acre site into four new parcels ranging from 40,220 to 46,540 sq. ft., each within the R-1- 40,000 zone district per Chapter 14 of the City Code. The four lots would be accessed by a private cul-de-sac (cont. from 8/28/91). Planner Walgren presented the staff report, reporting that this subdivision application was first reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 28, 1991. It was the direction of the Commission, after viewing height poles and staked building envelopes, that the applicant present modifications showing a minimum 18 ft. wide access road (in lieu of the 30 ft. wide public road) along the south side of lot #4, and consider a one-story structure restriction on lot #2. Planner Walgren further reported that staff can support this revised proposal; the revised tentative map is in conformance with the applicable general and specific plans for this area and does conform with the zoning ordinance requirements with regard to minimum lot size. Commissioner Durket addressed a letter submitted by Mr. O'Donnell and asked if he was willing to accept the Planning Departments modification (Exhibit C). Planner Walgren indicated that Mr. O'Donnell was amenable and that Exhibit D was also acceptable to Mr. O'Donnell. Mr. Walgren further reported that staff received a letter from Mr. O'Donnell regarding concerns with the alignment of the road and a letter from Mr. Ernesto regarding future • i construction on lot #2. Commissioner Caldwell asked which trees would need to be removed under Exhibits C & D. Planner Walgren responded that the smaller chestnut on Exhibit C is within th'e road construction and the large chestnut would need to be removed in Exhibit D. Commissioner Caldwell inquired as to whether staff has addressed the Emerson's concerns with the drainage issue, and Planner Walgren reported that the City Engineer has reviewed and it is felt that channeling the drainage would be an automatic obligation of the developer and staff could include a condition in the resolution that drainage on the northwest corner of parcel 3 shall be addressed and channeled into the private road for the City' Engineer's review prior to final map approval. Chair Caldwell opened the public hearing at 7:54 p.m. Mr. Woolworth, 3 Oaks Court, stated he felt the latest map is satisfactory; it mitigates the concerns of the neighbors; feels that the way the map is designed now is a workable compromise. Commissioner Caldwell asked if there is a plan to use entry gates to this subdivision and Mr. Woolworth responded that was correct. Mr. O'Donnell, Vista Drive, Saratoga, reported he was not aware of the compromise referred to earlier but submitted for the Planning Commissions review various other plans/compromises. At the direction of the Commission, Planner Walgren showed Mr. O'Donnell Mr. Woolworth's plan. Commissioner Caldwell referred to Mr. Ernesto's concern with lot #2 and the absence of height restrictions and asked if staff has considered this. Planner Walgren indicated that staff has considered all four parcels and still feels that lots #3 and #4 would have the greatest impact on view sheds. He further stated that lots #1 and #2 would be appropriate for a two-story structure. Commissioner Durket asked if the City is requiring a curved driveway and Planner Walgren stated it is a sight and safety issue and should be as much of a right angle as possible. Marvin Kirkeby, Civil Engineer for the project, stated they would like to revise the landscape plan~to include four 24" box trees, rather than specifying four oak trees. MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:09 p.m. M/S Tucker/Forbes ~ Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 MOTION to approve Exhibit D with condition of addressing the drainage issue per staff's comments, increase the distance between 4 • lots 2 and 4 to allow for a 10' landscape strip, and replace 24" box trees of a drought tolerant species for four oaks. M/S Tucker/Forbes Commissioner Tucker expressed concern with the driveway next to lot #2 asking if it would be feasible to plant along there to buffer it. She stated it seems there are no windows facing lot #2 and does not feel that putting a house on lot #2 would be an impact. Planner Walgren reported that there is currently only 6 ft. to work with but it would be possible to move to a greater distance to have a landscape strip. ; Commissioner Durket indicated he would like to see support for adding lots 1 and 2 to condition number 26 (height restriction) and stated he favors Exhibit C as far, as the driveway is concerned. Commissioner Caldwell stated she;was agreeable with Commissioner Tucker's suggestion of a 10' buffer between lot #2 and the Ernesto property; she prefers Exhibit C -from a safety standpoint it makes more sense; however Mr. O'Donnell ;seems amenable to Exhibit D as it takes care of some of his concerns. CALL FOR THE QUESTION ~ Ayes 3 Noes 1 (Durket) Absent 3 ---------------------~------~-----------~ -- q -------------g- 6. DR-91-026 - Ruehle 21097 Comer Ave re uest for desi n review approval to construct a new 5,221 sq. ft. two-story residence on a 1.95 acre site within the NHR zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. A rear yard pool, pool house and associated decking are also proposed (cont. from 9:/11/91). Continued to the October 9, 1991 meeting of the Planning Commission. ------------------------------------------------------------ 7. DR-91-048 - Sandijeh, 14265 Burns Way, request for design review approval to demolish an existing one- story residence and construct a 4,836 sq. ft. two-story home on a 28,020 sq. ft. parcel within the R-~1-15,000 zone district. Planner Walgren presented the staff report, stating that staff is unable to make the necessary design review findings at this time with specific regard to the findings that the project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy: the project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk and that the project is compatible with bulk and height with homes in the existing area. Staff is recommending that the size of the home be reduced to approximately 3800 to 4600 sq. ft., and that the second floor 5, • ~ square footage be greatly reduced if a two-story home is to be considered. Mr. Walgren reported that staff is recommending that this matter come back to a public hearing on December 11, 1991 with the noted revisions. He further reported that if the Planning Commission does not concur with staff's assessment, staff would recommend denying this application without prejudice to allow the applicant to come back with a one-story alternative. Chair Caldwell opened the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Mr. Sandi-Leh, the applicant, reported that there is currently a cottage style structure on the property but he needs a larger home; does not believe the proposed structure is too large for the area; and believes it will have the least amount of impact possible. Planner Walgren reported that ;staff received two additional letters, one from Lana Notly, 14131 Marian Road, and Mr. David Horn, 2646 Marian Road concerned with the size and compatibility of the proposed home. Mark Mittv, 1624 Orchardly Drive, San Jose, designer, addressed the Commission, indicating he would make himself available to receive input from the neighbors to try to please them and that Mr. Sandijeh will be more than happy to work with the recommendations of the staff in regard to scaling down the size of the proposed home. He further stated they would be happy to conduct a light study to address neighbors concerns with loss of light to adjacent properties. Mr. Voester, 14251 Burns Way, stated he is concerned with the compatibility of this home with the neighborhood; the privacy issue; and loss of view and sunlight. Melba Erbine, 14624 Burns Way, expressed concern with the loss of the view from her property. Donald Bernardo, 20544 Marion, stated he feels this home would dominate the other homes on Burns Way as the existing homes are smaller and of a more rural architecture. A resident at 20640 Marion Rd., spoke in opposition of the proposed home. MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:45 p.m. M/S Durket/Tucker Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 MOTION to continue DR-91-048, Sandijeh, to December 11, 1991 according to the staff recommendation with the exception of going to a one-story alternative. M/S Durket/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 The Planning Commission took a break at 8:50 p.m. 6 ~ i The meeting reconvened at 9:00 p.~m. -------------------------------------------------------------- 8. UP-91-006 - Commandeur, 13338 Carrick Dr., request for use permit approval to construct a detached two- car garage and workshop area to be located within a rear yard setback within the R-1- 10,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Planner Walgren presented the staff report, indicating that staff finds this application to be in conformance with the City's development regulations and feels that the necessary findings can be made to recommend approval of the project. Mr. Walgren then submitted into the record a letter and petition from area residents concerned with the use of the proposed addition. Planner Walgren clarified that the use permit is to allow a detached structure within a required rear yard setback as would be required for a pool cabana or other similar structure and not approval of a specific use such as a home occupation construction. Chair Caldwell opened the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. Peter Commandeur, 13338 Carrick, Saratoga, the applicant, stated he has no intentions of using this structure to conduct a home occupation; will only be using the structure for making cabinets, refinishing antiques, etc. ; will be using it for non-business, non- commercial use. MOTION to close the public hearing at 9:10 p.m. M/S Tucker/Durket Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 MOTION to approve UP-91-006, Commandeur, with one amendment to the resolution, Section B, to include language regarding non-commercial use. M/S Durket/Forbes Planning Director Emslie added a standard condition referencing Exhibit A should be inserted as condition number 3. Commissioner Tucker indicated she would like to see prohibition of the second unit use added to the language. The maker and second of the motion agreed to add this to the motion. CALL FOR THE QUESTION Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 7 • 9. UP-550.1 - Desert Petroleum, 12600 Saratoga Ave., request for use permit renewal approval to maintain an existing gasoline service station and to modify the existing signage from Gasco to Arco per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The subject property is located within the R-M-5,000 P-C zone district. Planner Walgren presented the staff report, indicating that staff was able to make findings and although the proposed sign is compatible with the existing development, the Planning Commission may not find it appropriate in this area. He then presented the following sign alternatives: 1. Have the gas station maintain the existing smaller sign, externally illuminated and change, the Gasco advertisement with an Arco plaque and revise the gas price signs. 2. Direct the applicant to proceed with a wood monument sign similar to the one that is existing but larger in size and similar to the scale proposed on the exhibit. Chair Caldwell opened the public hearing at 9:14 p.m. Commissioner Durket inquired as to whether or not the Planning Commission can impose conditions as to the type of operation, specifically to preclude a mini-mart, or is the Commission charged with reviewing only the signage. Planner Walgren responded that the Planning Commission can review the entire permit, noting that the applicant has a use permit until 1994. Mr. Walgren went on to report that staff has received complaints that the gas company was delivering gas beyond the existing hours of operation; the Community Services Officer has given the gas station 30 days to comply before taking further action. Planner Walgren also reported a letter from a resident on Biarritz Lane expressing concern with the use in general. Commissioner Forbes expressed concern with the violations of the use permit and asked the City Attorney if the Planning Commission is entitled to review whether or not they want to continue allow this use permit. The City Attorney responded that the application before the Commission is for review of the sign. However, the applicant is also obligated to operate under the conditions of the use permit. The City does not need a sign request to pursue violations of the use permit; can pursue them independently through revocation action. The sign request itself does not give the Commission an active role in approving the overall permit. The Commission will get an opportunity to review the use permit prior to its expiration in 1994, if the applicant decides to request another extension of the use permit. 8 • ~ Planning Director Emslie explained the revocation process that would have to be taken to revoke a permit. He indicated that the Planning Commission needs evidence to start the process, the applicant would be given an opportunity to respond to that evidence and then the Commission would make a decision as to the continuance of the use permit. Mr. Emslie stated that the Commission can take testimony this evening and discuss the violations, but it would not be possible to take action to revoke the permit this evening. He further clarified that the applicant could not initiate a mini-mart without coming back to the Planning Commission with a request to do so. ' Commissioner Durket expressed concern with sending a message that we are going to side step the violations; feels the violations should be dealt with first; would like to review the evidence to determine whether the permit should be revoked. Planning Director Emslie stated that if it is the consensus of the Planning Commission, staff could be directed to initiate the revocation proceedings, and the Commission could withhold any action on the sign until that is done. Chair Caldwell stated this was a noticed public hearing and suggested that the Commission hear testimony on this matter. John Rutherford, 2060 Knoll Drive, Ventura, CA, representing Desert Petroleum, stated he was not prepared to make a presentation this evening but would try to clarify some of the information. He stated the station is not changing hands, only changing their supplier. In regard to the issue of violations, Mr. Rutherford stated that Desert Petroleum does not deliver their own product; they have tried to conform to the requirements of the use permit but the product is delivered by an outside firm who is aware of the use permit restrictions. He indicated that by dealing with Arco, a major supplier, he felt confident that future deliveries will be in conformance with the use permit. Mr. Rutherford indicated that Desert Petroleum does not want to jeopardize their use permit and can restrict deliveries even more if necessary. Jim Peck, 18875 Bullocks Lane, representing the homeowners association of the Chardonnay Development, spoke against approval of the proposed sign and stated a desire to see the use permit revoked. Richard Johansen, 12537 Saratoga Avenue, expressed concerns with the violations by the applicant, the potential for environmental polluting and the possible negative effect on property values in the surrounding neighborhood. Stan Powell, 12636 Biarritz Lane, addressed concerns with occasional dumping on the site and young people congregating behind the station. 9 • Gary McDaniels, 204 Campus Way,; Modesto, representing the sign company, stated that the proposed sign was designed with State weight and measures standards; the current sign does not conform with the State standards; in designing the sign, they tried to incorporate existing building materials. Frank Rodriguez, 12625 Saratoga Avenue, spoke against the use permit in general. Shelley Williams, Brookridge Drive, Saratoga, spoke in favor of the use permit, adding that there is a need for service stations in that area and the conditions described by neighbors are for the property owners to control. MOTION to close the public hearing at 10:00 p.m. M/S Durket/Tucker Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 MOTION to continue the application for the sign modification and direct staff to begin revocation proceedings to allow for testimony from both side on December 11, 1991. M/S Durket/Forbes Chair Caldwell indicated she would like to deal separately with the issues of the sign modification and the use permit. She explained that it is her opinion that the proposed sign is inappropriate for the residential setting of the station. Any redesign should incorporate wood materials, external lighting and as nearly match the size and design of the existing sign as possible. Commissioner Forbes suggested continuing for'90 days and then proceed with revocation hearings. CALL FOR THE QUESTION Ayes Noes Absent Planning Director Emslie reported that it will 45 days to get the procedure in order investigation. He indicated we are looking at if possible. 4 0 3 take approximately and initiate the November 13, sooner ------------------------------------------------------------ 10. SM-91-003 - Dividend Development Corp.(Owner); Chapman & ZC-91-001 - Wilson (Applicant), 13150 Saratoga Ave., request to modify previously approved site development plans for the senior housing portion of the former Paul Masson site. The applicants propose the following on an 11.07 acre parcel located on the southerly half of 10 • ~ the Masson site zoned MU-PD: A. 192 condominium units B. 21 patio homes C. 40 beds.- personal care D. 80 beds.- skilled nursing In addition, the owner and applicant are requesting to amend the height limitation prescribed for the MU-PD zone district. The owner and applicant request a maximum height of 46 feet to allow a three-story structure. This would exceed the 30 foot, two-story limit prescribed for the MU-PD zone district (cont. from 7/24/91). Planning Director Emslie gave the staff report, indicating staff has concerns with the fact that the prospective operator, Summit Corporation, has withdrawn from the project, and because of the need for an operator, there is no assurance the project will go forth. Mr. Emslie reviewed the air quality concerns of the Planning Commission in regard to this project and the issue of the proposed change in the height of this structure. Planning Director Emslie further stated that the developer would like approval of the zone change to the 45 ft. height limit. Chair Caldwell opened the public hearing at 10:18 p.m. Dick Oliver, Dividend Development Corporation, addressed the Commission regarding his company's commitment to the City in relation to this project; still feels this is a good project for the City; feels there is a feeling that this site should not be for a senior citizen facility. Mr. Oliver expressed concern over the continued delays in not getting 'on with the project, indicating they are looking for a spirit of cooperation, and direction to go forward with the project. Mr. Oliver indicated he would like some definitive guidelines from the Commission and would like to see approval of a three-story structure. Commissioner Durket inquired why Summit withdrew,and Mr. Oliver responded that it was because the project was not progressing. When asked if Summit would be interested if the project is approved, Mr. Oliver responded that Summit has stated they are out of the picture but if approval is given, they are willing to talk about getting back into it. Planning Director Emslie gave an update, indicating that the consultant has identified a medical expert that can provide health information in relation to the air quality issue and that it would take approximately 1 1/2 days for review. Mr. Oliver stated he would be happy to work with staff in that direction; if there are serious health problems it would certainly change his and the City 11 • ~ Council's opinions. In regard to the three-story design, Mr. Oliver reported that the last design was done at the request of the City Council. Bill Scott, Chapman & Wilson Inc., addressed the Commission indicating that the State will not allow the project to be built until 60% of the units are sold and in order to proceed with the State, specific information is needed from the City. Chair Caldwell asked Mr. Oliver if his desire was for the Planning Commission to pass on the three-story issue absent the air quality issue and Mr. Oliver responded that he did not feel the three-story plan adds to the health risk. Shelley Williams, Brookridge Drive, Saratoga, spoke in favor of this project, indicating it was close to shopping, transportation and various other activities and would be a good location for a senior project. Stan Powell, 12636 Barritz Lane, spoke in favor of the project. Peter Leslie, 13100 Saratoga Avenue, spoke against the project, stating it was ill prepared. Ray Passatino, Saratoga Avenue, spoke against the three-story aspect of the project. Dave Kramer, 13103 Montrose, indicated he would like to see the structure kept to two-stories. MOTION to close the public hearing at 11:11 p.m. M/S Tucker/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3 Commissioner Durket asked if the zoning is changed to allow a three-story structure could it be changed back and Planning Director Emslie responded it can be changed anytime, but we cannot condition the zoning. Commissioner Durket further stated that there were three members of the Commission that were not present to give their views on this matter. MOTION to direct staff to prepare a resolution along the lines of the draft zoning ordinance that conditions the height of a structure tied to a senior facility only (up to 45 ft.). M/S Durket/Forbes Ayes 2 Noes 2 Absent 3 12 a It was noted no action was taken due to a tie vote. MOTION to continue SM-91-003/ZC-91-001 to October 9, 1991 for consideration of a three-story structure. M/S Caldwell/Durket Ayes 4, Noes 4, Absent 3 DIRECTOR'S ITEMS 1. Accumulated notes from the Circulation Element update workshops dated 7/23, 7/30, 8/13 and 8/20 for Planning Commission review and comment. Planning Director Emslie stated he would make sure that these are only notes; they were presented because the Planning Commission requested a list. COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Durket announced the resignation of Planning Director Emslie; addressed the issue of late meetings inquiring if an earlier adjournment time could be considered. It was the consensus of the Commission that would not allow time to hear all items. Chair Caldwell asked about the signs for Heritage Lane and Mr. Emslie responded the Heritage Committee has to approve and will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Chair Caldwell also asked about the recommendation from the Planning Commission regarding the trees along Saratoga Avenue. Mr. Emslie responded that the arborist is currently working on it. Commissioner Forbes stated he would like to see landscape plans submitted with every design as part of the application procedure. COMMUNICATIONS Written 1. City Council Minutes - 8/6 and 9/4/91 2. Planning Commission Study Session Report - 9/17/91 Oral City Council ADJOURNMENT MOTION to adjourn at 11:35 p.m M/S Tucker/Durket Ayes 4, Noes 0, Absent 3 13