Loading...
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