Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-23-1993 Planning Commission Minutes'~J ~~ CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 23, 1993 - 7:30 p.m. City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Regular Meeting ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Moran. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Moran, Commissioners Asfour, Jacobs, Murakami and Wolfe Absent: Commissioner Caldwell PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES Minutes of June 9, 1993. Commissioner Asfour had the following corrections: Page 3, 3rd paragraph from bottom should read as follows: "Commissioner Asfour pointed out that the existing walkway lighting at the site is brighter than that which is proposed for the sign, and, therefore, the sign should not be a problem." Page 9, 5th paragraph, the words "had tried to make it clear" should be deleted and replaced with "had made it clear..." Commissioner Asfour referred to Page 18, 6th paragraph, with regard to the worksession. He inquired whether worksessions are normally advertised. Planner Walgren explained that the agenda for worksessions are normally posted. Commissioner Jacobs had the following corrections: Page 8, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, 2nd line, the word "experience" should be "experienced". Page 13, last paragraph, 4th line from the bottom, the word "Are" should be "Area". 1 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 2 Page 14, 3rd line, the word "Commission" should be deleted and replaced with "City". Page 14, 2nd full paragraph, first sentence should be deleted and the paragraph should read: "Commissioner Jacobs expressed his understanding for Commissioner Asfour's comment that an issue should not be made over these properties." Page 14, 4th full paragraph, 8th line, the word "not" should be inserted immediately prior to the word "comfortable". In the 9th line the word "to" should be inserted after the word "on". Chairperson Moran had the following corrections: Page 13, last paragraph, second to last line, the words "Mountain Winery" should be inserted for clarification after the words "Paul Mason". Page 17, 8th paragraph, first sentence. last word "content" should be changed to "context". ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 1993, AS CORRECTED (ABOVE). PASSED 5-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the .agenda for this meeting was properly posted on June 18, 1993. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET Planner Walgren noted the two following technical corrections to the packet with regard to Item #2 V-93-009 -Smith: Page 13, Condition 5 (c), first sentence, should read :" Make no driveway cuts deeper than nine inches in the areas beneath the canopy of the Douglas Fir tree." 2 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 3 The following additional Condition should be added (and be incorporated as Condition #7): "Prior to foundation inspection, the property owners shall arrange for all property corners to be set by a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer. The surveyor or civil engineer shall verify the location of the garage is as approved per the attached exhibit." Planner Walgren noted that this condition was requested by the City Engineer and that this condition had been placed at the dias for the Commissioners to review. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. UP-93-002 - La Cuisine Gourmet; 14443 Big Basin Way, request for Use Permit approval to allow the operation of an 800 sq. ft. (+/-) restaurant in an existing building located in the Saratoga Village within a Commercial Historic (C-H) zone district. The restaurant is presently operating without a Use Permit. Planner Walgren presented the Commission with the Report dated June 23, 1993 and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the application and the use permit requirements and process. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:40 P.M. Judy Wilkins, 14443 Big Basin Way, applicant, spoke in favor of the application and explained that she was unaware of the requirement to obtain a use permit for her business (as also noted in Planner Walgren's report). Ms. Wilkins answered questions from the Commission with regard to her business and her application. There was no one else wishing to speak. ASFOUR/MURAKAMI MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:43 P.M. PASSED 5-0. JACOBS/MURAKAMI MOVED TO APPROVE UP-93-002 PER THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. The Commission wished Ms. Wilkins the best of luck with her business. 3 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 4 2. V-93-009 - Smith; 14739 Oak St., request for Variance approval to construct a 600 sq. ft. garage six ft. from the side property line where 10 ft. is required and four ft. from the front property line where 25 ft. is required. The maximum height of the structure is 12 ft. The subject property is approximately 13,100 sq. ft. and is located within an R-1-10,000 zone district. Planner Walgren presented the Report dated June 23, 1993 and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the project. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:46 P.M. Scott Cunningham, 14375 Saratoga Avenue, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the application. He explained that the proposed location of the structure had been chosen per the recommendation of the project arborist in order to protect existing oak trees. He noted that the site currently has no covered parking and this proposal would meet the City's parking requirements. With regard to the additional square footage of the structure which is to be used for storage/workshop, Mr. Cunningham explained that the property owner is in need of additional storage for tools and etc. and by placing the shed on the west side of the lot, the structure would better blend with the site and the buildings on the site. Mr. Cunningham noted that other similar structures exist on neighboring properties. He stated that this proposal is sensitive to tree preservation. Mr. Cunningham stated that staff's recommendation to reduce the size of the structure would not meet the needs of the applicant and would cause problems. With regard to the Condition requiring the roof to be shake, Mr. Cunningham stated that the applicant preferred a metal roof because he was concerned with leaks that may occur with the use of a shake roof. Mr. Cunningham noted that the applicant was concerned with Condition 5(a) with regard to the difficulty of keeping pine needles and such out of the wood chips and any related fire hazards the chips and pine needles may pose. With regard to the Condition 5(c) allowing for only nine inches to be cut, Mr. Cunningham explained that this would cause additional expense to the applicant because a soils report would need to be conducted and a structural engineer would need to be called in. He explained that a footing requires at least a 12 inch cut and that a 9 inch cut would not meet building codes. He also expressed concern with regard to water pipes being required to run underneath the (driveway) slab. Mr. Cunningham objected to the $1,835 bond required (Condition 6) and explained that the applicant has already paid a great deal of money to the City with regard to the required permits and processes for this project. He also 4 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 5 questioned Condition 10 and noted that a time cap should be placed on this condition so that a fine could not be collected for an indefinite period. Mr. Cunningham also answered questions from the Commission with regard to the project. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the applicant had considered reducing the size of the structure and locating the tool shed portion of the proposed structure elsewhere on the property. Mr. Cunningham explained that if the Commission decides to reduce the size of the proposed structure, the applicant would then look for another location on the site for the storage/tool shed. Mr Cunningham stated that the applicant preferred to have one structure, as proposed, and that it would be more economical to construct one structure than it would be to construct two structures. ASFOUR/WOLFE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:01 P.M. PASSED 5-0. Planner Walgren, at the request of Commissioner Asfour, addressed the concerns expressed by Mr. Cunningham. Planner Walgren explained that with regard to the 9 inch cut referred to in Condition 5(c) the language had been amended to clarify that this pertained only to the driveway -not the structure. With regard to the pipes under the driveway these are to be only aeration tubes and should not adversely effect the integrity of the driveway. Commissioner Murakami inquired about the required bond. Planner Walgren explained that this Condition is a standard condition used on such projects to ensure that the necessary work is completed. He explained that once the outlined work is completed to the satisfaction of the City, the bond is returned to the applicant. Planner Walgren also noted that the bond does not have to be in cash but could be in the form of a certificate of deposit or a passbook given to the City for keeping until the work is completed. Planner Walgren also explained that with regard to the fine referred to in Condition 10, this is also a standard condition which allows the City to assess a fine for violations. He noted that the fine ceases when the violation is corrected or when a reasonable attempt has been made to correct the violation. Commissioner Moran inquired if the fire district had approved of the condition requiring wood chips under the pine trees. 5 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 6 Planner Walgren indicated that he is unaware of any fire hazards posed by the existence of wood chips under pine trees. He explained that wood chips are commonly used under trees and in landscape plans. He stated that the Fire Chief had not indicate any concern with regard to the wood chips. Planner Walgren also noted with regard to the shake roof that extra layers of tar paper can be used under the shakes to help prevent leaks. He stated that the reasoning behind the requirement for a wood shake roof was that a metal roof in this area may appear out of place. Chairperson Moran stated that she had read the report and felt that it adequately addressed the issues and that she is in agreement with the staff recommendations. Commissioner Asfour stated that he is also in agreement with the recommendations made in the staff report. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he felt that the lot offered other locations for a shed and that he too could support the recommendations made in the staff report. JACOBS/WOLFE MOVED TO APPROVE V-93-009 AS RECOMMENDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. Commissioner Jacobs excused himself from this item and stepped down from the dias. 3. SD-92-004.1 - Glennon; 13091 Pierce Rd., request to amend the conditions of V-93-010 - Tentative Map approval in order to allow a flag lot access corridor to serve two parcels per Chapter 14 of the City Code. By allowing the access corridor to serve two parcels, Lot B would then be considered a corner parcel by City Code definition. Therefore, the applicant is also requesting Variance approval to allow the previously approved 40,075 sq. ft. lot to be less than the minimum prescribed for corner lots (48,000 sq. ft.) per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The property is located within an R-1-40,000 zone district. ------------------------------------------------------------- Planner Walgren presented the Report dated June 23, 1993, and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the application. Chairperson Moran inquired if the lot would be considered a corner lot with regard to setbacks. 6 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 7 Planner Walgren stated that technically, with the combined access, it would be a corner parcel, but combined with the variance request, the Commission could incorporate that the lot continue to be utilized as an interior parcel. Planner Walgren explained that this may be preferable since the property owner has already established a building site based on interior lot setback requirements. Planner Walgren explained that the lot is truly not going to be a corner parcel and that in light of the recently amended setback requirements for corner parcels, the corner lot setback requirements would be the same as what has already been utilized on this lot. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:10 P.M. William Glennon, 13091 Pierce Road, applicant stated that he did not have anything to add to the report given by staff. He inquire if Condition 9 from the original subdivision approval which requires the driveway improvement that serves Lot A be completed and the existing driveway access along the north side of the newly created Lot B be eliminated prior to approval of the final map could be modified to allow the existing driveway to remain until the new house is built. He explained that it would make more sense to allow the old driveway to remain and be used by the builder and the heavy trucks and equipment than to build a new driveway which would be subject to heavy use during the construction phase. Mr. Glennon stated that he would be willing to post a bond to the City guaranteeing that the old driveway would be removed once the construction is completed. There was no one else wishing to speak. WOLFE/MURAKAMI MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:13 P.M. PASSED 5-0. Chairperson Moran stated that Mr. Glennon's suggestion made sense and she inquired if this was something the Planning Commission could consider at this meeting. Planner Walgren explained that this request was not part of this application and could not be considered at this meeting. He explained that the condition Mr. Glennon referred to is part of the original tentative map approval and noted that the City may be able to meet Mr. Glennon's request per his suggestion of posting a bond, but that this matter would need to be discussed with the City Engineer at the time Mr. Glennon submits the final map. ASFOUR/MURAKAMI MOVED TO APPROVE SD-92-004.1 AND V-93-010. PASSED 4-0. 7 ~ • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 8 The meeting was recessed at 8:17 p.m. and reconvened at 8:26 p.m. Commissioner Jacobs re-joined his fellow Commissioners at the Bias. 4. Paul Masson Specific Plan; the Saratoga Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the draft Specific Plan for the former Paul Masson Winery site, located at the northeast corner of Saratoga Ave. and Route 85. The purpose of the Specific Plan is to ensure that appropriate development guidelines are in place for any future development plans for the 24 acre property. Planning Department staff will be presenting an overview of the development of the Plan and the various land use alternative proposals. The Planning Commission will then open the public hearing to take testimony and then either recommend adopting the Plan as submitted to the City Council or direct staff to revise the Plan for further Planning Commission review. Planner Walgren presented the Report dated June 23, 1993. Planner Walgren's report included a history on the site, background information on community meetings regarding this site, objectives of a Specific Plan, implementation measures, explanation of the community survey and circulation issues. Chairperson Moran noted that under the Circulation section, the first entry states that no through vehicular access shall be permitted connecting Afton Avenue with either Saratoga Avenue or McFarland Avenue. She inquired whether such access would be prohibited should a future plan proposing through access come before the Commission. In response to Chairperson Moran's question, Planner Walgren explained that the implementation measures of this document are prefaced by the words "should" or "shall". He explained that the word "should" is used in this document as encouragement and can be deviated from if the end result is appropriate. He further explained that use of the word "shall", as used in this document and specifically in the section to which Chairperson Moran referred, is a requirement and would require a formal modification of this document. He noted that the document prohibits a through access, but it does allow for a limited access such a cul-de-sac extension that could to finish off Afton. He pointed out #3 on page 17 which limits the number of parcels to 20 which can be served by such a cul-de-sac proposal. 8 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 9 Commissioner Asfour inquired about Page 17, #3 and wondered about this section and the secondary emergency access. Planner Walgren explained that the number 20 was arrived at through this Specific Plan process as a reasonable number of parcels for a cul-de-sac on this site. he noted that the secondary emergency access requirement for a cul-de-sac with more than 15 parcels is from the subdivision code. He explained that the emergency access could be located anywhere off the cul-de-sac and is a gated access that only the fire district and health services can get through with the appropriate keys. Commissioner Wolfe inquired if the fire department had reviewed the 5 plans and if there were any concerns. Planner Walgren stated that the fire district had reviewed and approved of the plans, but that when a specific development proposal is made the appropriate fire agencies would review the specifics of the proposal. Commissioner Moran instructed the audience on the appropriate procedure when addressing the Commission and advised them of the time limit. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:37 P.M. Peter Leslie, 13100 Saratoga Avenue, stated that he was concerned with Figure 5, Page 12 of the Plan, with regard to the close proximity of the access road to his property. He expressed such concerns as noise, increased traffic, and traffic fumes. He requested that the access be re-located away from his house and suggested that the access be located farther north near the water works. Mr. Leslie stated that given a little more time he may be able to come up with other suggestions for alternative access location. Commissioner Jacobs inquired how close the house was to the road that used to serve the winery. Mr. Leslie stated that he was unsure because he had not resided in the house during that time. Myra Chaney, 18859 Afton Avenue, submitted and read a letter from Alma Chaney. The letter expressed concern with what certain the types of development will do to the area. She pointed out that the area has no sidewalks and that many children play in the street and urged the Commission keep this in mind when reviewing the plan and any future development plans for this site. Miss Chaney also submitted a petition signed by 41 children representing similar concerns. 9 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 10 Rebecca Chaney, 18859 Afton Avenue, submitted a letter and expressed concern with the future use of the site especially with regard to a potential of increased traffic. She urged the Commission to make sure that Afton and McFarland would not be connected through to Saratoga Avenue and explained that there are many children and elderly in the area. The letter she submitted had the signatures of 36 residents expressing this concern. She also submitted a letter from Mr. Frank Linn. Deborah Lang, 13172 Montrose, submitted a letter and expressed concern with increased traffic. She suggested that with regard to #3 on Page 17 the number of homes on a cul-de-sac on this site should be limited to 15 in order to eliminate the need for a secondary emergency access. She explained that by doing this many neighbors may be alleviated of their concerns regarding increased traffic and through connections of the neighborhood streets to Saratoga Avenue. James Ousley, 20707 Seafor Avenue, stated that he felt that the Plan presented stiff criteria which would allow the land to be developed only by a large developer. He said that the Plan promotes cohesive development and he preferred to see the property be developed one piece at a time like other residential areas. He stated that the Plan is too restrictive and prevents density similar to that which is in the vineyards. He also stated that he thought that the City's intention to set aside a 50 foot buffer along Saratoga would be a significant demand to on a developer. He stated that because of the restrictions placed by this plan on the site, it may be a long time before the site is developed. He stated that the site is a good site and can be reasonably developed and that the City could use the development fees that would be generated by the development of this site. Ray Pasentino, clarified that the main entrance to the Paul Masson was approximately 75-100 feet south of where the access is located on Figure 5, Page 12. He noted that area proposed as an access served previously as the driveway to the winery tasting room. Mike Speckman, 13214 Montrose, expressed concern with regard to the access road and the signal intersection at Saratoga and the subject site. He explained that once Highway 85 is opened, traffic at this intersection would increase and an access road to the site at this point (Figure 5) may be a dangerous location with regard to traffic back-up. He also reported that the dust has been a issue since the demolition and expressed certain health concerns. He stated that he was pleased to see that many of the view points expressed at the community meetings have been reflected in staff's presentation. He spoke in favor of limiting the number of homes to be serviced by a cul-de-sac on the subject site (Page 17, #3) to 15. 10 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 11 Leo Barnard, 13151 Paseo Presada, Saratoga Parks and Recreation Commissioner, stated that he did not see any strong encouragement for incorporation of a neighborhood park. He stated he would like to see a park or a recreational area as part of this plan because of the density increase as a resulting from development of this site. He explained that Quito Park would be impacted by the residents of this site. Judy Homen, 13159 Montrose Street, reported on the numerous activities that have taken place on this property -the demolition, vagrants, parking and etc. She noted that the neighborhood has had to endure these occurrences and asked if there was any kind of guarantee the Commission could give that would assure the neighbors that there would be no through access of Afton to Saratoga Avenue. She also asked how only 15 homes could be proposed fora 13 acre parcel unless the homes are very large homes. Chairperson Moran explained that the Plan as presented tonight prohibits through access of Afton to Saratoga or McFarland and that the action the Commission would be taking would be only a recommendation. She further explained that the City Council would be the body which would make the final decision or approval of the plan. She explained that if, in the future, a developer brings a proposal before the City that deviates from the approved plan in a way that calls for amendments to the Specific Plan, the neighbors would be noticed of the public hearings. Chairperson Moran advised the neighbors to continue following the plans for the site. She stated that no absolute guarantees could be made and that when a development proposal is made there is a possibility for changes. She stated that such changes would require extensive review and public hearings. She again stated that the neighbors would be noticed that such changes are being considered. Planner Walgren explained that as the Plan is proposed the language reads that no through vehicular access shall be permitted connecting Afton Avenue with either Saratoga or McFarland. He also pointed out that the Plan also requires the use of Afton as access for only residential land uses. He stated that this language is very binding. He went on to explain that the plan also limits the number of parcels that can. use Afton as access via a cul-de-sac to 15, or 20 if there is a secondary emergency access provided. He stated that there has been interest in limiting the number of parcels on a cul-de-sac off of Afton to 15. He noted that the Plan, at this point, is not set in concrete and this change could be made. He also stated that should the Plan be approved by the City Council, the language used which prohibits connection of Afton to either Saratoga or McFarland is very binding. 11 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 12 Commissioner Jacobs stated that no one has expressed support for connecting Afton to Saratoga or McFarland, not even the property owner. He stated that he felt that the Commission is supportive of the neighbors desire to keep the streets unconnected. He stated that while there are no absolute guarantees he feels that a connection of the street would be very unlikely. He stated that some access from Afton into the development via a cul-de-sac is a reasonable design feature to integrated the development into the neighborhood. He explained that traffic concerns are something the Commission felt could be addressed and mitigated. Judy Homen suggested that #3 on Page 17 limit the number of homes served by a cul-de-sac to 15 and change the first line to read: "If Residential development is proposed to access off Afton Avenue it shall be via cul-de-sac serving not more than 15 residential parcels." Planner Walgren stated that this suggestion could easily be implemented since #1 on Page 17 precludes through access. Norm Matteoni, 1740 Technology Drive, San Jose, representing the property owner - BA Properties, stated that the property owner is not asking for through access of Afton. He also stated that the proposed access to the property and the signalized intersection (Figure 5), are dictated by certain fixed aspects such as the approved Vineyard Development plans. He noted that the plans presented in the Specific Plan are just examples of possible land use plans/guidelines and that the plans are not all encompassing. Mr. Matteoni presented the following language to clarify the purpose of the proposed Specific Plan: "As examples of possible land uses the following illustrative maps are set forth. These maps are guidelines. The actual applications of development after public review if approved will establish the precise development. These land use plan are not all inclusive." He suggested that the City may want to use this language as an introduction to the Specific Plan. He stated that the owner's intent is to produce a quality design that may have multiple uses and develop the property in a coordinated fashion. He also answered questions from the Commission. Commissioner Jacobs expressed interest in including the language read by Mr. Matteoni as an introduction to the Specific Plan. Planner Walgren noted that a letter had been received by Mr. and Mrs. Kramer requesting that Afton not become a through access and that any land use proposal for the property be limited to residential. 12 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 13 Planner Walgren also stated that it was the intent of staff that the final section of the Plan provide a descriptive that these plans included are preferred plans/guidelines as far as land use grouping which doesn't effect implementation measures such as access and green belt buffers. He explained that the language would reflect that these plans (as far as land use groupings) are only a guide, are not all inclusive and can be modified or deviated from if a better project is the result. There was no one else wishing to speak. ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:10 P.M. PASSED 5-0. Chairperson Moran stated that she has no interest in a through access of Afton to Saratoga or McFarland and can support the change of the "should" on Page 17, #3, to "shall" with regard to allowing access of Afton into the site via Cul-de-sac only. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he is in agreement with Chairperson Moran and stated that he could support limiting the number of parcels served by this cul-de-sac to 15. Commissioner Wolfe expressed his support for the comments made by Chair Moran and Commissioner Jacobs. Commissioner Asfour and Murakami also concurred with the comments made by Chair Moran and Commissioner Jacobs. Commissioner Asfour inquired if the Planning Commission would be able to see the Final Draft of the Specific Plan with the changes and the introduction incorporated prior to its review by the Council. Planner Walgren stated that it could come back before the Commission prior to City Council review. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he did not feel it necessary to bring the plan back before the Commission. He stated that the Commission has the plans that will be included and that the only other thing that he (Commissioner Jacobs) would like to see is incorporation of the language read by Mr. Matteoni. He stated that once the Commission agrees on whatever changes there are, the staff will make these and the item can be sent on to the Council. 13 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 14 Chairperson Moran expressed agreement with Commissioner Jacobs. Chairperson Moran asked staff to address Mr. Barnard's expressed concerns regarding the lack of parks in the Specific Plan for the site. Planner Walgren noted that Page 19, Common Greens and Landscaping section integrates common areas and open spaces into the Plan. Planning Director Curtis explained that development of this site especially a residential development would be subject to park in-lieu fees which would be put in the fund for purchase of park land or improvements to parks that would serve the residents of this development. He also explained that the City cannot impose, as a mandate, the establishment of a fully improved park within this site that is totally paid for by the developer and which serves people from outside this development. He explained that the City can only require the developer to pay the development's share of park fees. Commissioner Jacobs inquired as to how much land the City could require with regard to meeting the needs of the people of such a development. Director Curtis noted that there portion would be in the form an in-lieu park fee. Commissioner Jacobs asked how much property or donation of property would meet the development's need. He stated that his concern related to the developer paying an in-lieu fee for a park that would be located some distance away from the development and end up not actually serving the people from the development. City Attorney Riback explained that the General Plan does not designate that a portion of this land be used for park/recreational area and in order to require a developer to implement apark/recreation area on this site a Policy would have to be included in the General Plan calling for a park on this site. He explained that the formula for the size of a park is defined in the General Plan as 3 acres per every 1,000 residents. He noted that the City can only require a park on site if it is set forth in the Recreation Element of the General Plan. Commissioner Moran inquired if the Area Plan calls for a park. Mr. Barnard indicated a desire to address Chairperson Moran's question. JACOBS/MURAKAMI MOVED TO RE-OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:20 P.M. PASSED 5-0. 14 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 15 Mr Barnard stated that there is no park proposed on this site or in the plan. He stated that the Parks and Recreation General Plan that addresses the City's needs through the year 2000 concludes that the City is underplanned for parks by 40%. He stated that the opportunity should be taken in the future to have developments of this size and even smaller provide park capability wherever possible. He stated that he did not feel that the Plan addressed this issue and urged the Planning Commission to look at the Park Plan before coming to any conclusion with regard to the Specific Plan for this site. In response to Chairperson Moran's inquiry as to whether Mr. Barnard had any language that he would like to see added to the Plan which would address this issue, Mr. Barnard explained that he had not had a chance to review the Specific Plan prior to the meeting and did not have any language readily available. He stated that if allowed some time to review the Plan he could probably come up with some language. He urged the Commission to take every possible opportunity to create additional parks/recreational areas in the City. WOLFE/JACOBS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:23 P.M. PASSED 5-0. Commissioner Asfour noted that the Plan calls for common greens and landscaping as outlined on Page 19 and explained by Planner Walgren. He questioned whether this would be adequate for the residents of a future development. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he is troubled to find out for the first time tonight that a requirement cannot be made for the provision of parks in any plan provided to the Commission because apparently there is no provision for this in the General Plan. Planning Director Curtis clarified that the City cannot require the developer to dedicate a portion of this land be dedicated as park land that will serve people who live off-site. If this is done the City will have to pay for this land. He explained that only dedication for exaction the City could get from development of this site is from the need that is generated from the residents on this site. Commissioner Jacobs asked how much real property can be expected for service to the residents of this site. Planner Walgren called attention to Page 19 of the Plan and explained that the net site area covered by structures and other impervious surfaces shall not exceed 60% and that at least 40% - 9.6 acres of the remaining property be landscaped and that at least 50% - 4.8 acres of the landscaped area be designated and recorded (deed restricted) for the common use and enjoyment of the residents. He further explained that this 15 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 16 portion o t e property cannot a ence m, ut can a eat er concentrate or ro en up/distributed over the property. He also noted that the required greenbelt area is not comprised in these requirements for common areas and landscaping. He noted that the Plan does not specifically state this and that the Commission may want to add language to this effect. Planning Director Curtis and Planner Walgren answered questions from the Commission with regard to the Plan's "Common Greens and Landscaping" requirements, various City requirements and limitations to implementation of parks, in-lieu-park fees and acquisition of land for park uses. The Commission went through the Specific Plan page by page in order to identify any changes. There were no changes to Pages 1 through 14. Page 15 - Planner Walgren suggested that the following language be added as a Goal Statement: "Pedestrian connections should be provided wherever it is feasible to do so in order to provide pedestrian circulation within the development itself and between the new and existing neighborhoods." Chairperson Moran suggested that #4 be modified to read: "Ensure that future development of the site minimizes the potential for Route 85 interchange traffic to negatively impact this site and adjoining neighborhoods by promoting appropriate circulation patterns. Page 16 - no changes Page 17 - Chairperson Moran and Planner Walgren co-operatively modified #3 (Circulation) to read as follows: "If Residential development is proposed to access off Afton Avenue it shall be via a cul-de-sac servicing not more that 15 residential parcels and/or units to prevent the need for a secondary emergency access." Planner Walgren suggested that the phrase "(approximately 13 acres)" be stricken from the #2 (Development Regulations). Chairperson Moran suggested #2 (Development Regulations) read as follows: "The east portion of the site shall be devoted to Residential-Low or Medium Density development." Page 18 - no changes 16 • ~ Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 17 Page 19 - #5 (Greenbelt Buffering) Planner Walgren suggested that the following be added at the end: "These treatments should also provide pedestrian access connections wherever appropriate." #1 (Common Green and Landscaping) Chairperson Moran directed staff to draft language that would specifically exclude greenbelts and buffer zones from this section's requirements and provide language that calls for development of parks on the site to be in conformance with the guidelines in the Recreation Element of the General Plan. Page 20 - no changes Page 21 - (Land Use Plans) Commissioner Jacobs suggested that the language offered by Mr. Matteoni be incorporated into this section. City Attorney Riback reviewed the language and advised staff to use the following language for this section -Planning Director Curtis read this into the record: "As examples of possible land uses the following illustrative maps are set forth. These maps are guidelines. These land use plans are not all inclusive." Planning Director Curtis stated that staff would work with this language. Commissioner Wolfe commented that whatever is done as far as developing this site will be an improvement. He stated that he feels the City needs to be flexible with regard to proposals for development of this site. He noted that this site will serve as an entryway into Saratoga and the City needs to work to ensure that this site aesthetically pleasing and suggested that any commercial development carry the same architectural theme as the library building. Chairperson Moran noted that the concerns expressed by Mr. Leslie with regard to the proposed access for this site being in close proximity to his residence and its potential of increased traffic, traffic fumes, and noise needs to be addressed. 17 • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page 18 Planner Walgren noted that this intersection has been identified as an existing condition and that the following language as another Implementation Measure can be added as an Implementation Measure to help mitigate Mr. Leslie's concerns: "If vehicular access is proposed abutting the existing residence identified as 13100 Saratoga Avenue (A. P. N) sufficient buffering treatment shall be provided to protect the residence from traffic and traffic noise impacts. These bufferings can be landscaping, setbacks, sound attenuation walls or any combination of the above." Planner Walgren stated that this would probably go under the landscaping requirements of the Plan. JACOBS/ASFOUR MOVED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WITH REGARD TO THE PAUL MASSON SPECIFIC PLAN. THE MOTION PASSED 5-f). ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE PAUL MASSON SPECIFIC PLAN AS AMENDED (ABOVE). THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS None COMMISSION ITEMS None COMMUNICATIONS Written 1. City Council Minutes - 6/2 and 6/5/93 Oral City Council Planning Director Curtis announced that at the last City Council meeting the City's budget was reviewed. With regard to impacts to the Planning Commission, Planning Director Curtis explained that two Planning Department positions had been cut - 1 18 `Planning Commission M~s • Meeting of June 23, 199' Page 19 erica an 1 A vance P anner. He exp acne t at t e ommissions wor program would probably need to be revised and that staff would be looking into this matter and the new work program would be distributed to the Planning Commission at their July 6th meeting. He also noted that the City's Planning Division, Building Division and Code Enforcement division would be combined to make up a new Community Development Department. Planning Director Curtis also commended the work and efforts of the Planning Staff with regard to the Paul Masson Specific Plan. Commissioner Wolfe and Jacobs stated that they had attended some of the community meetings on the Paul Masson Specific Plan and thought that Planners Walgren and Dias had handled the meetings very well. Commissioner Murakami inquired if anything could be done with regard to the dust generated by the demolition and grinding done on the Paul Masson site. Planning Director Curtis explained that the demo crew had been experiencing difficulties with regard to the operation of water trucks used to wet the dust to help keep it minimized. The Director explained that the Code Enforcement Officer had visited the site and instructed the workers not to grind concrete when the water trucks are not functioning. Planing Director Curtis stated that the City is keeping on top of the issue and is doing what it can to minimize the dust. Commissioner Jacobs stated that the City's efforts should be communicated to the community. Planning Director Curtis stated that letters were sent out to the neighbors at the beginning of this project outlining the course of action the City would be taking in order to mitigate any problems. Commissioner Asfour requested that he receive a copy of the Final Draft of the Specific Plan. Staff indicated that a copy would be forwarded to him. ADJOURNMENT At 9:55 p.m. Chairperson Moran adjourned the meeting to 7:30 p.m. on July 6, 1993, in the Senior Day Care Center, 19655 Allendale Ave., Saratoga, CA. Andrea M. Chelemengos Minutes Clerk 19