HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-22-1993 Planning Commission Minutesi
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
November 22, 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 Acting Chairperson Asfour.
ROLL CALL
Present: Acting Chairperson Asfour, Commissioners Caldwell, Jacobs, Kaplan,
and Wolfe
Absent: Commissioners Moran and Murakami
City Attorney Riback and Community Development Director Curtis were not present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
MINUTES
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 1993
Commissioner Caldwell had the following corrections:
Page 4, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, and Page 7, 4th paragraph, "Slough"
should be deleted and replaced with "Shloh".
Page 5, last paragraph, should read as follows "Mr. Piontek stated that he now
understands that based on staff's review that he has nothing to worry about in
terms of safety and that there will not be a retaining wall. He noted that these
were the clarifications he was seeking."
Page 9, 2nd sentence, the word "equality" should be deleted and replaced with
"equity".
Page 12, 4th paragraph, 1st line, the address "1309 Gish Road" should be
deleted and replaced with "13091 Pierce Road". Further in the same paragraph,
16th line, "Mr. Gish "should be deleted and replaced with"Mr. Glennon".
•
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 2
Commissioner Kaplan had the following correction:
Page 9, the 3rd paragraph, 3rd line, the word "extent" should be changed to
"extend"
Page 9, 4th paragraph, Commissioner Kaplan questioned the clarity of the
paragraph. Commissioner Caldwell suggested that this paragraph be clarified
administratively since the Director was not present and unable to explain his
comment reflected in this paragraph. This suggestion was agreeable to the
Commission.
CALDWELL/KAPLAN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 10, 1993
MINUTES AS CORRECTED (ABOVE). PASSED 5-0.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There was no one wishing to speak.
REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly
posted on November 19, 1993.
TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET
Planner Walgren stated that there was a technical correction to the agenda, Item #2,
DR-93-006, the proposed floor area indicated on the agenda is 3,740 and should be
3,756. He noted that this correction should also be made on Pages 5 and 6 of the
staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner Caldwell requested that Item #1 be removed from the Consent
Calendar for the purpose of adding some language to the resolution.
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 3
1. V-93-018 - Moley; 19910 Robin Way, request for Variance approval to
construct 428 sq. ft. of first floor area to an existing 3,916 sq. ft.
one-story residence which will be located 18 ft. from an exterior
side yard setback where 25 ft. is required per Chapter 15 of the
City Code. The property is approximately 39;073 sq. ft. and is
located within the R-1-40,000 zone district (cont. from 11 /10/93
meeting to prepare and adopt an approval resolution; application
expires 4/13/94.)
------------------------------------------------------------
Commissioner Caldwell suggested that the last sentence of subsection "a" be modified
to read as follows: "To deny this request to maintain the nonconforming bedroom
setback line would cause undue hardship and deprive the applicants of a reasonable
use of their existing home and property." She also suggested that a subparagraph "d"
be added which would read as follows "That a granting of the variance is consistent
with the objectives of the zoning district and the General Plan."
Commissioner Caldwell explained that these findings are pursuant to the Government
Code and should be made by the Planning Commission.
CALDWELL/JACOBS MOVED APPROVAL OF V-93-018 WITH THE ABOVE
MENTIONED MODIFICATIONS.
Commissioner Kaplan noted that Commissioner Caldwell's added language is actually
adding basic language to the resolution stating that the variance is consistent with the
zoning district and the General Plan. She inquired if this language should be used
each and every time a variance is granted.
Commissioner Caldwell stated that she feels this language should be made a part of
the standard findings and that the issue could be further discussed at a worksession.
Planner Walgren stated that in the City's zoning ordnance, variances are not permitted
to "use and activity" type items and it (granting of a variance) would be inherently
consistent with the General Plan. He stated that one can not apply for a variance that
would be inconsistent with the General Plan. He explained that with regard to zoning
code consistency, there are very specific regulations that cannot be modified through
the variance process. He noted that these modifications are actually illustrated in the
City's zoning ordinance and only setback, floor area and various other specifically
mentioned variances can be applied for through the City code.
• •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 4
Their was brief discussion regarding the language suggested by Commissioner
Caldwell and a consensus of the Commission to further discuss the language and its
use at a future worksession. Acting Chairperson Asfour requested that staff look into
the use of the language and present a report to the Commission at the worksession.
The Commission agreed that this language would be acceptable to add to this
resolution as suggested by Commissioner Caldwell.
THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. DR-93-006 - Coe; 15217 Sobey Rd., request for Design Review approval to
demolish an existing 3,566 sq. ft. three-story residence and
construct a new 3,740 sq. ft. two-story residence per Chapter 15
of the City Code. The parcel is 38,109 sq. ft. and is located within
the R-1-40,000 zone district (cont. from 8/11 /93 to revise plans as
directed by the Commission; application expires 1 /7/94).
------------------------------------------------------------
Planner Walgren present the Report dated November 22, 1993. He noted that an
additional condition (Condition #8) was being recommended by the staff and had
been distributed to the Commissioners. He explained that this added condition was in
response to a letter received by Mr. and Mrs. Johnston inquiring about tree removal
and expressing concern regarding the effects of the proposed grading (for the
construction of the retaining wall) on two trees on their property which are close in
proximity to the proposed construction. Planner Walgren explained that the new
condition requires that the applicant, prior to zoning clearance, submit detail
construction plans of the proposed retaining wall adjacent to the driveway for the
Community Development Director and City Arborist's review and approval. Planner
Walgren stated that with the added condition, staff could support the application.
ACTING CHAIRPERSON ASFOUR OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING- AT 7:48 P.M.
Ron Harris, R&H-Associates, project architect, spoke in favor of the application and
gave a brief overview of the proposed project. He stated that the applicant is in
agreement with the recommendation made in the staff report.
There was no one else wishing to speak.
i •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 5
JACOBS/CALDWELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:49 P.M.
PASSED 5-0.
JACOBS/ICAPLAN MOVED TO APPROVE DR-93-006 PER THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT INCLUDING THE NEWLY ADDED
CONDITION #8.
Commissioner Caldwell explained that even though she was not present for the
August 11, 1993, review of this project, she had reviewed the initial staff report, visited
the site, reviewed the minutes of the last public hearing and is prepared to vote on the
application.
Chairperson Asfour thanked the applicant and architect for following the direction of
the Commission during the last review of the project.
THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.
3. DR-93-030 - Ebrahimoun; 15170 EI Camino Grande, request for
V-93-026 - Design Review approval to construct a new two-
story 6,277 sq. ft. residence and a swimming pool per Chapter 15
of the City Code. The existing residence is proposed to be
demolished. Variance approval is also requested to allow the
proposed residence to exceed the site's maximum allowable floor
area of 5,688 sq. ft. by 589 sq. ft. The subject property is
approximately 51,400 sq. ft. and is located in an R-1-40,000 zone
district (cont. from 11 /10/93 at the applicant's request; application
expires 3/29/94).
------------------------------------------------------------
Planner Walgren presented the Report dated November 22, 1993, and answered
questions with regard to the project.
ACTING CHAIRPERSON ASFOUR OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:52 P.M.
Gene Zambetti, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant had not yet arrived
and asked if the Commission could move on to the next application and then come
back to this application when the applicant arrives.
At this time the applicant arrived and Mr. Zambetti was requested to proceed with his
presentation.
i •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 6
Gene Zambetti, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the application. He
submitted pictures of the subject lot and used a transparency to aid in his
presentation. Mr. Zambetti explained that the lot has a 19.3% slope, but when
calculating the allowable floor area the code requires the slope of the lot to be
rounded up to 20%. He explained that floor area was lost due to this code
requirement and presents the applicant with an undue hardship. He stated that there
are other homes in the area built on a sloping lot and exceeding the allowable floor
area. Mr. Zambetti explained that the structure would have 12 inch walls opposed to
the standard 6-inch walls. He stated that the floor area calculation is taken from the
outside of the walls and not from the inside. He stated that this also reduces the floor
area and that the thickness of the walls takes up some of this allowable floor area. He
noted that the neighbors are in support of this project and have written letters
expressing their support and the absence of any concern with regard to potential
impacts of the project on their properties. He also stated that the neighbors do not
feel that granting the variance would be a granting of a special privilege. Mr. Zambetti
explained that the lot is well screened and is unique because of its slope and because
of the location of the proposed home (on the lot) due to the existing gorge on the
property. He discussed the placement of the garage in the basement and other
architectural/design features of the proposed home. He urged the Commission to
approve the project and answered questions from the Commission with regard to the
project.
Planner Walgren, in response to questions from the Commission, explained that the
requirement to round-up the slope percentage was consistent with the code
requirement implemented in 1987. He also explained that the square footage of the
garage is required by code to be counted in with the allowable floor area. He stated
that all applicants are subject to this regulation.
Planner Walgren stated that another letter was received this evening from Mr. and Mrs.
Comport supporting the applicant's request.
Jean Ebrahimoun, applicant, spoke in favor of the applications. She stated that the
design process has taken three times as long as expected. She explained that they
had many issues to address such as bulk and that the garage was purposely placed
underground to lessen any perception of bulk. She stated that she and her family
were interested in maintaining a one story home and retaining much of the existing
vegetation. With regard to the extra thick walls, she explained that these were chosen
for their energy-efficiency. She stated that she feels the lot is unique and noted that
the neighbors are in support of the project.
Dave Ebrahimoun, applicant, urged the Commission to approve the applications. He
explained that many different options/design were looked at and, in consideration of
the City codes and the needs of his family, the design proposed is
• •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 7
the one which best meets these needs and is within the spirit of the code. He
explained that much effort had been spent on trying to minimize mass and bulk. He
explained that due to the requirement to round the slope of the lot up to 20% he is
penalized. He stated that because of this requirement, he would be forced to reduce
the size of the master bedroom and reduce the thickness of the walls. He stated that
he feels the lot is unique and that the variance would not adversely impact anyone in
the vicinity.
Maurice Camargo, project architect, 3953 Yellow Drive, stated that in designing the
proposed structure he tried to balance the owners wishes while working with the City
codes. He explained that he had tried to design a suitable home without the need for
a variance, but because of the uniqueness of the lot was unsuccessful. He discussed
various features such as the thickness of the walls, the proposed square footage, and
the underground garage. He explained that originally the house was designed with
only a carport,but due to the City's requirements for two fully enclosed parking areas
the applicant was forced to add a garage. He explained that the garage was added
underground. He again urged the Commission to approve the applications and
stated that the lot is fairly isolated and the granting of the variance would not impact
other residents in the area. Mr. Camargo also answered questions from the
Commission.
Ann Bogan, 12228 Morelia Drive, stated that she is a' local real estate agent and spoke
in favor of the application claiming that the new structure would enhance the area.
She stated that the easement would not be visible to anyone in the area.
Gene Zambetti, stated that all the neighbors were in support of the application and
that the granting of the variance would not grant the applicants a special privilege.
There was no one else wishing to speak.
CALDWELL/KAPLAN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:23 P.M.
PASSED 5-0.
Commissioner Caldwell verified that there was no easement on the subject property.
Planner Walgren stated that there was no easement on the property which effects the
proposal.
• •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 8
Commissioner Caldwell noted that the Commissioners had been given some written
information (the same diagrams/transparencies presented by Mr. Zambetti during his
presentation) when they had visited the site earlier in the day. She asked if
Commissioner Jacobs had also been given this information.
Commissioner Jacobs thanked Commissioner Caldwell and stated that he had visited
the site on his own and had indeed received the written information.
Commissioner Caldwell stated that she felt staff did an excellent job on the staff report
and that she agrees with staff's recommendation. She stated that she could not make
the variance findings. She stated that the applicants should have taken into
consideration the requirement for a garage and their desire for thicker walls earlier in
the planning process. She stated that she could find no special circumstance that
would warrant the need for a variance. She stated that she would not be voting in
favor of the applications.
Commissioner Wolfe stated that he was impressed by the out pour of letters from the
neighbors in support of this application. He noted that the neighbors found nothing
wrong with the design. He stated that the fact that the house was designed with
energy saving walls is environmentally conscious and saves energy. He stated that
the variance is no more than about 5% of what would be allowed on the property
when the "peculiar" calculation (of the slope and floor area) is not taken into
consideration. He stated that he found the design acceptable and the variance
request reasonable.
WOLFE MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL
OF DR-93-030 AND V-93-026 AS PROPOSED.
COMMISSIONER JACOBS SECONDED THE MOTION SO THE ISSUE COULD BE
BROUGHT TO A VOTE.
Acting Chairperson Asfour stated that he would like to continue discussions on the
application before voting. He explained that a vote could be taken at this point or
discussions could continue and Commissioner Jacobs could withdraw his second so
the motion would die for lack of a second.
COMMISSIONER JACOBS WITHDREW HIS SECOND. THE MOTION DIED FOR
LACK OF A SECOND.
Commissioner Jacobs stated that on one hand he is in agreement with Commissioner
Wolfe - he feels the design is an excellent design. Commissioner Jacobs explained
that although he liked the design, he could not support the
r ~
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 9
variance because he could not make the findings. Commissioner Jacobs stated that
he did not feel that the square footage allowed for this lot deprives the applicants of
enjoyment of the lot. He read the required variance findings aloud and stated that the
site would be an empty site and he does not find any physical constraints that would
force the applicant to build a house which exceeds the allowable floor area. He
explained that there is nothing topographical about the lot itself which warrants a
variance. He explained that if the variance was granted based on the fact that the
design is nice and because everyone likes it, the Planning Commission would be
violating the code. He stated that he feels he has no choice but to vote against it.
Commissioner Kaplan stated that she seconded the comments made by
Commissioner Jacobs.
Acting Chairperson Asfour commended the applicants and the architect on the design.
He stated that even though the design is excellent, it does not change the
requirements of the code. He stated that the applicants should have taken into
consideration the special design features (thicker walls and etc.) earlier in the planning
process. He stated that he could not make the necessary findings and therefore
would not be supporting the applications.
KAPLAN/CALDWELL MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION DR-93-030 TO DENY THE
APPLICATION. PASSED 4-1 (VI/OLFE OPPOSED).
Commissioner Caldwell asked about a motion regarding the variance application.
Acting Chairperson Asfour stated that he thought the applications were to be voted on
together.
KAPLAN/CALDWELL AMENDED THEIR MOTION (ABOVE) TO INCLUDE BOTH
DR-93-030 AND V-93-026 -ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS DR-93-030 AND V-93-
026 FOR DENIAL. THE VOTE WAS THEN RETAKEN AND PASSED 4-1 (WOLFE
OPPOSED).
Mr. Zambetti asked about the time line for resubmitting plans for another design
review.
Commissioner Caldwell stated that it is her recommendation that the denial be without
prejudice.
~ •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 10
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN INDICATED THAT A DENIAL OF THE DESIGN REVIEW
APPLICATION WAS ACCEPTABLE TO HER. COMMISSIONER CALDWELL, AS
SECONDER OF THE MOTION, STATED THAT DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
WOULD ALSO BE HER PREFERENCE. THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS FOUND
THIS TO BE ACCEPTABLE.
4. V-93-023 - Onn; 13770 Beaumont Dr., request for Variance approval to
allow a six foot high fence to be constructed on top of a two foot
high retaining wall, effectively creating an eight foot tall fence.
Chapter 15 of the City Code limits fences and walls to six feet in
maximum height. The subject property is approximately 12,000
sq. ft. and is located within an R-1-10,000 zone district.
Planner Walgren presented the Report dated November 22, 1993. Planner Walgren
announced that staff had received a letter from the adjoining property owner to the
south requesting that the hearing on this issue be continued until the first meeting of
December so that the neighboring property owner can be present. Planner Walgren
explained that the applicant had been informed of this request. Planner Walgren
explained that the Planning Commission could either open the public hearing, take
testimony and act on the application or open the public hearing, take testimony and
then continue action on the item until the 1st meeting in December when the adjoining
property owner can be present. Planner Walgren also answered questions from the
Commission with regard to the application.
Acting Chairperson Asfour and Commissioners Kaplan and Wolfe expressed a desire
to proceed with the application and resolve the issue at the current meeting. Acting
Chairperson Asfour and Commissioner Kaplan stated that they felt that the adjoining
property owner(s) had been given enough time to at least submit a written detail
expressing their concerns.
Commissioners Jacobs and Caldwell expressed their preference to continue the
application to the 1st Planning Commission meeting in December so that the adjoining
property owner could be present.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:40 P.M. BY ACTING CHAIRPERSON
ASFOUR.
• •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 11
Charles Onn, applicant, 13770 Beaumont Avenue, explained that he had sent 5 letters
to the adjoining neighbor informing him of the poor condition of the fence and the
need to construct a new fence. Mr. Onn stated that the neighbor objected to the
fence because Mr. Onn had asked him to pay for half the fence. He explained that
he had waited a long time before finally building the fence in hope that he and his
neighbor would be able to reach an agreement with regard to the fence and the cost
of the fence. Mr. Onn expressed safety concerns with regard to adequately enclosing
the pool which is on one of the adjacent properties. Mr. Onn also reported that one
of the adjacent properties was not well maintained and that the higher fence would
help in deterring animals from crossing the property lines. Mr. Onn spoke in favor of
the application and urged the Commission to grant an approval.
There was no one else wishing to speak.
AT 8:42 P.M., WOLFE/CALDWELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
PASSED 6-0.
Commissioner Kaplan stated that she felt that the fence needed to be at a height to
protect children from the pool. She suggested that Condition #1 be modified so as to
require that the 1st panel of the fence be the same height as the rest of the fence.
Commissioner Caldwell asked if Commissioner Kaplan would agree that no further
extension (in height) should be made to the fence.
Commissioner Kaplan agreed with Commissioner Caldwell's suggestion.
KAPLAN/WOLFE MOVED TO APPROVE V-93-023 PER THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATION AND WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATION TO
CONDITION #1 (AS SUGGESTED ABOVE) "THAT THE 1ST PANEL OF THE
STREET SIDE BE REDUCED TO THE SAME LEVEL AS THE FENCE FACING THE
FRONT AND THAT THE POSTS, THE 4 X 4'S, BE REDUCED TO THE LEVEL OF
THE FENCE AND NO OTHER STRUCTURE BE ADDED TO THE FENCE IN THE
FUTURE."
Acting Chairperson Asfour suggested that Condition #1 include language
requiring that THE 4X4 POST STICKING UP BE REDUCED DOWN TO THE LEVEL
OF THE TOP OF THE EXISTING FENCE."
Commissioner Wolfe stated that he thought the applicant should be given some
flexibility to add a 6" decorative piece/cap to the post of the fence if he so desired.
•
•
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 12
Acting Chairperson Asfour indicated that some type of decorative piece on top of the
post would be acceptable. .
THE MAKER AND SECONDER OF THE MOTION ACCEPTED THIS ADDITIONAL
(ABOVE) TO CONDITION #1.
Commissioner Jacobs questioned the requirement to lower/reduce the height of the
first panel. The Commission explained that a stepping down effect would result and
this was the effect that they intended on creating. There was a brief discussion and
explanation to Commissioner Jacobs regarding the various reasons for requiring the
stepping down feature.
THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.
Mr. Onn thanked the Planning Commission for their time and consideration.
Commissioner Caldwell stated that she wanted to add the same language to the
variance findings that she added to the findings in the 1st application (V-93-018).
The Commissioners stated that they did not feel that this additional language needed
to be added to the variance findings and that the use of this language, they felt,
needed to be further discussed at a worksession.
5. V-93-024 - Santa Clara County Parks; 15400 Montalvo Rd., request for
Variance approval to construct an 8 foot tall fence around
Montalvo's Italian Garden, Cactus Garden and Love Temple,
where 6 feet is the maximum permitted per Chapter 15 of the City
Code. The main entrance gate to the proposed enclosure will be
10 feet where 6 feet is again the maximum permitted. The parcel
is approximately 44 acres and is located in the R-1-40,000 zone
district.
Planner Walgren presented the Report dated November 22, 1993 and answered
questions from the Commission.
ACTING CHAIRPERSON ASFOUR OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:50 P.M.
• •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 13
Lisa Killough, 298 Garden Hill Drive, Los Gatos, representing the Santa Clara County
Parks Department, spoke in favor of the application and urged the Commission to
grant the variance request. She explained that one of the reasons the higher fence
was needed was to help keep the deer population out of the gardens. She also
answered questions from the Commission.
Commissioner Kaplan asked if there was also a second issue having to do with
vandalism which warranted the need for a higher fence. She stated that she had
heard of such vandalism and also noted that she understood that deer could jump
high barriers.
Lisa Killough, explained that vandalism was always a concern and that the garden
needed extra protection from the deer population as well.
Chuck Coleman, 15400 Montalvo Road, Park Ranger, spoke in favor of the
application. He explained that park would be working on an Italian garden that it (the
Park Department) hopes will become the Park's centerpiece. He explained that the
Park had used drought resistent plants in the past, but since the drought, the deer
have changed dietary habits and the deer-resistant plants are no longer effective. He
explained that years ago the previous owners had kept the deer in a paddock and
didn't have to deal with the destruction of the area by the deer. Mr. Coleman also
answered various questions from the Commission with regard to the variance request.
There was no one else wishing to speak.
WOLFE/CALDWELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:55 P.M.
PASSED 5-0.
CALDWELL/JACOBS MOVED TO APPROVE V-93-024 WITH THE FOLLOWING
MODIFICATIONS TO THE RESOLUTION:
SUBSECTION (A), 3RD LINE, THE WORDS "CAUSE UNDUE
HARDSHIP AND" SHOULD BE ADDED AFTER THE WORDS
"SPECIFIED LOCATION WOULD"; AND
A NEW SUBPARAGRAPH (D) SHOULD BE ADDED AND READ AS
FOLLOWS: "THAT THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT
WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE
PARK IS LOCATED AND THE OBJECTIVES OF THE GENERAL PLAN.
• ~
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 14
Commissioner Jacobs stated that he was voting in favor of the application because of
the valid concerns of vandalism to the public park and not because of the deer issue.
Commissioner Caldwell echoed Commissioner Kaplan's comment that she also
understood that deer could jump fences as high or higher than 12 feet.
THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.
DIRECTOR'S ITEMS
Planner Walgren read the following meeting dates to the Commissioners.
January 25 -City Council joint meeting with all Commissions to discuss recent
amendments to the Brown Act
February 8 -City Council worksession -Noise Ordinance Enforcement
February 22 -City Council/Planning Commission worksession
There was brief discussion regarding the upcoming meeting schedule.
COMMISSION ITEMS
Commissioner Caldwell reported that she had attended the City Council meeting
where they (the City Council) considered the Planning Commission's .
recommendations regarding the rezoning of the current sphere and the Open Space
Element. Commissioner Caldwell stated that both of the Planning Commission's
recommendations were adopted, but with some minor modifications to the Open
Space Element.
Commissioner Jacobs asked what would be on the next Planning Commission
worksession agenda.
Planner Walgren stated that he did not know, but would check the agenda and let
Commissioner Jacobs know.
• •
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 15
Commissioner Caldwell stated that she would check with the City. Attorney with regard
to the use of the language she suggested (and used on two of the variance approvals)
therefore, pending the City Attorneys opinion on the use of this language there may
not need to be a discussion at a worksession. Commissioner Caldwell stated that if
the City Attorney agrees that this language should be used, the language can simply
be incorporated into the standard "boiler plate" language used when approving
variances. The Commission agreed with Commissioner Caldwell's suggestion.
COMMUNICATIONS
Written
Notices for the 12/8/93 public hearing
Oral
Gene Zambetti, 14510 Big Basin Way, representing the Ebrahimouns, applicants - DR-
93-030 and V-93-026, stated that in talking with the applicants, they expressed a desire
to take their original plans that were previously placed on the consent calendar (prior
to making the modifications which were reviewed earlier in the evening) and moving
those plans through the process. He asked if this evening's denial without prejudice
would allow the applicants to take the original plans back through the process without
having to re-pay the application fee.
Planner Walgren explained that technically the denial closed out the original application
and therefore a new application would need to be made and another application fee
would need to be paid.
Commissioner Caldwell asked if the Planning Commission could re-consider
applications at the ®Xneeting at which the application had originally been voted
on.
Planner Walgren stated that he thought that re-consideration could only take place
when there is a tied vote. He stated that he would look at the code to make sure his
understanding was correct.
Commissioner Caldwell stated that if the applicant wishes to have the Commission
review the design (as it was prior to making the modifications which required the
variance), she feels that it would be within the Planning Commission's capacity to
approve the design review with the condition that it conform to the original design or
that the applicants remove the three elements that require the variance.
~ i. L
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 16
She stated that a reconsideration would be a simple matter instead of having the
applicant re-submit the same design, re-pay an application fee, and then wait until the
new application can come up on the Planning Commission agenda.
Commissioner Kaplan expressed agreement with the comments made by
Commissioner Caldwell.
Acting Chairperson Asfour stated that he did not know whether the Planning
Commission could re-consider the item.
Planner Walgren suggested that the Commission take a brief break to allow him time
to check the Code to see if the Commission could re-consider the action taken.
AT 9:07 P.M. ACTING CHAIRPERSON ASFOUR RECESSED THE MEETING. THE
MEETING WAS THEN RECONVENED AT 9:14 P.M.
CALDWELL/KAPLAN MOVED TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE TAKEN ON DR-93-
030 AND V-93-026. PASSED 5-0.
KAPLAN/JACOBS MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION V-93-026 (DENIAL OF
VARIANCE REQUEST) PASSED 4-1 (WOLFE OPPOSED).
ASFOUR/KAPLAN MOVED TO APPROVE DR-93-030 WITH THE CONDITION
THAT THE DESIGN BE MODIFIED TO MEET THE CITY REQUIREMENTS AND
ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE, BUT THAT THE NEW DESIGN BE IN
SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE TO THE DESIGN PRESENTED THIS EVENING.
THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.
Planner Walgren asked if the Design Review Resolution was being adopted based on
the design review findings that were expressed during the original discussion in
support of the design.
Commissioner Caldwell explained that the Design Review Resolution was indeed being
adopted based on the design review findings expressed during the original discussion
in support of the design and on the findings made in the staff report.
Commissioner Caldwell explained that normally the Planning Commission would move
to direct staff to draft a resolution for approval of the design review application and
that resolution would then come back before the Planning Commission at the next
public hearing on the consent calendar.
~ , I,
Planning Commission Minutes
Meeting of November 22, 1993
Page 17
Planner Walgren stated that he felt that the Commission should take this action
(explained by Commission Caldwell above) instead of trying to provide language to
make all the necessary findings this evening.
ASFOUR/I{APLAN MODIFIED THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS: THAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DIRECT STAFF TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION TO BE PLACED ON
THE DECEMBER 8, 1993 CONSENT CALENDAR TO APPROVE DR-93-030 WITH
THE CONDITIONS THAT THE DESIGN BE MODIFIED IN A WAY WHEREAS TO
MEET THE CITY CODES AND ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE AND
STILL BE IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE TO THE DESIGN PRESENTED THIS
EVENING.. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.
COMMUNICATIONS (continued
City Council
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:20 p.m., Acting Chairperson Asfour adjourned the meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
December 7, 1993, in the Senior Day Care Center, 19655 Allendale Ave., Saratoga,
CA.
Andrea M. Chelemengos
Minutes Clerk