Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-11-1993 Planning Commission Minutes_~ ,_ • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 11, 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, and Wolfe Absent: Commissioners Caldwell and Murakami PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES Minutes of July 6, 1993. Commissioner Asfour had the following corrections: Page 1 1 , 1st motion on the page should reflect the vote of 3-2 (Commissioners Wolfe and Asfour opposed). Page 1 2, 1st motion should, the vote should be 3-2 (Commissioners Wolfe and Asfour opposedl. Commissioner Wolfe had the following corrections: Page 7, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence, the words "of vision" should be inserted after the word "conflict". Further in the same paragraph, 3rd line from the bottom, the words "to the City" should be added after the word "obligation". Also, the last line of the same paragraph, the words "the property rights of all parties concerned and" should be added after the words "with regard to". Commissioner Jacobs had the following correction: Page 8, last paragraph, should include language to reflect that the Paul Masson Mountain Winery is one of the areas that Commissioner Jacobs feels should be included in the City's sphere of influence. Commissioner Caldwell submitted, in writing, the following corrections: • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1 , 1 993 Page 2 Page 2, 2nd paragraph, 1st line the name "Jody Bamfor" should be "Doty Bamford". Page 9, 1st paragraph, the following should be added to the end: "and that the developer of that property was pursuing a sphere expansion through LAFCO on his own and at his own expense." Minutes of July 14, 1993. Commissioner Asfour had the following correction: Page 9, the 3rd bullet of the motion should be deleted. Chairperson Moran had the following corrections: Page 7, 6th line (1st partial paragraph) the word "indefinite" should be changed to "infinite". Commissioner Jacobs concurred. Page 8, 2nd paragraph from the bottom, 1st line the words "a good" should be deleted and replaced with "the City's". Commissioner Caldwell submitted, in writing, .the following corrections: Page 4, 6th paragraph 4th line from the bottom, "Ried Lane" should be corrected to "Reid Lane". Page 12, motion approving DR-93-016, the words "clear story" should be deleted and replaced with the word "clerestory". Page 13, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, the last word "understanding" should be deleted and replaced with "agreement with the County". Page 14, the speaker identified as Anne Smith should be corrected to "Anne Waltonsmith". ASFOUR/WOLFE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 6, AND JULY 14, 1993, AS AMENDED ABOVE. PASSED 4-O. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications. s • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 3 REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 6, 1993. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET There were no technical corrections to the packet. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. DR-93-023 - Anderson; 14971 Quito Rd., request for Design Review approval to allow an addition to an existing detached guest house to be 15 ft. in height. The Zoning Ordinance limits accessory structures to a maximum height of 12 ft., unless an exception is granted by the Planning Commission. The subject parcel is approximately 1.2 acres and is located in an R-1- 40,000 zoning district. ------------------------------------------------------------- Planner Walgren presented the Report dated August 1 1, 1993. He also presented a color board and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the application. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:45 P.M. There was no one wishing to speak. ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:45 P.M. PASSED 4-0. Commissioner Asfour stated that he had visited the site and had only one concern regarding the impact to neighbors directly behind the proposed structure. He explained that since these neighbors were noticed of the proposal and did not come forward with any objections, he (Commissioner Asfour) is satisfied that there will be no problems with regard to the proposed structure. ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO APPROVE DR-93-023 AS RECOMMENDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 4 2. SM-93-007 - Shanahan; 19244 Crisp Ave., request for Site Modification approval to construct a pool, spa, arbor, decking and associated grading pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code and the Subdivision conditions of approval. The subject property is approximately 40,000 sq. ft. and is within an R-1-40,000 zone district. Planner Walgren presented the report dated August 1 1, 1993. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:47 P.M. There was no one wishing to speak. JACOBS/WOLFE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:47 P.M. PASSED 4-0. WOLFE/JACOBS MOVED TO APPROVE SM-93-007 AS RECOMMENDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. Chairperson Moran explained that she originally had concerns with regard to the amount of grading required for this project, but that the Staff Report persuaded her to believe that the grading will not have a negative impact on the surrounding properties. She stated that she could support the application. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 3. SUP-93-001 -Coward; 15095 Quito Rd., request for Second Unit Use Permit approval to construct a 12 ft. tall, 800 sq. ft. second unit detached from the main residence per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The property is approximately 64,270 sq. ft. and is located within an R-1-40,000 zone district. Planner Walgren presented the Report dated August 1 1, 1993. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:49 P.M. BY CHAIRPERSON MORAN. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 5 John Coward, applicant, spoke in favor of the application. He stated that he was opposed to Condition #6 which requires 4 - 24-inch box trees to be planted. He explained that the adjacent neighbor had installed a fence between the location of the proposed structure and the neighbors property. He stated that the proposed structure would be screened from the neighbor by the fence. Mr. Coward also answered questions from the Commission. AT 7:51 P.M., WOLFE/ASFOUR MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. PASSED 4-0. In response to the Commission's inquiry, Planner Walgren explained that Condition No. 6 had been included with the original approval, in 1990, and was designed to ensure that the proposed structure would be screened from the view of the neighbors. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he could support the application as presented, but could not support the request to remove Condition No. 6 for the reason that the neighbors may have reviewed the plans which included the installation of the four trees and then concluded that they had no objections to the proposal. He further explained that if the Condition requiring the planting of the trees were to be removed, the neighbors should be noticed of that proposed change so they may have a chance to again review the plans and present any concerns this may present. Commissioner Asfour agreed with the points made by Commissioner Jacobs. The applicant indicated his desire to re-address the Commission. ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO RE-OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:54 P.M. PASSED 4-0. John Coward, applicant, stated that since the original approval, the adjacent neighbor has constructed a 7-foot-high fence and that the neighbor would not be impacted by the structure if the trees required in Condition No. 6 are not installed. He urged the Commission to delete Condition No. 6. Commissioner Jacobs stated that the Commission may want to continue the application, if agreeable with the applicant, in order to allow the Commission and staff time to look into the issues. Commissioner Jacobs explained that he would feel uncomfortable with removing the condition without further study and noticing of the requested change to the neighbors. ASFOUR/WOLFE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:00 P.M. PASSED 4-0. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1 , 1 993 Page 6 Commissioner Wolfe stated that he had visited the site and confirmed the existence of the fence. Commissioner Wolfe stated that he felt the trees are now unnecessary and he could support the applicant's request to delete Condition No. 6. Chairperson Moran stated that she too would like an opportunity to further study the issues before removing Condition No 6. She stated that she felt that the trees help to mitigate potential privacy impacts and before deleting Condition No. 6 which requires the trees she would like to make sure that there will be no negative impacts to the neighbors. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he could support the application as presented, but could not support the deletion of Condition No. 6 without further study. Commissioner Asfour agreed with the comments made by Commissioner Jacobs Commissioner Asfour noted that during his visit to the site the neighboring house was visible over the fence and he concluded that the proposed structure may also be visible to the neighbors. He stated that he felt that the trees may be needed as screening and that he would not be in support of deleting Condition No. 6 without further study and noticing the neighbors of the requested change. The commission inquired of the applicant whether he would prefer that the commission vote on the issue or continue it to allow for further investigation with regard to the matter of eliminating the condition requiring the trees. The applicant indicated the he preferred that the Commission proceed with the application, as presented, and also stated that he would comply with any conditions of approval. JACOBS/ASFOUR MOVED TO APPROVE SUP-93-001 AS RECOMMENDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. PASSED 4-0. 4. SM-93-006 - Finocchio; 19160 Crisp Ave., request for Site Modification approval to construct a pool, arbor and associated decking. An exemption from the hillside fencing requirement is also requested to allow the area of enclosure to exceed the permitted 4,000 sq. ft. pursuant to Chapter 15 of the City Code and a Subdivision condition of approval. The subject property is approximately 42,400 sq. ft. and is within an R-1- 40,000 zone district. -------------------------------------------------------------- Planner Walgren presented the report dated August 1 1, 1993. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 7 CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:06 P.M. Robin Atherton, project designer, offered to answer any questions from the Commission with regard to the project. WOLFS/ASFOUR MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:07 P.M. PASSED 4-0 Commissioner Asfour stated that he could agree with the findings made in the staff report and noted that the proposed fence would not be visible from the street side. ASFOUR/WOLFS MOVED TO APPROVE SM-93-006 AS RECOMMENDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. Chairperson Moran stated that she could support the application including the exemption from the fence enclosure regulations because of the rolling topography of site. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. At this point, Planning Director Curtis noted, for the record, that the City Attorney was not present for the meeting. Planning Director Curtis stated that he had spoken with City Attorney Riback and that they had agreed that the agenda items did. not warrant the attorney's presence at the meeting. The Director also noted that City Attorney Riback also had a scheduling conflict with regard to attending the Planning Commission meeting. 5. DR-93-007 - Peterson; 14644 Stoneridge Rd., request for Design Review V-93-005 approval to construct two residential townhomes on a SD-93-OOH~I-4,Om~Jsl~e~rt~tij~Ilet6~vnNrprax~ira~c~is~~iGi94~/s~iaftc~ap~bwetfisi an R- necessary to allow the structure to encroach into tired front and side yard setbacks, which vary based on the structure's height. Subdivision approval is necessary to allow the units to be parcelized and individually owned. ------------------------------------------------------------- The Report dated August 1 1 , 1 993 was presented to the Commission by Planner Walgren. Planner Walgren also answered questions from the Commission with regard to the application. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:15 P.M. BY CHAIRPERSON MORAN. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 8 Don Peterson, 162 Alta Vista, Los Gatos, applicant, spoke in favor of the application and noted that with regard to the design of the structure, it was his goal to minimize grading and preserve as many of the existing trees as possible. Mr. Peterson suggested that instead of the Commission requiring him to install additional trees in the backyard of the proposed site, they (the Commission) may want to consider having him (Mr. Peterson) purchase trees to be planted in one of Saratoga's public parks. Mr. Peterson stated that the required replacement trees would not be seen by anyone, but if the trees were installed on public property many more people would be able to enjoy them. AT 8:18 P.M., ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. PASSED. Commissioner Asfour stated that he had visited the site and noticed that the site was not very visible to other nearby properties. He stated that he had no problem with the application as submitted and could support it in its entirety. ASFOUR/WOLFE MOVED TO APPROVE DR-93-007, V-93-005, AND SD-93-003 PER THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE IN THE STAFF REPORT. Chairperson Moran stated that she was very pleased with the two-family plan and the effort made to preserve the trees. She explained that with regard to Mr. Peterson's suggestion to plant the replacement trees on public property, the Commission could not make that decision because there is not yet a mechanism in place to do so. She expressed her support for the applications. Planning Director Curtis noted that a program similar to that which Mr. Peterson suggested is underway. He confirmed Chairperson Moran's statement that there is no mechanism currently in place that would allow the Commission to require that replacement trees be planted at a location other than the subject site. The Director noted that if the Commission so desired, they could eliminate the condition require the applicant to install replacement trees and just encourage the applicant to contact the City at a later date (when a program is implemented) for the purpose of contributing to a fund for planting of trees on public property. He suggested that the Commission may just want to go ahead and require the replacement trees since no mechanism is currently in place and there is no certain date when such a program will be implemented. Commissioner Jacobs noted that it is the City Council's place to establish a mechanism to allow off-site planting of replacement trees. He stated that he thought the idea had merit, but that the Council should initiate the program before the Commission begins recommending off-site planting of replacement trees. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 9 THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 6. SD-93-044 - Fine; 14075 & 14065 Saratoga Ave., request for V-93-011 - Tentative Parcel Map approval to divide a 29,228 sq. ft. parcel, with three existing homes situated on it, into two separate parcels of 21,203 sq. ft. and 8,025 sq. ft. Variance approval is also necessary to allow the one parcel to be less than 20,000 sq. ft. in area as.prescribed by the R-1- 20,000 zoning regulations. A 20 ft. wide 1,425 sq. ft. parcel abutting the northeast property line would be merged into the 8,025 sq. ft. lot as part of the application. The Tentative Parcel Map and Variance requests would allow the northeast home to sit on its own parcel, and the two remaining homes to sit on their own parcel as a main residence and secondary dwelling. All three structures are on the City's Heritage Inventory. ------------------------------------------------------------- Planner Walgren presented the Report dated August 1 1 , 1 993, and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the project. Planning Director Curtis explained that payment of the fee referred to in Condition No. 4 was up to the discretion of the Planning Director. He stated that it is his recommendation that this fee be waived because even though a new lot will be created, the living unit already exists and, therefore, a new need for additional uses of City parks and recreational facilities will not be created by this action. In response to Commissioner Jacobs' inquiry, Planning Director Curtis explained that the fee is based on a formula of land costs and the average occupancy of 2.9 persons per household. He also stated that the City's goal is to have 5 acres of recreational area per every 1000 residents. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:30 . Larry Fine, applicant, provided background information on the site and the application and spoke in favor of his proposal. He stated that he had no intention of removing the northeast house, but would like the future owners of the house to have the ability to remodel it if they so desired. Mr. Fine stated that he had not been made aware of the fee required in Condition No. 4 until just recently and urged the Commission to waive the fee. WOLFE/ASFOUR MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:35 P.M. PASSED 4-0. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1 , 1 993 Page 10 Commissioner Asfour stated that he could support the application because it would bring the properties closer into compliance with the City Code. ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO APPROVE SD-93-004 AND V-93-011. Planning Director Curtis inquired if this motion intended to recommend waiving of the fee outlined in Condition No. 4. ASFOUR/JACOBS ACCEPTED PLANNING DIRECTOR CURTIS' RECOMMENDATION TO WAIVE THE FEE (AS NOTED IN CONDITION NO 4) AND AGREED TO AMEND THEIR MOTION TO REFLECT THAT CONDITION NO. 4 NOT REQUIRE THE PARK AND RECREATION FEE. Commissioner Wolfe asked if language could be added that would strongly encourage preservation of the northeast house. Planner Walgren stated that a condition could be added that strongly encouraged the preservation of the house. The applicant indicated a desire to speak. Planning Director Curtis reminded the Commission that a motion had been made and should be either voted on or withdrawn if the public hearing was going to be re-opened. COMMISSIONER ASFOUR WITHDREW HIS MOTION. ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO RE-OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:38 P.M. PASSED 4-0. Larry Fine, applicant, suggested that if the Commission was concerned about preserving the northeast house, they may want to recommend that the property owners seek Heritage Designation of the structure. ASFOUR/WOLFE MOVED TO CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:40 P.M. PASSED 4-0. Planning Director Curtis explained that if the site was designated as a Historical Site the designation would not necessarily prevent demolition of the structure, but it would require that further review processes be conducted before a demolition could take place. He also noted that usually when a site has a Historical designation, the owners take pride in the designation and try to preserve the structure. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 12 ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:02 P.M. PASSED 4-0. Commissioner Asfour stated that he felt that the setback should be measured from the wall that is at the back of the easement. Commissioner Jacobs stated that the photo board presented by Mr. lee demonstrates that others have encroached into the setback. He noted that staff has brought the issue before the Commission for the purpose of establishing a policy with regard to the point from which the setback should be measured. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he is in agreement with staff's recommendation that the setback should be measured from the edge of the pedestrian and landscape easement. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he can support this recommendation based on visual and aesthetic reasons. Commissioner Wolfe concurred with Commissioner Jacobs and stated that he could support staff's recommendation. Chairperson Moran stated that she also supported staff's recommendation. Commissioner Jacobs expressed concern with regard to future development "slipping through the cracks" and developing the parcels based on a setback measurement taken from the property line and not the edge of the easement. Planner Walgren and Planning Director Curtis explained that the action taken will be documented in the subdivision file and records and that the counter maps in the Planning Department will have a notation made on them which will mark the properties effected and note from what point the setback measurement should be taken. Commissioner Asfour noted that there are 2 homes that were originally built using the property line as the location from which to measure the setback. He noted that this fact should also be noted in the City records. JACOBS/ASFOUR MOVE TO UPHOLD THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION MADE WITH REGARD TO THE KIM APPLICATION -THE 25-FOOT REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE EDGE OF THE PEDESTRIAN AND LANDSCAPE EASEMENT. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 11 ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO APPROVE SD-93-004 AND V-93-011 WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: • CONDITION NO. 4 SHALL NOT REQUIRE PAYMENT OF A PARK AND RECREATION FEE; AND • ANEW CONDITION SHALL BE ADDED REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR HISTORICAL DESIGNATION OF THE NORTHEAST HOUSE. Chairperson Moran stated that in light of staff's report of the Council's direction to use this kind of procedure to try to bring heritage sites closer into compliance with the Code, she would support the application. She stated that she was not sure this practice would work, but that she would support the application. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. The meeting was recessed at 8:45 p.m. and then reconvened at 8:49 p.m. 7. Appeal of Administrative Decision -Kim; 12477 Blue Meadow Ct., Applicant is appealing an administrative determination as to where the required 25 ft. rear yard setback is taken from per Chapter 15 of the City Code. Staff's determination is that the setback should be measured from the 20 ft. pedestrian and landscape easement which crosses over the rear of the property and abutting Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. The applicant is requesting approval to measure the setback from the property line to allow construction of a 685 sq. ft. addition six feet from the edge of the easement. The property is approximately 12,700 sq. ft. and is located within an R-1-10,000 zone district. -------------------------------------------------------------- Planner Walgren presented the Report dated August 1 1, 1993. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:57 P.M. Mr. Lee, project designer representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the Commission overturning the administrative decision and allowing the 25-foot rear yard setback to be measured from the property line. He also presented a photo board and a map depicting other houses in the area which have built closer to the pedestrian easement and have used the property line as the point from which to measure the required setback. Mr. Lee also answered questions from the Commission with regard to the application. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1 , 1 993 Page 13 8. DR-93-006 - Coe; 1 5217 Sobey Rd., request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing 3,566 sq. ft. three-story residence and to construct a new 3,740 sq. ft. two-story residence with approximately 813 sq. ft. of attic space and 1,660 sq. ft. of basement area per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The parcel is 38,109 sq. ft. and is located within an R-1-40,000 zone district. -------------------------------------------------------------- Planner Walgren presented the Report dated August 11, 1993 and answered questions from the Commission. Planning Director Curtis stated that he had discussed the issues of the application with City Attorney Riback who reviewed the issues and concurred with staff's interpretations of the Code. Planning Director Curtis further explained that City Attorney Riback was of the opinion that should the applicant wish to pursue the project as proposed, a variance would need to be pursued. Per Commissioner Jacobs' request, Planner Walgren pointed out the attic and basements on the elevation plan. Planning Director Curtis explained that not all the floor area is visible from the outside, but per the Code, would be considered as countable floor area. CHAIRPERSON MORAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:20 P.M. Chairperson Moran noted the receipt of letters from Mr. Davis and Mr. Coe. Tom Coe, applicant ,spoke in favor of the application and directed the Commission's attention to the letter that he had submitted. Mr. Coe explained that the existing house had been condemned as a result of earthquake damage. He stated that the proposed house had been designed to meet his family's needs, be compatible with the neighborhood, be wheelchair accessible and conform with the City codes. He stated that he did not feel that the attic and basement space should be considered (countable) floor area. He also stated that the proposed house can not be lowered to submerge the entire basement because of geotechnical concerns. He noted that the attic and basement space would be wasted if he could not use it as living area. With regard to the suspended ceiling in the basement, Mr. Coe stated that between the ceiling and the floor of the next story is where the air handling ducts, pipes, wires and etc. would be placed. Mr. Coe expressed his desire to construct the proposed residence as soon as possible and urged the Commission to approve the application so he may begin construction. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1 , 1 993 Page 14 Bob Johnson, 18955 Monte Vista Drive, expressed concern with regard to the height of the proposed structure and the structure's overall (vertical and longitudinal) impact on his view. He noted that the false ceiling in the basement could be removed once the house has final clearance from the Building Department. n Mr. Coe, applicant, stated that the roof line of the proposed house would be lower than the roof line of the existing house except for a small section. He explained that most of the house would not be above grade. Mr Coe, in response to a question from the Commission, indicated that the existing house was built in 1964 or 1965. ASFOUR/JACOBS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:38 P.M. PASSED 4-0. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he was not as concerned about the protruding section of the basement as much as he is concerned with the visuals of the house. He stated that the house presented a bulky appearance and had excessive bulk above the 2nd/upper story. He stated that he was particularly opposed to the west elevation and could support staff's recommendation that the item be continued to allow the applicant to redesign the proposed structure. Chairperson Moran stated that she was concerned with the section of the basement which protrudes from the ground. She stated that this is precisely what gives designs the look of a 3- or 4-story building. She expressed her concern with regard to the design. She stated that she found it to be bulky and she also noted that the site is a prominent site and that the Commission needs to take into consideration the structure's impact on the views of neighboring parcels. She stated that she would be in support of continuing the application so the applicant can have a chance to redesign the structure and address the concerns of the Commission. Commissioner Wolfe also expressed concerns with regard to bulk. He stated that he would be in favor of continuing the item and directing the applicant to redesign the structure to address the concerns regarding the building's bulky appearance. Planning Director Curtis explained to the Commission that this item and the issue relative to the floor area has to do with the intent of the code. He stated that he feels that the intent of the Code relative to floor area has to do with regulating the size, bulk and mass and that the floor area is directly related to the size, bulk, and mass of a structure. He stated that the kind of spaces which the applicant has chosen to utilize results in this space being counted as floor space. He again stated that floor space and the size of a building are directly related. • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 15 Chairperson Moran explained to the applicant that the Commissions comments indicate support for continuing the item for redesign. She asked the applicant if he would be agreeable to a continuance. The applicant indicated a desire to speak. ASFOUR/WOLFE MOVED TO RE-OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:47 P.M. PASSED 4-0. Mr. Coe, applicant, stated that he would like additional time to explain some of the details to the Commission. He again stated that the proposed house is lower than the existing house. With regard to the issue of floor space he noted that he is only trying to utilize space which would not normally be used. Chairperson Moran asked Mr. Coe if he would rather the Commission vote on his application as proposed or continue the item for redesign. She noted that she felt that if the Commission were to act on the item before them, a denial would be the result. After conferring with his architect, Mr. Coe stated that he would be agreeable to a continuance, but would like further direction with regard to the redesign and would also like his project to proceed through the City processes as quickly as possible. There was discussion with regard to possible meeting dates on which the project could be brought back and reviewed by the Commission. With regard to the Planning Commissions direction to redesign the house, the applicant was directed to with staff. The Commission explained that staff would be able to assist the applicant and the architect with regard to identifying and addressing the concerns expressed by the Commission with regard to the design. Planning Director Curtis noted that if the applicant is agreeable to the continuance only because he feels that he will be given another chance to argue his interpretation of the Code relative to floor area and not to redesign the house per the Commission's direction, a continuance may not be beneficial. Mr. Coe and his architect indicated that they would work with staff with regard to redesigning the structure. The Commission explained to Mr. Coe that they are interested in a redesign of the structure that would reduce the mass, height, and size and if the structure still exceeds the allowable floor area a variance will need to be pursued. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 16 Commissioner Wolfe noted that the Coe family has some special circumstances - the need for wheelchair access, an elevator and elevator equipment. He suggested that when staff is working with the applicant and the architect that these special circumstances be given some consideration. JACOBS/ASFOUR MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM INDEFINITELY TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TIME TO REDESIGN THE HOUSE AND ADDRESS ISSUES OF MASS, BULK, SIZE, HEIGHT AND THE AMOUNT OF FLOOR AREA. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Planning Director Curtis provideD an update to the Commission with regard to the Paul Masson Winery Demolition process. He stated that the demolition was completed on schedule and that the grinding of the material is 3-weeks behind . schedule due to machinery breakdowns, but will be completed, and the machinery removed from the site, August 22, 1993. He also noted that removal of material began on August 10th and will be removed by September 10th. With regard to the boarded-up house on Quito Road, Planning Director Curtis explained that the house sustained fire damage and until the insurance companies are finished with their work the Building Department is unable to get involved. Planning Director Curtis stated that staff will stay on top of the issue. The Director reminded the Commission of the following meeting dates: Tuesday, September 7th -Land Use at 3:00 p.m. and later that evening a worksession, Wednesday, September 8th -Planning Commission Regular Meeting. Chairperson Moran stated that she will be out of town September 7th and 8th. In response to Chairperson Moran's inquiry, Planning Director Curtis stated that the next joint Planning Commission/City Council worksession will held on October 12th. Planing Director Curtis reported that Mr. Tarentino's weeds have been cut. The Director noted that the Final Draft of the Open Space Element has been passed out and the Commission should review it and notify staff of any changes. ~ • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1 , 1 993 Page 17 . Commissioner Jacobs stated that he preferred to receive drafts with some marking or indication of what has been changed or a copy of the last draft for the purposes of comparing the two drafts. With .regard to when a new Planning Commissioner will be appointed, Director Curtis stated that it probably will not take place until October or a little later. COMMISSION ITEMS Chairperson Moran stated that she will be out of town September 1 5th when she is supposed to go to the City Council meeting. She asked staff to assist Vice Chairperson Asfour with assigning a replacement if there is something of importance (with regard to the Planning Commission) on the City Council agenda. Director Curtis stated that at this point the Open Space Element is scheduled for September 1st and no public hearings of this type are scheduled for the 15th, unless an appeal is received. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Commission felt that the presence of a Planning Commissioner at the City Council meeting is representative of the Planning Commission. Chairperson Moran answered "No" to Commissioner Jacobs question. Commissioner Asfour stated that he felt the Planning Commissioner is at the City Council meeting just in case there are any questions. He further stated that he felt that if an issue appears on the City Council agenda that the Commission feels strongly about (such as an appeal) it should be the Planning Commissioners' responsibility to go up and speak to the Council with regard to the Planning Commission's position on the item. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he has a problem with applicants presenting new issues at the City Council level and then the Council considering these new issues. Commissioner Jacobs stated that the Council does not read the Planning ~~ Commission minutes and don't know what issues the Planning Commission did consider. He noted that many times the Council inquires why the Commission did not consider certain issues when, in fact, the Planning Commission did consider these very issues. ° • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1, 1993 Page 18 Commissioner Wolfe stated that he feels that part of the purpose of a Planning Commissioner being present at the Council meetings is to offer some insight to the Council with regard to the Planning Commission's deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. Commissioner Asfour suggested that the Commissioners take a more pro-active position at the Council meetings. Chairperson Moran expressed her concern with regard to Planning Commissioners not representing the Planning Commission accurately, but instead, representing their own views. Commissioner Jacobs stated that once the Planning Commission makes a decision, each Commission should stick by that decision and accurately represent this decision at the Council meetings. He explained that if his vote is in the minority, he believes that if he is before the City Council he is to represent the majority. He stated that he feels that it is important for Planning Commission representative to be present at the City Council meetings and again expressed concern with regard to the Council not reading the Planning Commission minutes due to the vast amount of material they need to review.. There was also discussion with regard to a situation where the Planning Commission's position on a certain item differs from the staff's position or recommendation. It was questioned whether staff can present both sides and unbiasly report to the Council on the position of the Commission. Planning Director Curtis stated that it is his job to accurately represent to the Council the actions taken at the Planning Commission meetings. He explained that with regard to new issues being presented at the City Council level, the City Council typically sends the item back to the Planning Commission for consideration of the issue. Commissioner Jacobs stated that it is the staff's job to represent the Planning Commission's position, but not necessarily to advocate the Commission's position. He explained that in a case where staff is not in agreement with the Commission's position, the Council may be able to sense this, but when the staff's recommendation and the Planning Commission's action are in agreement, staff may more strongly represent that position. There was also discussion among the Commission with regard to continuing items until a decision is reach by the Planning Commission instead of sending the item on the Council where the Planning Commission has no control or input with regard to the decision made on the application or item. • • Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of August 1 1 , 1 993 Page 19 COMMUNICATIONS Written 1 . City Council Minutes - 7/7/93, 7/10/93 & 7/13/93 Oral City Council ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Moran adjourned the meeting at 10:20 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on September 7, 1993, in the Senior Day Care Center, 19655 Allendale Ave., Saratoga, CA. Andrea M. Chelemengos Minutes Clerk