HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-09-1991 Planning Commission MinutesCITY•F SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISw.~ON
MINUTES
DATE: October 9, 1991 - 7:30 p.m.
PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave.
TYPE: Regular Meeting
----------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Chair Moran called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Present: Commissioners Moran, Caldwell, Durket, Tucker, Favero,
Boqosian and Forbes
Pledge of Allegiance
Minutes - 9/25/91
Commissioner Caldwell noted a blank in minutes correction of August
28, asking that the tapes of that meeting be checked.
Page 7, the paragraph following the motion to approve UP-91-006,
the word "omission" should be corrected to read "prohibition".
Page 8, last paragraph, Commissioner Caldwell stated the language
was not clear. The City Attorney submitted the following changes
to be reflected in the minutes (in relation to Up-550.1, Desert
Petroleum): The application 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.
Commissioner Caldwell corrected the spelling of "Biarritz" on page
8 and asked that the minutes be changed as follows on page 10
relating to Desert Petroleum: (to be inserted between the first
and second sentences in the paragraph immediately following the
motion to continue) 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 Favero noted that he was not present at the meeting of
September 25 and would like clarification as to the comments
contained in the last paragraph on~page 11 in relation to Dividend
Development. Mr. Favero asked at what meeting the City Council
requested the last design submitted and what design was being
referred to, stating these may be material facts as this project
proceeds. Planning Director stated it was not his understanding
that the City Council directed a specific design at any point in
time but the Council did indicate in July they would support
increasing the height limit on the senior project in order to
enhance the economic feasibility, of the project. Mr. Emslie
indicated staff would review the tape and elaborate if necessary.
Chair Moran asked if the "last design" referred to in the September
1
25 minutes is the c7'C,.rrently proposed design an•Planning Director
Emslie responded that was correct as he understood it.
Commissioner Durket requested that the meeting tapes of September
25 be checked for further discussion on item DR-91-048, Sandijeh on
Burns Way. He recalled there was more discussion about what the
direction the Commission wanted to take with this application
between the motion to close the public hearing and the motion to
continue the item to December 11.
• MOTION to approve the minutes of September 25, 1991 as corrected.
M/S Tucker/Caldwell
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Ayes 4
Noes 0
Abstain 3 (Bogosian, Moran,
Favero )
Chair Moran 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 October 4, 1991.
Technical Corrections to Packet
PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no technical changes.
1. DR-90-079 - Constantin, 20855 Rittridge Rd., request for
SD-90-009 - design review approval and building site
V-90-037 - approval to construct a new two-story 4,390
sq. ft. residence on a 1.8 acre site within
the HC-RD zone district per Chapters 14 and 15
of the City Code. Variance approval is also
requested to allow the residence to be
constructed on a pad with an average slope of
85% and to allow the structure to exceed the
26 ft. height limitation (application
withdrawn by applicant).
-----------------------------------------------------------
2. DR-91-058 - Saratoga Pacific Oaks, 19205 Crisp Ave. (Lot
#15), request for design review approval to
construct a new 5,615 sq. ft. single family
residence on a vacant lot per Chapter 15 of
the City Code. The residence is situated on a
1.196 acre parcel located in the R-1-40,000
zone district. The subject property is Lot
#15 of the San Marcos Heights subdivision
(cont. to 11/13/91 at the request of the
applicant; application expires 3/9/92).
MOTION to approve the consent calendar as submitted.
2
M/S Caldwell/Fave~ ~ All ayes •
MOTION to continue Item 10, Open Space Element, to a study session.
M/S Forbes/Favero Ayes 6
Noes 1 (Moran)
Commissioner Caldwell noted for the record that a clear majority of
the residents who were pesent that evening to speak on this issue
indicated a preference for a special study session. Commissioner
Bogosian stated he would like to add that individuals be notified
again for the study session and would like to adopt a format
similar to zoning ordinances with a line by line analysis. He
indicated he could support the motion if these concerns were
understood. Commissioner Tucker asked if it would be in the best
interest to listen to those people that have come to this meeting
to hear this item, allowing the Commission some format to follow in
a study session. Commissioner Forbes stated he did not feel it was
fair to other citizens that their items be delayed or continued in
order to hear this item and that the open space issue should be
given careful consideration, and deserves an individual, less
formal forum. Commissioner Favero expressed agreement, indicating
this matter requires a great deal of public input and he is anxious
to hear from the average Saratoga citizen regarding this. Chair
Moran spoke in favor of hearing the matter this evening, stating
that citizens had come to this meeting expecting this matter to be
addressed, and she would like to hold the hearing as advertised.
Planning Director Emslie indicated that the Planning Commission can
continue a public hearing without opening the public hearing and it
would be appropriate to continue it to a date certain.
Commissioner Tucker suggested that those present in the audience to
hear the open space element item should contact staff to make sure
their concerns are addressed at the study session. Commissioner
Caldwell suggested that if this matter is voted to a separate
meeting, it should be a very structured meeting and one at which
only this matter will be heard. Planning Director Emslie stated
that November 5 is a regularly scheduled study session and staff
would check to see that the theater will be available.
Chair Moran indicated to the audience that the Planning Commission
would reconvene on November 5, 1991 to hear the Open Space Element
item. She further stated that the Commission will convene in its
regular meeting room (theater) and any change to that would be
posted on the doors directing the public to the Community Center.
Commissioner Caldwell suggested that staff post the doors this
evening to let late-comers know that the public hearing for the
Open Space Element has been postponed to November 5.
Chair Moran announced to the audience that with 14 public hearings
on the agenda it was very likely that the Commission would not get
to all public hearings; the Commission's policy is to not begin any
public hearings after 11:30 p.m. and anyone interested in having
their item continued should make that request of the Commission.
PUBLIC HEARINGS **
3. AR-91-016 - GTE Mobilnet, 14375 Saratoga Ave., request for
3'
design review approval to~onstruct two, 40
ft. cellular transmission towers per Chapter
15 of the City Code. The structures are
located in the Professional and Administrative
Office (P-A) zone district (cont. from
9/25/91; application expires 3/11/92).
Planner Susan Riggs presented the staff report, indicating the item
had been continued previously over concerns with conflict of
interest and stated the City Attorney would address that issue
after the staff report. Ms. Riggs reviewed the revised proposal
before the Planning Commission, indicating that staff has prepared
an initial environmental study. Ms. Riggs reported that staff was
recommending a non-biased third party be retained by the applicant,
and approved by the Planning Director, to evaluate conflicting
reports to determine if the environmental impacts can be mitigated.
Planner Riggs further reported that, due to the issues of design
incompatibility, non- conformance and environmental concerns, staff
is unable to recommend approval of this project.
The City Attorney addressed the conflict of interest issue,
indicating that a mere participation in mutual funds does not
constitute a conflict of interest as long as the mutual fund meets
the statutory definition registered with the SEC. Several
Commissioners indicated they had no conflict of interest and were
prepared to vote on this matter this evening.
Commissioner Caldwell asked for clarification that either a
Negative Declaration or an EIR would be needed if the Commission
determined to go forward with the project. Planning Director
Emslie responded that the study shows that a Negative Declaration
would be prepared. Commissioner Caldwell added that it could be
the Commission's conclusion that a full EIR is necessary and Mr.
Emslie agreed that was correct.
Several Commissioners reported viewing Mr. Wetstone's clips
regarding another GTE monopole in the bay area.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m.
Peggy Cocker, representative of GTE Mobilnet, reviewed the new plan
before the Commission, indicating the new proposal is for two 40'
foot wooden poles, with three antennas attached to the top. Ms.
Cocker reviewed the staff report, focusing on the issues of design
review, non-conformance, and further environmental review. She
reported that in their opinion this site does meet design review
criteria, it is compatible in terms or height and bulk design, and
they believe this particular use will not enlarge or intensify this
non-conforming use. This is an unmanned facility and will not
increase parking requirements for this site. As to the issue of
site coverage, .Saratoga ordinance definition of structure
specifically excludes fences, and they will not be looking at fence
to determine if this use is non-conforming as to site coverage. In
their opinion the two wooden poles will not be intensifying or
enlarging the non-conforming use. As to environmental review, they
do not feel that further environmental review is necessary but
rather, under SEQA, a categorical exemption should apply. Ms.
Cocker further reported that they do not feel that this type of
4
facility poses any'!'health hazard. Ms.
Planning Commission vote on the specific
evening, and if denied, give GTE; specific
assist them in determining rather or not to
other antennae poles on this site.
Cocker asked that the
plan before them this
reasons for denial to
look at other plans for
Don Whetstone, 14395 Saratoga Avenue, expressed concern over the
fact that screening has not been addressed, indicating that trees
on the east side of the site will do nothing to screen the view
from his building located on the west side of the property. Mr.
Whetstone further stated his concern with the rapid increase in
cellular use indicating that applications have been filed with the
FCC and the EPA to do something about setting some standards. He
expressed appreciation to the Planning Commission for trying to
protect residents regarding this issue.
Noel Lindsay, 14349 Saratoga Avenue, asked that consideration be
given to the potential damages that could be incurred by homeowners
in the area of the site. Mr. Lindsay stated his opinion that
equitable restitution should be made to homeowners who's property
values will drop if this project proceeds as proposed.
Joe Long, 14363 Saratoga Avenue, spoke against the project stating
it does not belong this close to residences and it will take away
views and property values.
Shelley Williams, 11951 Brook Ridge Drive, spoke in favor of the
project and urged the Planning Commission to visit the site.
Bob Pierce, 20350 Argonaut Drive, stated the project would not do
anything to enhance the aesthetic value of the Village and urged
the Planning Commission to deny the project.
Mary Monaghan, 14351-C Saratoga Avenue, expressed concerns with
health hazards and urged denial of the project.
Peggy Cocker, representing the applicant, addressed some of the
concerns raised by residents stating that the applicant has been
working on the need for service in the project area and reiterating
her previous statement regarding the SEQA categorical exemption.
Ms. Cocker further stated the applicant feels they have put their
best plan before the Planning Commission.
Ms. Cocker proceeded to answer various questions of the Commission,
indicating the poles are 22" in diameter at the bottom with
tapering to the top; wires shown in Exhibit A would be in the
interior of the structure; there is approximately 395 sq. ft.
inside the building, which is presently being used as office space
but will house telephone switching equipment.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:34 p.m.
M/S Favero/Bogosian Al1'ayes
MOTION to deny AR-91-006 with prejudice.
M/S Forbes/Tucker
5
Commissioner Tucke~ withdrew her second wh~ the motion was
repeated. The motion died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Favero referred to documents provided by staff giving
a chronology of events, indicating that the Planning Department was
going to approve this on August 5 and asked why this point was not
included in the chronology of events. Planner Riggs responded that
because this was a permitted use' under this zone district staff
typically, in order to keep the process moving, sends a letter of
intention to approve to affected neighbors to let them know what
the proposal is. Ms. Riggs stated concerned citizens then have ten
days to review the proposed plans, giving them an opportunity to
discuss and raise issues of concern to staff. At the end of the
ten day period, a second letter is sent stating that staff will
either go forward with intention to approve the project or, as in
this case, staff will recommend denial of the project.
Commissioner Favero expressed concerns with sending mixed signals
to the public and the credibility of the representations made.
Commissioner Favero questioned why a petition signed by residents
was not included in the agenda packet and Planner Riggs responded
it may have been included in a previous packet. Commissioner
Favero also expressed concern with health hazards, indicating he
would not vote in favor of this project.
MOTION to deny AR-91-016 with prejudice.
M/S Forbes/
Motion died for lack of a second.
MOTION to deny AR-91-016 without prejudice per the staff report.
M/S Caldwell/Tucker
Commissioner Caldwell stated that she felt the heart of the issue
is how to define the use and, for the purposes of the Commission's
evaluation of non-conforming use; are we talking about just the
aspect of the use that makes it non-conforming or the totallity of
the use at the site. The City Attorney responded that categorical
exemptions apply only if there is no chance the project will have
an adverse effect. If it is determined there could be an adverse
effect, as staff has found, the categorical exemption doesn't
matter. Commissioner Caldwell further asked the issue of enlarging
or intensifying the use - what use are we talking about - and the
City Attorney responded it is dependent on what question is being
asked. She stated that for the purposes of processing this
application, staff determined that a design review permit was
required because the antennae is a new, independent structure. As
to determining what type of parking and the details of the district
standards, one way or another we need to look at what the parking
effects are.
Commissioner Bogosian stated he is opposed to this design review
proposal because he can't make the design review findings, the view
cannot be successfully mitigated, and it will adversely impact the
environment. He also stated he feels there will be an
intensification of use in the area, impacted the total flow of
traffic .
6
Chair Moran thanke~the Planning staff for th~series of reports
and stated a different location should be looked into.
Commissioner Durket expressed appreciation to staff for the reports
on health issues expressed agreement with Commissioner Bogosian's
views.
CALL FOR THE QUESTION
All ayes
Chair Moran informed the applicant they have ten days to appeal
this action to the City Council.
Chair Moran again invited applicants to request a continuance of
their items to another meeting.
Mr. Oliver requested his item, Item 9 - Dividend Development be
continued for two weeks to allow the Planning Commission to review
the results of the air study.
MOTION to continue SM-91-003, ZC-91-001, to the October 23, 1991
Planning Commission meeting.
M/S Tucker/Durket
Mr. Brackwill asked if was appropriate to ask for a study session
regarding the carbon monoxide issue and Chair Moran indicated the
carbon monoxide report was not available this evening and it would
be more appropriate to address this issue at the next meeting when
all the information will be available. She further recommended
that Mr. Brackwill leave his name and address with staff who will
see that he is notified of future meetings on this subject.
CALL FOR THE QUESTION Ayes 6
Noes 0
Abstain 1 (Favero)
Chair Moran called a recess at 8:55 p.m.
The Planning Commission reconvened at 9:09 p.m.
-----------------------------------------------------------
4. DR-91-022 - Orosz, 14113 Pike Rd., request for design
SD-89-011.2 - review approval to construct a new 5,217 sq.
ft. two-story residence on a one acre site
within the NHR zone district per Chapter 15 of
the City Code: Modification to condition #27
of SD-89-011 is also requested to allow the
structure to exceed the 200 ft. contour
elevation (cont. from 9/11/91; application
expires 10/26/91).
Planner Walgren presented the staff report, noting that the
Planning Commission reviewed this matter at its September 11
meeting and, based on the prominence of the parcel, continued the
item to allow the applicant to revise the plans per staffs
recommendations. Mr. Walgren reviewed the changes before the
Commission this evening, stating that staff feels the applicant has
satisfactorily addressed each of the concerns raised at the
September 11 public hearing.
7
Commissioner Caldw~l indicated that at the las~public hearing the
second story pullback was discussed and asked if the resolution to
that concern was the window boxes. Planner Walgren indicated that
was correct. Commissioner Favero asked if a precedent was being
set here in regard to elevation and exceeding the height limit and
questioned if this should go before the City Council. Planner
Walgren indicated the condition was being specifically placed on
this individual parcel, and would~be looked at case by case. The
City Attorney stated that any action the Commission takes is
precedent setting to the extent that someone else has similar
conditions. This condition is applied to meet a specific situation
and each application would be evaluated on a case by case basis.
Commissioner Caldwell asked for clarification of the policy
regarding bonding conditions. Planner Emslie responded that the
policy states that replacement and protected trees shall be bonded
for 100% of their retail value.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 9:20 p.m.
Michael Helm, 200 7th Avenue, Santa Cruz, project architect,
reviewed the modifications made to the plans and indicated he and
the applicant are agreeable to all conditions and ask for approval
of the Commission.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 9:24 p.m
M/S Tucker/Durket All ayes
MOTION to deny DR-91-022 and SD-89-011.2 without prejudice for the
following reasons:
1. this site is even more prominent than the neighboring site
and a significant percentage of the roof line exceeds the
200' contour;
2. applicant did not accomplish a meaningful second story
relief;
3. the color is far too white.
M/S Caldwell/Bogosian
Commissioner Favero indicated he would like to see the Commission
articulate what they would like to see from the applicant.
Commissioner Caldwell stated she~has been very specific in her
motion as to what she would like to see.
CALL FOR THE QUESTION All ayes
-----------------------------------------------------------
5. DR-91-041 - Waller, 20420 Montalvo Oaks, request for
design review approval to construct a new
4,123 sq. ft.~two-story residence on a 22,651
sq. ft. parcel within the R-1-20,000 zone
district per Chapter 15 of the City Code
(cont. from 8/28/91; application expires
1/26/91).
Planner Walgren presented the staff report, noting that staff
recommends approval of this project. Mr. Walgren further reported
8,
that staff had rec~ed landscape plans today ~hibit B) and they
would be included in the resolution should the Planning Commission
approve the project. Planner Walgren reported that the house plan
has been modified to leave 16' between the house and the trees .
The City Horticulturist's report is also included for reference.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 9:40 p.m.
Michael Layne, 513 Monterey Avenue, Los Gatos, architect, addressed
the Commission regarding the proposed plan and stated that every
effort will be made to see that the trees nearest the house are
preserved.
Mr. Hogan of Saratoga expressed concern with the protection of the
six Blue Oaks and the Elm tree, and suggested several measures that
could be taken to see that they are preserved. His suggestions
were in the areas of grading, irrigation and utility trenching. He
further suggested that inspections be made at key stages of the
construction of the proposed home.
Mr. Waller, applicant, stated he will take all necessary
precautions regarding drainage and asked that the Commission look
at their building project and the drainage issue as two different
matters.
Duane Sand, 14910 Vickery Lane, reported that the changes made
since the last meeting were very good and he was pleased with the
landscaping plan submitted. Mr. Sand did express concern with the
drawings regarding the roof line and concern with the drainage
issue.
Richard Rivoir, 20411 Hill Avenue, reviewed maps plotting the
property and expressed his concerns with drainage construction as
well as the bulkiness of the proposed structure.
Joseph Waller, 2367 Bay, San Francisco, applicant, addressed some
of the concerns expressed by other speakers, indicating
specifically that there is a separate agreement regarding the
drainage issue.
Betsy Mace, 20172 Glen Brae Drive, expressed concerns with the
height and location of the proposed structure.
Mr. Hancock, 20410 Montalvo Oaks Place, asked that the Planning
Commission pay special interest to the height of this proposed
project.
Keith Miller, 14900 Vickery Lane, expressed concern with the close
proximity of the house to the trees and with the drainage issue.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 10:20 p.m.
M/S Caldwell/Tucker
All.ayes
MOTION to deny DR-91-041 without prejudice.
M/S Durket/Bogosian
9'
Commissioner Durke~stated his belief that its not possible to
put a two story home on this particular lot. He further stated
this is a very nice home, but is~not appropriate for lot.
Commissioner Tucker spoke in favor of the design, stating she feels
it is compatible with the other homes in the neighborhood.
Commissioner Favero asked if the issue of a single story structure
was considered at the study session. Commissioner Durket indicated
it was not requested, but he had mentioned he would like to see a
single story. Commissioner Favero indicated he could only support
this if it were a one story structure.
CALL FOR THE QUESTION Ayes 4
Noes 3 (Caldwell, Tucker, Moran)
Chair Moran again invited members of the audience with items on the
agenda to ask for a continuance of their item at this time.
Steve Straight, applicant for Items 13 & 14, DR-91-055 and DR-91-
056 requested his item be continued to the October 23 meeting.
MOTION to continue DR-91-055 and DR-91-056 to the October 23, 1991
Planning Commission meeting.
M/S Forbes/Tucker Ayes 5
Noes 0
Abstain 2 (Caldwell & Favero where out
of the room at the time the
vote was taken)
----------------------------=------------------------------
6. SD-89-009 - Wonq, Chiquita Ct., request for tentative map
approval to subdivide a 26.4 acre site into
five new parcels ranging from 2.6 to 10.7
acres in size. The subject property is
located between Chiquita Way and Chiquita
Court, within the NHR zone district, and is
proposed to be accessed by a cul-de-sac off
Chiquita Court. A draft Environmental Impact
Report will be presented which will then be
available for public review and comment for a
period of 45 days, per the California
Environmental Quality Act guidelines.
Planner Walgren presented the .staff report and history of this
item, noting that the most critical environmental impacts have been
summarized in the staff report. Mr. Walgren reported that staff is
recommending the Planning Commission direct the applicant to
proceed with a modified bridge access alternative.
Ms. Turrell, project manager of the EIR for Engineering Science,
presented their findings and reviewed the site plans for the
Planning Commission as well as various alternatives as recommended
by the EIR.
Commissioner Caldwell asked if .the statement identifying the
mitigated alternative as the most ;favorable applies to individual
site development as well. Ms. Turrell responded that the statement
10
is intended to inc~de individual site developT nt.
Commissioner Favero asked Ms. Turrell if enough mitigation could be
implemented to preserve the biological and hydrology type of
impacts. He indicated the documents expressed substantial concern
with these issues and felt we should focus on the environmental
impacts with respect to wildlife and watershed. Ms. Turrell
responded there will be cumulative impacts on wildlife if the site
is developed. She further stated that given the fact that this
site is between two existing developments the impacts to wildlife
can be reasonably mitigated if the site is not completely
fragmented. Ms. Turrell stated the hydrology impacts can be
mitigated with the right conditions and the right kind of
maintenance. Commissioner Favero expressed concern with the
magnitude of the mitigation and how effective it can really be.
Ms. Turrell responded that they will not create any more impacts
than are already created on site by runoff.
Commissioner Durket noted that one alternative considered was the
elimination of parcels 1 & 5 but this was not a recommended choice
and asked why. Ms. Turrell responded it was not recommended that
parcel 1 be eliminated because they thought it could be developed
as proposed. She further reported that parcel 5, located in the
middle of a landslide, was eliminated by moving to the proposed
mitigated alternative.
Planning Director Emslie asked the Commission to keep in mind that
the EIR is resource information to give information on potential
impacts of a project before a decision is made. Part of an EIR
always includes an analysis of alternatives, but does not mean that
the Commission is bound by that.
Commissioner Caldwell asked how staff reached the proposed
alternative stated in their report. Planner Walgren responded that
staffs recommendation for the bridge alternative is consistent with
the EIR's recommendation of the modified bridge alternative and the
only real inconsistency relates to parcel 1, which does conform
with NHR standards. Staff was taking the criteria further, but
overall staffs recommendation is consistent with the EIR
recommendation. Commissioner Caldwell asked how the "no project"
alternative fits into this. Planning Director Emslie responded
that every EIR prepared in the state has as one of its alternatives
a "no project" alternative which has to be looked at. The
Commission has to be told what will happen if no project go
forward. Commissioner Caldwell 'asked how the Commission is to
address the cost of corrective measures. Planning Director Emslie
responded that staff does not have the information at this point to
answer that and are waiting for geotechnical clearance on this.
Staff would not recommend any of these alternatives until that
phase of the development is completed.
Commissioner addressed page 91 of the agenda packet, asking if Item
d should be revised to address all trees, not just ordinance sized
trees given the policy of the Council to require identification of
all trees and groves of trees on development applications.
Planning Director Emslie agreed.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 11:15 p.m.
11'
• •
Bill Heiss, Civil Engineer for the project, reviewed for the
Commission the history of the project. Mr. Heiss reported that
because of the ongoing erosion there is continual silting and is
the cause for the continual landslides. He stated he feels this is
primarily a hydrologic problem. Mr. Heiss further reported that he
will be interfacing with staff to determine which alternative will
work and will be meeting with consultants as to where to go from
here. He also stated he would prefer not to eliminate parcel 1 as
it seems the most logical site with its easy access and flat
terrain.
Commissioner Favero stated he is not prepared to compromise the
environment therefore the no project alternative would be his
choice.
Paul Robles, 12906 Chiquita Ct., expressed concern with both
environmental and aesthetic issues.
Gerry Fields, 12861 Chiquita, also expressed concern with the
environment and asked that the sewage situation be addressed.
Luanne Nieman, 13217 Padero Ct., expressed concern with a potential
increase in the flow that goes from the end of the property into
Calabazas Creek. She also stated. she felt notice of this hearing
was not adequate and the notice received did not give an
explanation of what type of hearing this would be.
William Brook, 20230 Merrick Dr., spoke regarding staffs
recommendation pertaining to pedestrian and equestrian pathways,
stating he would like to recommend that what Mr. Emslie knows of
this project be preserved and an addition to recommendation #4 that
the Parker Ranch people be involved.
Commissioner Favero expressed agreement with Mr. Brook in that
intense public involvement is needed in regard to this project.
Commissioner Bogosian indicated he would prefer to see the
geological studies before directing the applicant further.
Commissioner Tucker indicated she was willing to provide more
direction to rule out some things so that the applicant can be more
focused. She further stated she felt the bridge alternative would
have the least impact on wildlife:
Commissioner Caldwell asked if it is possible for the City to
require mitigation under the no project alternative. Planning
Director Emslie responded that we need to focus on the adequacy of
the document. He further stated it would be helpful if the
Commission would give some indication of what configuration of the
development the Commission would like to see. He noted that if
some different alternative comes up that no one has thought of
before, we have to begin this entire process over. Commissioner
Caldwell asked what the Commission's limitations are in relation to
the 45 day time frame and Mr. Emslie responded that the 45 days is
the publics opportunity to review the project as it stands. If the
project changes, we go back to square one and begin the review
period over again. He further noted we are looking at a decision
in approximately May of 1992.
12
Commissioner Caldw~l suggested moving the di~ussion to a study
session format with the EIR consultant present in order to give
additional input on this matter. Planning Director Emslie
indicated this would be appropriate.
Commissioner Favero stated he is feels the Commission needs to
understand more about the impacts of this project and he is
unwilling to compromise. Mr. Favero also indicated he is
uncomfortable with the notification process and would like to
pursue the matter.
Mr. Schwartz, San Marcos, Saratoga, addressed the Commission
regarding the NHR specific plan as it relates to additional creeks
and culverts, and asked if the recommended alternative would effect
these two conditions. Commissioner Caldwell responded that at this
point the Commission does not have all the necessary information
available at this time to say what is required on a lot by lot
basis.
Planning Director Emslie reported that if there were no conflicts
the study session could be set for Tuesday, October 15.
MOTION to continue SD-89-009 to an October. l5 study session.
M/S Tucker/Durket All ayes
Chair Moran indicated that the study session will focus on the EIR
and participants should come with questions and concerns.
Commissioner Favero indicated he would like to explore some of the
methodologies used in arriving at the conclusions with respect to
mitigation recommendations.
----------------------------=-------------------------------
7. DR-91-026 - Ruehle, 21097 Comer Ave., request for design
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 9/25/91; application expires
11/19/91).
MOTION to continue to October 23, 1991.
M/S Forbes/Favero All ayes
------------------------------------------------------------
8. 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. from ,9/25/91; application expires
12/24/91).
MOTION to continue to October 23, 1991 meeting.
M/S Forbes/Favero All ayes
13
9. 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
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 9/25/91; application expires 1/92).
MOTION to continue to October 23, 1991 meeting.
M/S Forbes/Favero All ayes
10. City of Saratoga - Open Space Element
This is the first public hearing for review
and consideration of an amended Open Space
Element. As a follow-up to the Open Space
Survey conducted within Saratoga's community,
the City Council formed an Open Space Task
Force to study the open space conservation
issues. The Task Force formulated
preservation policies and implementation
program in a Draft Open Space Element for the
Planning Commission review and consideration.
MOTION to continue to November 5, 1991 meeting.
M/S Forbes/Favero All ayes
11. DR-91-050 - Callahan, 14307 Lutheria Way, request to
RE-91-005 - construct a 1,880 sq. ft. one and two-story
addition to an existing 3,015 sq. ft. two-
story residence. The request also involves
pool and hardscape surface construction within
the R-1-20,000 zone district per Chapter 15 of
the City Code.
MOTION to continue to the October 23, 1991 meeting.
M/S Forbes/Favero All ayes
---------------------------------------------------------
12. DR-91-051 - Shenhav, 12291 Titus Ave., request for design
14
~eview apt~roval to constr~t a 1, 108 sa. ft.
second story addition to an existing 2,638 sq.
ft. single family residence per Chapter 15 of
the City Code. The residence is situated on a
14,000 sq. ft. parcel and is located in the R-
1-12,500 zone district.
MOTION to continue to the October 23, 1991 meeting.
M/S Forbes/Favero All ayes
13. DR-91-055 - Saratoga Estates, 19171 Oahu Ln., request to
construct a .new one-story 4,047 sq. ft.
residence per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
The parcel is approximately 16,738 sq. ft. in
area and is located within the R-1-15,000 zone
district.
Continued per applicants request.
MOTION to continue to the October 23, 1991 meeting.
M/S Forbes/Tucker Ayes 5
Noes 0
Abstain 2 (Caldwell/Favero out of
room)
------------------------------------------------------------
14. DR-91-056 - Saratoga Estates, 19151 Oahu Ln., request to
construct a new one-story, 4,093 sq. ft.
residence per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
The parcel is approximately 26,365 sq. ft. in
area is located within the R-1-15,000 zone
district.
Continued per applicants request.
MOTION to continue to the October 23, 1991 meeting.
M/S Forbes/Tucker Ayes 5
Noes 0
Abstain 2 (Caldwell/Favero out of
room)
------------------------------------------------------------
DIRECTOR'S ITEMS
Planning Director Emslie reported that neighbors adjacent to the
Woolworth subdivision have submitted an alternative plan to the
plan the Commission approved at its last meeting. He indicated
that the proposed plan moves the driveway away from the Ernesto
property and toward the front property line. Mr. Emslie reported
he wanted to make the Commission aware of this and the Commission
determined it could be considered on an administrative basis.
Commissioner Caldwell expressed agreement provided the arborist be
consulted regarding measures to preserve the trees around the
driveway.
Planning Director Emslie thanked the Planning Commission for the
15 '
rewarding and chal~nging years he has spent king with them.
COMMISSION ITEMS
Commissioner Forbes expressed concern with the efforts of Barry
Coates in determining protective measures for trees that everyone
agrees to but then do not follow through with and asked if there
could be a periodic follow up .procedure implemented. Planning
Director Emslie responded this would be very labor intensive
however the bonding method works essentially as an insurance policy
wherein people pay a premium to hold money aside for the survival
of trees. Commissioner Caldwell suggested .that on a regular basis
add a condition that the applicant provide written confirmation
that the work is being completed. This information would be
submitted to the Planning Department where it would be directed to
the appropriate Planner. Another. suggestion was an annual or bi-
annual review by the arborist. Commissioner Tucker expressed her
objection, indicating she did not feel that the City has the
staffing to handle this type of project.
Commissioner Caldwell asked for a letter to be drafted to the City
Council requesting the Commission be given a courtesy interview for
any applicant being considered to~fill Mr. Emslie's position with
the purpose of the interview being an opportunity to express any
concerns the Commission may have with any applicant.
MOTION to direct staff to draft a letter to the City Council
requesting a courtesy interview with any interim or permanent
applicant.
M/S Caldwell/Durket Ayes 4
Noes 1 (Moran)
Absent 2 (Favero/Bogosian)
Commissioner Caldwell suggested an item be place on the agenda for
the December joint meeting with Council pertaining to the County
wide effort to preserve riparian corridors. She indicated a video
would be shown by Linda Shield-Jones.
COMMUNICATIONS
Written
1. City Council Minutes - 9/17 &9/18/91
2. Planning Commission Study Session Report - 10/1/91
oral
City Council
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 12:15 a.m.
16