HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-11-1991 Planning Commission MinutesCI'3~3F SARATOGA PLANNING COMM~ION
MINUTES
DATE: December 11, 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 7:35 p.m.
Present: Chair Moran and Commissioners Forbes, Durket and Bogosian
Absent: Commissioners Caldwell, Tucker and Favero. Planning
Director Eisner announced he had received calls from Commissioners
Caldwell and Favero regarding their absences at this meeting and
Chair Moran reported that Commissioner Tucker's was an excused
absence.
Pledge of Allegiance
Minutes - 11/13/91
Chair Moran noted that on page 4, last paragraph regarding
Boisseranc, Tucker should be added after Commissioner; page 5,
regarding Dividend Development, please clarify whether there are
21, 23 or 17 patio homes; page 7, first sentence, Andrew Bai1y
should be Beverett; page 7, seventh paragraph from the bottom,
regarding Dividend Development, it should read "Chair Moran asked
if any operators had expressed interest in the project now that it
is proposed at three-stories rather than two-stories and Mr. Oliver
responded that they have not."; page 10, third paragraph, second
line should read "proposed parking pad near the garage" rather than
the house pad.
MOTION to approve the minutes as amended.
M/S Forbes/Bogosian Ayes 3 Noes 0 Absent 3 Abstain 1
(Durket)
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 Moran invited members of the audience to address the
Commission on any item not on the agenda.
Bert Martel, Fruitvale Avenue, read December 11, 1991 letter,
regarding the circulation element, into the record, adding he would
like a copy of the stadium study when it is completed.
Commissioner Bogosian asked that the letter be formally entered
into the record.
1
REPORT OF POSTING~ENDA
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting
was properly posted on December 6, 1991.
Technical Corrections to Packet
There were no technical corrections.
PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT CALENDAR
THESE ITEMS WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION UNLESS THEY ARE
REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION BY COMMISSIONERS
OR ANY INTERESTED PARTY.
1. 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 (item
removed from agenda; 11/13/91 tie vote
accepted as .denial and appealed to City
Council).
--------------------------------------------------------
2. 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 (cont.
f+wm 9/25/91; withdrawn by applicant).
PUBLIC HEARINGS **
(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).
3. SD-88-005.2 - DiManto, Madrone Hill/Peach Hill Rd., request
for extension on an approved 5-lot subdivision
in the HC-RD and R-1-40,000 zone districts per
Chapter 14 of the City Code.
Planning Director Eisner presented the staff report, reviewing the
history of this item. He reported that the map was submitted in
October of 1988 and approved as the tentative map and that a map is
good for 24 months and is subject to renewal in one year increments
to a maximum of 48 months. He reported it is his assumption that
the renewal of a time extension on a tentative map is discretionary
on the part of the Planning Commission. Mr. Eisner further reported
that a time extension was granted in November of 1990 and the
applicant has again submitted a request for another one year time
extension and if the request is granted, the map will have one more
year before reaching its total life of 48 months. Mr. Eisner
stated that in reviewing the tentative map, the most obvious of
issues was that the 1989 earthquake brought with it recognition
that faults do play a role in determining land use and that at the
time this map was originally submitted to the Commission, there was
Planning Commissi~Minutes
12/11/91
an awareness that there is a fault located on the property as well
as landslides, and that a good deal of cut and fill would have to
be done and that some areas would have to be avoided or worked
around. Since the 1989 earthquake, a different view has been
taken. Mr. Eisner stated that in writing the recommendation for a
denial of this time extension, in no way is staff recommending that
this be viewed as a way of denying reasonable use of the property.
He stated staff has met with the applicant and the applicant's
engineering design representatives to relate to them how staff
feels this map can be modified to create a situation which presents
environmental as well as economic equity. The applicant is aware
that a revised map will fall within the guidelines approved by the
Planning Commission. Planning Director Eisner stated that staff
would recommend that any action taken by the Commission be taken
without prejudice so that the map can be resubmitted with a net
result that the City has a project that has less cut, less fill,
and a roadway system which has less of an environmental impact.
Planning Director Eisner further reported that 4 of the 5 lots meet
the criteria of the new design ordinance and the fifth lot could be
made to be in conformance. He stated that staff is recommending
that the request for extension of the map be denied and staff be
directed to work with the applicant and the applicants engineers
and come back to the Planning Commission with a revised map that
addresses the concerns of the City Engineer and the Planners.
Commissioner Forbes stated that at the site visit he was told that
the City has demanded there be access to the Peach Hill Rd.
Planning Director Eisner responded that there are two roads off of
Peach Hill Rd. as well as a road that comes up from the south end
of the map. He stated one of staff's concerns is the amount of
fill needed to get a roadway to serve those lots, and one option is
to take a lot off of Peach Hill and have the roadway that comes
from the other end extended. This would minimize the impact on
Peach Hill Rd. Commissioner Forbes reported he understood that one
of the faults runs through the proposed access to Peach Hill from
the subdivision and wonders if there was no access from Peach Hill
would this eliminate some of the problem. Planning Director Eisner
stated he felt it would be premature to answer that question at
this time, since discussions with the applicant have been on a
theoretical basis.
Commissioner Bogosian stated he understood that there was already
a legal access established. Mr. Eisner responded that the question
is whether or not the street should be extended to provide access
to any other properties and if the subdivision is redesigned in
somewhat the same configuration, there will be access to Peach Hill
Rd.
Commissioner Bogosian expressed concern that the alternatives were
not presented to the Planning Commission prior to this meeting.
Planning Director Eisner responded that it was not staff's place to
redesign the subdivision; the City Engineer is meeting with the
applicant on an ongoing basis; and there were no design
3
Planning Commissi~Minutes
12/11/91
alternatives to present to the Commission. He stated that as staff
progresses with the design map, changes will be shared with the
Commission and eventually the Commission will have to examine the
old map and decide whether or not they can make findings as to
whether or not it is reasonable to extend the life of the map or
move in another direction.
The City Attorney stated that a time extension is a discretionary
action, the Commission does have the ability to say no. Any time
we say no to a permit, we need to have findings to base the denial
on. In the case of a time extension on a tentative map, the City
has already said its okay to proceed with the subdivision but we
want to review this again in a given time if not completed. If
there have been significantly changed conditions when the map comes
back, then those concerns can be reflected in detailed findings
that may be the basis to deny a time extension. She stated that if
the Planning Commission goes forward with a recommendation to deny
the time extension, that decision must be supported by strong
factual findings.
Chair Moran asked for more information regarding the grading issue.
Planning Director Eisner responded that the City Council has
recently adopted a new set of design standards and the question is
whether the map, as adopted, would meet those standards,
particularly as regards the roadway coming off of Peach Hill. In
discussions with the City Engineer there was some agreement that a
different approach would be taken that would require far less fill
to get the roadway in on Peach Hill Rd.
Commissioner Bogosian noted that the fault line wanders throughout
the entire parcel and asked what difference, in terms of safety, it
will make if the crossing is on the north or south end of the
property. The City Engineer responded that with respect to the
fault the principle concern would be how many lots would have to
access from the road that would have to cross the fault and
presently the Peach Hill access would serve two lots. The Madrone
Hill access does not presently cross the fault and the question is
whether it can be configured in such a way that it would avoid the
fault. Mr. Perlin stated his concern is with the appropriateness
of carving an access road from Peach Hill into the property in
order access the development and he doesn't believe this issue was
given property attention in the past due to lack of knowledge as to
how this development was going to take shape. Mr. Pearly reported
he has been meeting with the subdivider and his engineers and
significant changes have been made, adding that what is being
proposed now is superior to what was originally proposed. However,
he is not convinced that this is the most appropriate way for this
property to be developed. If there is an opportunity to further
discuss this it should be taken in order to get the best plan we
can for development.
Commissioner Bogosian stated that in order to feel comfortable in
denying this extension, he would have to see something that would
suggest that the public health would be endangered by this proposed
4
Planning Commissi~Minutes
12/11/91
plan.
Chair Moran asked City Engineer Pearly how the design could be made
more appropriate in his opinion. Mr. Pearly responded that there
appears to be a possibility to get access into this property from
Madrone Hill direction only, but they have not pursued how this may
be done. There may a possibility of utilizing existing old roads
on the property rather than creating new roadways.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 8:22 p.m.
Bill Heiss, applicant's civil engineer, reviewed the history of
this project, noting it has been the most unusual project he has
ever run into. Mr. Heiss stated that he and the applicant have
been working on improving the plans with staff and had hoped he
would not have to ask for a time extension but due to a series of
problems has run out of time. Mr. Heiss stated that the fault zone
and land slides did not move during the 1989 earthquake and the
only area of concern is the stone wall which experienced some
damage at the time of the quake. Mr. Heiss further reported he
sees two concerns: (1) the length of the culdesac; and (2) five (5)
lots on a minimum access road which is contrary to the City's
ordinance of no more than four (4) lots on a minimum access road.
Mr. Heiss stated he feels they have proceeded in good faith to meet
the City's conditions; it took longer than planned but they would
like to be allowed to proceed.
John DiManto, applicant, gave a history of this matter stating the
length of the road has been a concern at all times and he feels
there are no problems that cannot be mitigated with the present
design proposal and the "stitch" design proposed for the stone
wall.
Commissioner Bogosian asked if the stitch construction would
withstand an 8.2 quake and still maintain its integrity and Mr.
Heiss responded it was designed with seismic loading considered but
was not sure what seismic event was used.
Planning Director Eisner asked Mr. Heiss how much reduction in
grading and how many fewer trees would be lost following the
extended alignment. Mr. Heiss responded he did not have that
information but it would be less in both cases. Mr. Eisner asked
Mr. Heiss to give the Commission an estimate as to whether the
visual impact of the required walls along that route would be equal
or lesser in substance. Mr. Heiss responded that the walls would
be equally or a little more visible on the interconnecting route.
Mr. Eisner asked if Mr. Heiss would describe the areas identified
on lots 4 and 5 as being relatively consistent with the area that
is subject to a slide. Mr. Heiss reported the information on lot
5 is more detailed than lot 4, but the slide on lot 5 is older and
it would appear that the slide on lot 5 is somewhat larger. He
added that it is his feeling that the slide on lot 4 is probably
more prone to being active than the slide on lot 5.
5
Planning Commissi~Minutes
12/11/91
•
MOTION to close the public hearing at 9:00 p.m.
M/S Durket/Bogosian Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
MOTION to deny according to staff recommendation and amend the
resolution as follows: (1) Page:i, under A, correct language to
read in the second sentence "fault also crosses the proposed Peach
Hill access road. Since the last time extension a greater
awareness of a threat of such a fault as to health and safety of
the community has surfaced."; (2) under subdivision B, amend second
sentence as 1; insert "being a significant slide which underlies
the Peach Hill access road"; (3) under C, amend to read "Geologic
instability on the subject parcel, issues of access, internal
circulation design and earth removal also raise concerns of health,
safety and welfare...", (4) amend D as follows: add a second
sentence to state "Specifically,. grading and tree preservation
standards have been changed to preserve the integrity of the
hillside and to insure the public health, safety and welfare."
M/S Durket/Moran
Chair Moran stated she has to defer to the suggestions of staff in
this matter. Commissioner Bogosian stated he is unable to find
anything related to health, safety and welfare and just adding the
wording to the resolution is not satisfactory and he would not be
voting for the resolution to deny.
Chair Moran stated that as she understands it, now is the
appropriate time to consider specific health, safety and welfare
issues and lack of consideration previously is not enough.
Planning Director Eisner responded that the Commission needs to
have findings and they need to be anchored on specific issues but
it is his opinion that they do not have to be anchored only on
health, safety and welfare issues.
The City Attorney stated that to deny based on health, safety and
welfare issues so long as those issues have been demonstrated, the
decision would be upheld. To base a decision on other findings
makes the decision riskier. Policy changes would not be the
strongest ground to deny a project that has already been approved
and is in an extension period.
Chair Moran asked if the grading issues can be considered to be
health, safety and welfare concerns. The City Attorney responded
this has certainly been suggested by the City Engineers comments
this evening, and it may be helpful to get more information from
the City Engineer as to what makes this a more desirable plan.
Planning Director Eisner stated he was in agreement, but would add
that it is equally significant that the applicant's engineer
indicated that there appears to be the ability to redesign the
project in another configuration that would require less grading
and would disturb fewer ordinance size trees. While this may not
be a specific health, safety and welfare issue, it certainly does
6
Planning CommissiiMinutes
12/11/91
address the issue of change of policy.
Chair Moran stated she was much impressed that the issue of the
road had not been given attention previously and that health,
safety and welfare issues are not strongly involved in the concerns
raise by staff. She stated she would be voting against the motion
and withdrew her second.
Motion failed for lack of another second.
MOTION to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve a one
year extension to the tentative map for SD-88-005.2.
M/S Bogosian/Forties Ayes 3 Noes 1 (Durket) Absent 3
Chair Moran called a recess at 9:13 p.m.
The Planning Commission reconvened at 9:27 p.m.
Chair Moran announced that she had been informed by staff that the
Commission may be well advised to consider reconsidering the
previous item for purposes of elaborating on the resolution that
staff has been asked to prepare.
Planning Director Eisner explained that the resolution should
contain findings and staff has pulled finding together for the
Commissions consideration to avoid having to come back to the
Commission at a future date.
Commissioner Bogosian stated he would like to reconsider for that
purpose. Commissioner Forbes also agreed.
Planning Director Eisner stated that the motion was to approve a
one year extension to allow the map to run the full 48 months with
the following findings: (1) The proposed map is consistent with
the General Plan and any applicable specific plans; (2) That the
design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General
Plan and any applicable specific plans; (3) That the site is
physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (4) That
the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of the
development; (5) That the design of the subdivision is not likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially to
avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; (6) That the
design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public
health or safety problems; (7) That the design of the subdivision
will not conflict with easements required by the public at large
for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision; and (8) The discharge of waste from the proposed
subdivision to an existing community sewer system would not result
in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Quality
Control Board pursuant to Division 7, commencing with Section 13000
of the State Water Code. Mr. Eisner added "Now, therefore, the
Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as
follows: The requested time extension of tentative map (fill in
the number) is hereby approved."
7
Planning Commissi•Minutes
12/11/91
The City Attorney stated that the Planning Director read from an
extension approved last year; typically these are findings made
when a tentative map is approved. This is an attempt to close this
issue rather than prolong the matter. Staff could be directed to
draw up a resolution, findings can be made at a hearing and plans
can be drawn up.
MOTION to approve the motion as read into the record by the
Planning Director.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes Ayes 3 Noes 1 (Durket) Absent 3
Chair Moran announced to the audience that if anyone wanted their
item continued to the next meeting of the Planning Commission now
was the appropriate time to make that request. There was no
response.
PUBLIC HEARINGS, cont.
4. UP-550 - Desert Petroleum, 12600 Saratoga Ave., review
of compliance with existing use permit
conditions which allows the operation of a
gasoline service station in the R-M-5,000 P.C.
zone district per Chapter 15 of the
City Code (cont. from 11/13/91).
Planner Kermoyan presented the staff report, stating that staff has
found no non-conformance related to the hours of operation or the
delivery of gasoline. He further stated that staff recommends that
the design review portion of this matter be heard at the January 8,
1992 meeting of the Planning Commission.
Planner Kermoyan noted there were two modifications to the use
permit resolution: (1) Condition #1 of the resolution should be
modified to read as follows: "The use permit shall be reviewed by
the Planning Commission on a yearly basis to insure compliance with
all the use permit conditions for a period of two years; prior to
the expiration of the use permit on January 15, 1994, the use
permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission to determine if
this use should be allowed to continue. It is the applicant/owners
responsibility to apply for the application in a timely manner."
(2) An addition to the resolution: "This resolution will supersede
all previous use permit resolutions."
Chair Moran asked if this language covers deliveries that might be
started prior to the closing hour and completed after the closing
hour. Planner Kermoyan responded that the condition indicates that
all deliveries shall be made within the hours of operation and he
would therefore conclude that the ending of the delivery shall be
within the closing of the business.
Chair Moran noted that the 1984 use permit required review after
five (5) years and asked staff to report on that. Planner Kermoyan
8
Planning Commissi•Minutes
12/11/91
responded that his research was unable to find any application or
staff report regarding the compliance within that fifth year. It
was noted that this could have been a status report by the Planning
Director that there has been no violation of the use permits and it
may not have gotten into the file. Chair Moran asked how to make
sure that a review is made and Planner Kermoyan stated that the
responsibility is placed on the applicant to check in every year
until 1994.
Commissioner Bogosian asked how many complaints would have to be
received before the Planning Commission would hear this matter and
consider revocation. Planner Kermoyan responded that one complaint
would trigger action and the Planning Director would make the
decision as to how to proceed. Planning Director Eisner stated
that it would be the Planning Directors discretionary decision as
to whether to bring the matter to the Planning Commission or not -
only the Planning Commission can begin revocation proceedings.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 9:45 p.m.
Kenneth Shidig, representing the applicant, addressed the Planning
Commission, stating he was in agreement with the staff report that
there have been no violations of the use permit and only if there
is substantial evidence of violations is there a right to revoke
the use permit. Mr. Shidig reported that his client has instructed
his vendor that no deliveries are to occur except between 9:00 a.m.
and 3:00 p.m., making all deliveries during daylight hours. Mr.
Shidig further stated that he did not feel it was appropriate to
hear testimony regarding the sign as the agenda does not reflect
that that is the case and with three Planning Commissioners absent
there may be some repetition of signage testimony at the next
hearing. He added that his client does not object to the
modifications with respect to the delivery of gasoline.
Mr. Shidig expressed concerns over the condition of annual review,
but stated his client will comply in the interest of being a good
neighbor. He also expressed the opinion that the landscaping at
this site is quite remarkable, and is concerned with the
landscaping condition proposed. Mr. Shidig further stated that he
believed the January 15, 1994 date is incorrect, noting that a
number of amendments to the resolution were made on January 25,
1984 and it is his understanding that the term would run from the
last action of the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Bogosian expressed concern with the possibility of
changing suppliers from time to time and asked if the terms of
delivery are written into the contract. Mr. Shidig stated that his
client will make certain that all suppliers are made aware and it
will be included in the contract.
Commissioner Bogosian asked if the Planning Commission has the
discretion to bring this matter back on a yearly basis and the City
Attorney indicated that could be done.
9
Planning Commissi•Minutes
12/11/91
Jim Peck, 18875 Biarritz Ln., spoke against this use. expressing
specific concern with garbage accumulating on the subject property.
Resident of 18867 Biarritz Ln., expressed concern with the
potential increase in business creating more traffic at the subject
property if the sign is approved.
Richard Julians, 12537 Saratoga Ave., expressed concern with the
non-conforming entity, noting it is located in a residential
community.
Jerry Hanney, 18859 Biarritz Ln., spoke against this matter,
stating that maintenance could be kept at a higher level.
Mr. Shidig stated that he and his client had visited the site
earlier today and did not see any trash but his client will police
the property as much as possible to see that this does not become
a problem in the future. Mr. Shidig expressed concern with new
conditions being imposed, stating that conditions can be changed at
any time in the future for any .applicant. He stated that his
client is aware this is a nonconforming use but that will be dealt
with in 1994.
Chair Moran asked if landscaping would be installed and Mr. Shidig
responded that his client will be replacing shrubs that died in
last years frost and anything else would depend on what the
Planning Commission wants.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 10:30 p.m.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
MOTION to consider revoking the use permit.
M/S Forbes/Durket
Commissioner Bogosian stated he would like to support staffs
recommendations, especially those concerning delivery, and he
supports the idea of landscaping. He further stated he would have
to see more evidence of noncompliance before revoking the use
permit and he felt staff's recommendations adequately address
concerns.
Commissioner Durket suggested adding to condition #5 of the
resolution "All gasoline deliveries shall be made and completed..."
Chair Moran expressed agreement and suggested specifying 9:00 a.m.
to 3:00 p.m. in terms of establishing gasoline deliveries.
Commissioner Forbes stated he believed violations have taken place.
CALL FOR THE QUESTION Ayes 1 (Forbes) Noes 3 Absent 3
MOTION to adopt UP-550.1 as amended with the language and completed
10
Planning Commissi• Minutes
12/11/91
and restrict delivery hours from 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. (amending #5
of the resolution).
M/S Durket/Bogosian Ayes 3 Noes 1 (Forbes) Absent 3
Chair Moran noted that the sign issue will be heard at the January
8, 1992 meeting of the Planning Commission.
Chair Moran announced that the applicant for Item #12, SD-91-004,
Wirnowski, requested a continuance to the next regular meeting of
the Planning Commission and invited members of the audience who
wished to address this matter to speak. There were no requests.
MOTION to continue SD-91-004 to the January 8, 1992 meeting.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
------------------------------------------------------------
5. DR-91-035 - Chen, 12505 Crayside Ln., Lot #18, request for
design review approval to construct a new
5,511 sq. ft. two-story residence on a one
acre parcel within the R-1-20,000 zone
district per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The
subject property is Lot #18 of the Beauchamps
subdivision .(Tract #8316); (cont. from
11/13/91; application expires 2/8/92).
Commissioner Durket noted he had intended to abstain from
discussion on this matter because he was not at the last meeting,
but was informed that his stepping down would create a lack of a
quorum, and therefore suggested continuing this matter to another
meeting.
MOTION to continue DR-91-035.
M/S Forbes/Bogosian Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
6. SM-91-007 - Hancock, 20410 Montalvo Oaks P1., request for
site modification to previously approved plans
for an existing residence in order to
construct a pool, spa, arbor, decks and
sitting areas in the rear yard area, per
Chapter 15 of the City Code. The parcel is
located within the R-1-20,000 zone district
(cont. from 11/13/91).
Planner Walgren presented the staff report. Planner Walgren noted
that a new condition #8 should be inserted: "All tree preservation
recommendations outline the City Arborist report dated September
30, 1991, shall apply." Following #8 there would be a new
discretionary condition #9 stating: "All exterior pathway lighting
shall be located at ground level and screened from neighboring
properties." Existing #'s 8 & 9 would become #'s 10 & 11.
11
Planning Commissi• Minutes •
12/11/91
Chair Moran opened the public hearing
Jim Waterbahm, landscape architect,
questions the Commission may have.
MOTION to close the public hearing at
M/S Durket/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0
MOTION to approve SM-91-007 with moc
staff.
at 10:47 p.m.
was present to answer any
10:48 p.m.
Absent 3
iifications as suggested by
M/S Durket/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
7. DR-91-052 - Hu, 12370 Ted Ave., request to demolish an
existing residence in order to construct a new
3,369 sq. ft. one-story residence per Chapter
15 of the City Code. The parcel is
approximately 11,202 sq. ft. and is located
within the R-1-10,000 zone district (cont.
. from 10/23/91 & 11/13/91).
Planner Kermoyan presented the staff report.
Chair Moran asked if there are any architectural features that will
offer any relief from the massiveness of the side of the house
along Seagull and Planner Kermoyan responded this lot is considered
a corner lot and the existing fence on that side will screen the
house from the street and it will not be visible.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 10:54 p.m.
Mr. Hu, owner 12370 Ted Ave., addressed the Commission stating he
plans to demolish the existing old home and build a single story
home that he feels is compatible with the neighborhood.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 10:55 p.m
M/S Forbes/Durket Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
MOTION to approve DR-91-052.
M/S Durket/Bogosian Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
8. DR-91-037 - Chao, 21894 Villa Oaks Ln., request to
construct a new 5,845 sq. ft. two-story
residence within the Mt. Eden Estates
subdivision per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
The parcel is approximately 43,996 sq. ft. and
is located within the NHR zone district (cont.
from 10/23/91 & 11/13/91).
Planner Kermoyan presented the staff report.
12
Planning Commissi• Minutes •
12/11/91
Commissioner Durket asked if alternatives to the tower approach
were considered and Planner Kermoyan responded they were not, staff
looked at the design in terms of ,compatibility with the house to
the east.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 10:58 p.m.
Alex Lisabahn, designer, addressed the Commission, stating they
feel the house is compatible with the neighborhood.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 11:00 p.m.
M/S Forbes/Bogosian Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
Commissioner Durket stated he would not be supporting the
application as presented as he feels the tower presents too much
mass and the color is too light for the hillside area. He stated
he would like to see at least some of the arch features reduced if
not eliminated, and the driveway is not appropriate for the
hillside.
Commissioner Bogosian concurred with Commissioner Durket's comments
on the driveway and the color of the home, but was satisfied with
the height of the building.
Commissioner Durket pointed out on the map what he felt to be the
unnecessary portion of the driveway
Commissioner Forbes stated he did not like the tower and felt the
color was too bright; he would like the retaining wall cribbed and
the circular element of the driveway should be eliminated.
Chair Moran stated she would like to see the driveway reduced by
half and the color should be darker, but she had no objection to
the proposed tower design.
MOTION to deny DR-91-037 without prejudice.
M/S Forbes/Durket
Commissioner Durket addressed the applicant, clarifying that the
concerns are with the driveway, the tower and the color of the
home, adding that the two towers at the front elevation make it too
bulky and massive.
Commissioner Bogosian stated he would be uncomfortable with the
project going forward and if it were withdrawn, it could be
continued to a public hearing with instructions to the applicant to
work on those items of concern to the Commission.
Commissioners Forbes and Durket indicated they would be agreeable
to continuing the item.
Chair Moran suggested trying to set the house back into the slope
13
Planning Commissi•Minutes •
12/11/91
to alleviate mass.
MOTION to continue DR-91-037 to January 8, 1992.
M/S Durket/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
Chair Moran announced that if any applicant in the audience would
like to have their item continued to the next meeting now would be
the appropriate time to do so. It was requested that Item #13 be
continued.
MOTION to continue LL-91-005, GPA=91-002 and AZO-91-004 to January
8, 1992.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
--------------------------------------------------------------
9. DR-91-013 - West, 14801 Andrew Ct., request to construct a
4,871 sq. ft. one-story residence on a 37,252
sq. ft. parcel per Chapter 15 of the City
Code. The property is located within the R-1-
40,000 zone district.
Planner Kermoyan presented the staff report.
Commissioner Durket asked if any correspondence had been received
from the neighbors at the study session. Planner Kermoyan
indicated none had been received.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 11:16 p.m.
Tom Sloane, architect, reported meeting with neighbors, that he has
been able to address the concerns in a non-public forum, and the
project has been scaled down.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 11:19 p.m.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
MOTION to approve DR-91-013 with.the elimination of the circular
driveway and retention of the existing access to the garage.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes
Commissioner Bogosian stated that the current plan is a tremendous
improvement but he still felt that given the physical location of
the lot, the circular driveway gives a massive feeling. He stated
that a driveway into the building would draw less attention and be
more compatible with the neighborhood.
CALL FOR THE QUESTION Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
-------------------------------------------------------------
10. DR-89-047.1 - Saratoga Country Club, 21990 Prospect Rd.,
14
Planning Commissi• Minutes •
12/11/91
request for a one-year extension to a design
review approval to construct a pro-shop and
cart barn and to remodel an existing clubhouse
on the grounds of the Saratoga Country Club
per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The subject
property is located within the Northwestern
Hillside Residential (NHR) zone district.
Planner Walgren presented the staff report.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 11:24 p.m.
Elizabeth Van de Tooren, President Saratoga Country Club, addressed
the Commission brought the Commission up to date on the work done
to the facility.
Chair Moran questioned the expiration date of August, 1991, and Ms.
Van de Tooren responded that they had applied in July but the
application was just coming to the Planning Commission.
MOTION to close the public hearing at 11:26 p.m.
MOTION to approve the time extension as per the resolution.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
----------------------------=-----------------------------
11. DR-91-054 - Houston, 14810 Sobey Rd., request for design
review approval to construct a new one-story
6,780 sq. ft. residence on a 1.6 acre parcel
within the R-1-40,000 zone district per
Chapter 15 of.the City Code.
Planner Walgren presented the staff report, noting that one of the
conditions in the resolution will be that no building permits be
issued until the applicant has final map approved by the City
Council and been officially recorded. A critical aspect of the
review of this development has been the preservation of the willow
grove near the back of the property and the preservation of the
drainage and riparian habitat in general. The City Arborist has
visited the site several times and his report is included in the
Commission's packets. Staff feels findings can be made with the
modification of condition #16 of the resolution as follows: "Final
approval and recordation of tentative map SD-90-O1i shall occur
prior to issuance of a zone clearance for this development."
Chair Moran clarified that there is no gate included in the present
proposal and Planner Walgren confirmed that that was the case.
Chair Moran opened the public hearing at 11:29 p.m.
Jerry Houston, applicant, addressed the Commission regarding the
landscape plan noting that what is before the Commission is a
conceptual plan as he would like to make sure he is able to bond or
15
Planning Commissi• Minutes •
12/11/91
do whatever is needed at the time. Mr. Houston also reported that
he had taken the plans to adjacent neighbors and none of them have
any objections.
Commissioner Durket asked if there is some necessity to the
proposed driveway and Mr. Houston responded that there is no
parking on the road going back to the flag lot at the request of
the Fire Department and parking on Soeby Road is very limited. The
proposed driveway allows for additional parking.
Chair Moran asked if he would be opposed to changing the back
element to match if he changes the other and Mr. Houston he's
willing to work with staff.
Mr. Heinz, architect, stated he feels this is compatible with the
neighborhood in the Moorish, Spanish Mediterranean style.
Chair Moran closed the public hearing at 11:37 p.m.
MOTION to approve DR-91-054 with two amendments: (1) elimination of
the circular driveway; (2) Condition #10 regarding the City
Arborist report: "No clearing activity take place within 20 feet of
the willow grove."
M/S Bogosian/Durket
Chair Moran asked how this would differ from the Arborist's report,
and Commissioner Bogosian responded that it would preserve
everything within the existing grove and the Arborist's report
proposes going into the grove and selectively cut and use
pesticides under the supervision .of the Arborist. His proposal
would leave everything essentially as it is today.
Commissioner Forbes stated that 'we are getting down to a few
riparian areas in Saratoga and he would like to see them maintained
as is.
Mr. Houston noted that the tentative map was approved by the
Arborist; the grove contains small saplings and poison oak and the
water is further into the grove.
Chair Moran asked if Mr. Bogosian's motion included a construction
period fence and he responded that was correct.
Commissioner Bogosian added that he feels this grove may turn out
to be a very valuable habitat and feels it is a critical water area
and shelter for birds.
Chair Moran stated she feels the applicant should be allowed to
clear the poison oak and brush from the willow grove.
CALL FOR THE QUESTION Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
16
Planning Commissi~ Minutes •
12/11/91
12. SD-91-004 - Wirnowski, 20140 Mendelsohn Ln., request for
tentative map approval to subdivide a 40,920
sq. ft. site located within the R-1-20,000
zone district into two new parcels of 20,000
sq. ft. (parcel A) and 20,920 sq. ft. (parcel
B), pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
This minor land division has been determined
to be categorically exempt from environmental
review per the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines.
CONTINUED
-
------------
13. LL-91-005 - -------------------------------------------------
Head/Allison, 14684 Pike Rd., 20700 Saratoga
Hills Rd., request for lot line adjustment
approval to relocate an existing lot line per
Chapter 14 of the City Code. The proposal
involves amending the General Plan designation
boundaries and rezoning portions of the
parcels involved from R-1-40,000 to
Northwestern Hillside Residential (NHR) to
conform with the revised property lines. An
environmental Negative Declaration has been
prepared.
CONTINUED
----------------------------=--------------------------------
14. SUP-91-006 - Sieber, 13505 Myren Dr., request for use
permit approval to allow an attached 775 sq.
ft. second unit on a 12,290 sq. ft. parcel per
Chapter 15 of the City Code. The property is
located within the R-1-10,000 zone district.
MOTION to continue SUP-91-006.
M/S Bogosian/Forbes Ayes 4 ~ Noes 0 Absent 3
** The Planning Commission will not open any new public
hearing items after 11:30 p.m. Those items not heard
will be placed as early as possible on the next public
hearing agenda.
DIRECTOR'S ITEMS
1. DR-91-025 - Leposavic, 15134 Sperry Lane, a discussion of
visual impact for an approved project (cont. from 11/13/91).
Planning Director Eisner reviewed background on this matter, noting
that the project was previously approved but as it was built it is
slightly lower than approved and constitutes a change in the
approved site plan. The lowering of the project has changed the
pitch down the driveway, but in staff's opinion it has improved the
visual continuity of the site.
2. Discussion of grading accident at Saratoga Country Club.
17
," Planning/Commissi~ Minutes •
12/11/91
Planner Walgren reviewed memo relating accident that took place
causing the loss of a 12" DBH Coast Live Oak. The City Arborist
has assessed a replacement value of either three additional 24" box
trees or one 36" box native oak for replacement. Planner Walgren
stated that staff recommends that this be viewed as an information
item and staff will handle administratively.
Planner Walgren addressed Planning Commission public hearing and
study session meeting attendance, noting it has been suggested that
perhaps if Commissioners don't contact secretarial staff the day
prior to a meeting it will be anticipated that they will be in
attendance.
Chair Moran stated that having one central place to call so that
all Commissioners talk to just one person. It was determined that
Commissioners would attempt to call Diane on the Planning staff if
they are unable to attend a meeting.
COMMISSION ITEMS
COMMUNICATIONS
Written
1. City Council Minutes - November 26 & 20
Oral
City Council
MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 11:59 p.m.
M/S Durket/Forbes Ayes 4 Noes 0 Absent 3
18