Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-12-1994 Planning Commission Minutes•.ANNING COMMISSION )v11NU'~ OCTOBER 12, 1994 Cily Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Regular MeetinK The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Asft~ur. Roll Call Present: Abshire, Caldwell, Kaplan, Murakami, Patrick, Siegfried, Asfour Late: None Absent: None City Attorney Riback was not present this evening. PI.F.DGE OF ALLEGIANCE ORAL. COMMUNICATIONS No comments were offered. MINCITES Scotember 28. 1994 COMMiSSiONERS CALDWELL/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO APPROVE "1'HE SEPTEMBER 28, 1994 MINUTES WI'T'H "I'HE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: - Page 1, Minutes of July 2(i, 1994 to read: "Commissioners Caldwell/Kaplan moved to approve the 4trne July 27, 1994 Minutes with the following amendntents: - Page 2, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 5 to read: "Commissioner Caldwell yuestioned °''°,.,,~1;~-gym how i#e long ago fkae stucco wall was ever approved...." - Page 2, Paragraph 3, line 3 to read: "...whether there would be freedom cm fiat the wild animals to...." - Page S, Paragraph 1, line 1, change the word "mcctr to "meet". - Page 8, paragraph 2, line I to read: "Commissioner Patrick also yuestioned the average lot sizes. She noted that of the 94 lotti...." - Page 9, paragraph 1, line 4 to read: "...She wanted to make sure that the condition lees not ettd-t+p-~e~ be meaningless...." - Page 9, paragraph 4, line G to read: "...dcclairation, under CEQA, the City is saying that there +s are no significant environmental...." - Page 10, paragraph Z, line 4, change the word includi+~ to include. PLANNING COMMIS•N MINU'I~ES • OCTOBER 12, ]9)4 PAGE - 2 - Page 12, paragraph 2, line 3 to read: "...would be visible from a car driving ea-tl~rt r frim?the;:freewaytc~w~rels #+gltw,ty-£~.~ the;:tzaffc'IigNt...:' - Page 14, paragraph 2, lines 2 :tnd 7 to react: "...Commissioner Kaplan relative to traffic. The answer "yes" to the questions raised was as;;to...typical subdivisions of homes less than 300 dwellings in total sire tiimlier, it was typical to include...." - Page 14, paragraph 4, line S change the word "intersections" to react "intersection". - Page 16, paragraph 16, line ~, change the word "were" to "watt'. - Page 20, paragraph 3, line 2 change the word "comes" to "come". It was noted for the record that the September 28, 1994 minutes included the suggested modifications by the Commissioners having reviewed the minutes in advance. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0-1 AS FOLLOWS: Al'ES: ABSHiRE, CALDWELL, KAPLAN, MURAKAMI, PA'1'RiCK, SIEGFRIEU; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: ASFOUR: ABSENT: NONE. ORAL COMMUNICATION' No comments were offered. REPORT OF POS'1'INC AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 5494?, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on October 7. 1994. TECHNICAL, CORRECTIONS 'I'O F'ACKF,T Planner Walgren informed the Commission that there was one clarification occurring on Agenda Item No. 4, page 44, Fire District's stantl:trd condition IS.e. pertaining to fire hydrants and their spacing location. He noted that a fire hydrant would not be required as a condition of approval for this project. He recommended that condition 15.e. be deleted. CONSENT CALENDAR I'UBi,IC HEARING CONSENT CAi,ENUAR LL-94-009 - Brown & Johnsun; 21151 Saratoga Hills Rd. & 13877 Upper Hill Ct., request for Len Line Adjustment approval to transfer 10,019 sy. ft. of land from Parcel A (Brown) to Parcel B (Johnson) pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code. Parcel A would be 2?8 acres and Parcel B 1.33 acres; each exceeding the minimum requirement of 40,000 sq. ft. for this R-1-40,000 zoning district. PLANNING COMMISaN MINUTES • OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE - 3 - --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. DR-94-039 - Wang; 15230 Sobey Rd., request for Design Review approval to construct a 733 sy. ft. one-story addition to an existing 5,810 sy. ft. one- story home pursuant to Chapter 15 of the City Code. Design Review approval is necessary since the total square footage exceeds 6,000 sq. ft. The subject property is 1.56 acres in size and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. COMMISSIONER CA[_DWELL/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS I (LL-94-009) AND 2 (Dlt-94-03I). THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). PUBLIC HEARINGS ** 3. DR-94-018 - Nigam; 21451 Continental Circle, reyucst fur Design Review approval to construct a new 5,363 sy. ft. two-story residence per Chapter 15 of the City Code. The property is a 3.06 acre vacant parcel located within the Hillside Residential (HR) zoning district (cont. from 9/l4/94; application expires 1/20/95). Planner Walgren presented the report on this itetn. Commissioner Murakami inyuired as to the size of the lot. Planner Walgren responded that the tut size was 3.06 acres. Commissioner Kaplan asked staff if the resolution included a condition which discusses the preservation of the oak trees. Planner Walgren noted that there was a brief discussion located on page 29 of the staff report stated that the five ordinance protected coast live oaks were well away from the building site. Because of the location of the oak trees, the City arborist was not reyuired to review this project. In response to a condition for oak preservation, Planner Walgren stated that it was not cleernecl necessary to have the City arborist review this case because of. the distance of the building site to the trees. Commissioner Kaplan commented that the last paragraph of Resolution DR-94-018 was not clear to her. Planner Walgren clarified that the initial language was complicated but came right out of the Zoning Ordintmce. iie indicated that the planner was trying to address the individual subheadings one sentence at a time. The paragraph w•as attempting to reference in sequence the findings contained in the ordinance (i.c., architectural compatibility and environmental compatibility). Commissioner Caldwell further clarified that the Commission would be making the findings specific to this application. Chairman Asfour opened this item to public hearing ttt 7:55 p.m. Walter Chapman, Designer representing the applicant, informed the Cotnmissiun that he would respond to questions pertaining to the redesign of the project. He commented that PLANNING COMMIS•N MINUTES OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE-4- the majority of the roofline was reduced to 24.5 feet with one portion raised to 25.5 feet. He stated that he tried to keep the roof height as low as possible. Commissioner Kaplan asked if the height poles that the Commission viewed on site were depicting the amount of house that would be placed between the two poles. Mr. Chapman responded that the two poles were set to run the direction of the main portion of the structure. Mr. Chapman commented that the previous hearing gave reference to the house previously approved for this property. Ile indicated that the previously approved home was designed under previous zoning setback regulations which allowed flexibility in the placement of the house on the property. He stated that he had to work with much tougher constraints with this proposal. COMMISSIONERS KAPLAN/SiEGFR1ED MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:58 P.M. Commissioner Caldwell stated that she was not able to vote in favor of the previous home that was approved for this property. The reason she could not support the original proposal was that she did not believe that the site was an appropriate one for a two story structure. even at 24 feet. She felt that it was a prominent site. She made severad site visits to look at it and its surrounding area. The site was visible from the different streets of the Parker Ranch subdivision and felt that the proposed home in combination with the other existing structures along Continental Circle would create the impression of having a large structure on the ridgeline. She felt that it was a mistake to approve a two story stnrcture in this location. She recognized that a home was approved on the site in the past but that she did not believe that this was an appropriate site for that house. She stated that she would not be able to vote in favor of the design this evening. She urged that those Commissioners who would be voting in support of this design to think about planning (i.e., review color board and material and think about whether or not the home would be integrated into the natural topography which is a design review finding that the Commission would need to make. She stated that she could not make findings 1, 3 and 4. Commissioner Patrick commented that the difficulty she had at the site visit was the visibility of the topography. She felt that the proposed home would block the valley view and that she would be hesitant to approve the home design. Commissioner Kaplan stated that the lot was a peculiar one and inquired as to the size of a home that could be built xt a one story level in this location. She questioned if the home was restricted to one story, would it be a viable option for the owner. Planner Walgren responded that in referring to the original staff report, the first floor and the garage area were approximately 3,200 syuare feet. Given the restrictions of the front setbacks of 123 feet and given the fact that the pad was limited, the 3,500 syuare feet probably gives the indication that at least that size of a single story home could be provided and that a larger size home could also be managed (3,500 to 4,000 square foot single story home could be built). PLANNING COMMIS•N MINUTES • OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE-S- Commissioner Siegfried commented that after reviewing what htts developed over the past years, he was having second thoughts of what has been proposed. lie stated that what has happened with this particular lot was that after the lot.vas approved, an increased front yard setback was required, forcing the house to be sited as proposed. When the site was original approved, there was not a front yard setback problem. Without the increased setback, he felt that the house could have been setback closer to the street and that it might make the home a little less obstructive. lie noted that the neighboring homes did not have the front yard setbacks reyuired of this lut and that the homes were located closer to the street. He felt that the home, as designed, meets all City requirements. Commissioner Caldwell inquired if Commissioner Siegfried felt that the impact could be mitigated with the use of color. She stated her agreement with his assessment of the situation. She felt that this lot was bad for development and that from the community's perspective, it should not be developed. Commissioner Siegfried noted that there would only be a 2.5 foot difference, visually, from the valley floor, in height elevation from a single story to that of a two story home. He stated that he would agree to review colors. He did not believe that this property owner should be penalized. Commissioner Patrick questioned if the colors presented were the colors that were to be utilized. She noted that the staff report indicates that a maroon color would be used and that the color depicted in the color board did not appear to be maroon u> her. Planner Walgren responded that the colors depicted on the color board were the most current colors proposed. Commissioner Patrick stated her preference to the colors as depicted in the color board sample. Commissioner Murakami concurred with the comment that the lot was an unusual one. Ile felt that no matter what was built on the lot, it would impact someone's view either from below or from the sides. He stated that although he was not crazy about the redesign, he felt that the applicant has tried to address the original concerns. Chairman Asfour stated that he had a problem with the house because it can easily be seen from the valley but that he would support the application as it meets all of the City's requirements. Commissioner Abshire stated his agreement with the comments as expressed by his fellow Commissioners. He felt that it was unfortunate that in the past, Saratoga designs allowed for large, two story homes on a hillside. He hoped that the City could change the path from going from high, hvo story homes on hillside to lower square foot homes that blend with the hillside. He felt that review of hillside development was needed. COMMISSIONERS SIEGFRIED/MURAKAMI MOV ED "r0 APPROV E RESOLUTION NO. DR-94-018 AMENDING CONDITION 9 TO READ AS FOLLOWS: "THE F_•XTERIOR COLORS SHALL BE OF DARKER TONES FOR TIIE STUCCO FINISII WI'T'H THE USE OF LIGHT BROWN TRIM ANll LIC;HT BROWN TIFF., ROOFING AS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THF. PLANNING COMMISSION. THE MOTION CARRIED (i-1 (COMMISSIONER CALUWELL VOTING NO). PLANNING COMMIS•N MINUTES • OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE-6- 4. DR-94-O10 - Rosendin; 13506 Deer Trail Ct., reyue5t for Design Review approval V-94-002 - to construct a new two-story x,024 5y. ft. residence and a swimming pool on a vacant parcel pursuant to Chapter 15 of the City Code. Variance approval is :1150 requested to allow a maximum building height of 29.3 ft. where 2C ft. is the maximum permitted. The subject property is approximately 47,524 5y. ft., i5 Lot 19 of the Mount Eden Estates subdivision and is located within aHillside-Residential zoning district. Planner Walgrcn presented the report on this item. Commissioner Caldwell commented that at the site visit she noticed how close the home would he to Quarry Creek. She inquired as to how staff dealt with the proximity of Quarry Creek to development and the erosion problems that occurred in the past. Planner Walgren responded that erosion has occurred in the past along Quarry Creek. Erosion control has been mitigated on the back sides of the homes with the use of riprap walls staggered at intervals to slow down the water going down stream and also the use of riprap walls along the sides of the banks. The erclsicln that the up slope neighbor was facing has been resolved as far a5 the City was aware. With regard to the house plttcentent itself, the back fourth or fifth of the property is located within an open space easement. That area is where the creek traverses the property. He stated that no development or hardscape improvements would he permitted within the easement. Beyond that, the house has been pushed as close to the street and as far away from the creek as possible. Chairman Asfour opened this item to public hearing at 8:17 p.m. The applicant was present at the meeting and elected not to address the Commission. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/CALDWELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:18 P.M. Commissioner Kaplan thanked the applicant for the placement of the ribbon height poles on the site as it made ;t difference in the review of the site. She reyuested that staff encourage applicants to utilize the flag poles because it would make the Commission's job easier. Commissioner Abshire expressed concern with the large amount of fill to be used on this lot. He felt that the fill would cause drainage onto the lot located to the right of the home. He requested assurance that the home located to the right does not suffer from any possible drainage or erosion problems from the fill to he used. Planner Walgrcn commented that it was a common practice when the grading plan was submitted for plan check and the grading inspectors are on the site to have hay bales or silk screens installed to property lines to control construction drainage onto adjacent properties. He (Walgren) stated that was a standard review procedure and that it could be included as a condition in the resolution of approval. He also noted that a retaining wall existed along the driveway apron. PLANNING COMMI~N MINUTES • OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE - 7 - Commissioner Caldwell noted that landscape plans were not included with this submittal. She inquired if provisions were made to stabilize the property with landscaping. Planner Walgren noted that there exists a condition in the resolution to require three, twenty-four inch boxed revegetation trees to the property and to revegetate the cut slopes for erosion control measures. He felt that these mitigation measures and the grading inspectors regular procedures of monitoring grading, particularly during the rainy season, should mitigate drainage and erosion. Commissioner Caldwell commented that existing landscaping was falling down due partly to over watering of the fill area. She recommended that the applicant design landscape to avoid the need for a large amount of watering because it wciuld defeat the purpose of stabilizing the fill. She requested that staff keep this in mind in its review of the landscape plans. COMMISSIONERS CALDWELL/PATRICK MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. V-94-002 BASED ON THE FINDINGS AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). COMMISSIONERS CALDWELL/PATRICK MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. DR-94-010, DELETING CONDITION 15.e. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT STAFF WOULD BE REVIEWING THE REVEGETATIONPLANS WITH ATTENTION BEING MADE TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL OF ANY SOIL FAILURE/EROSION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). 5. SM-94-004 - Downing; 15084 Gypsy Hill Rd., request for Site Modification approval to allow the construction of a swimming pool with associated decking and an exemption from the hillside fencing requirement to allow the area of enclosure to exceed the permitted 4,000 sq. ft. per the Tentative Map conditions of approval. The subject property is Lot 30 of the San Marcos Heights subdivision and is located within an R-1- 40,000 zoning district. Planner Walgren presented the report on this item. Chairman Asfour opened this item to public hearing at 8:25 p.m. The applicant (Mr. Downing) was present and stated that he would answer any questions which the Commission may have. COMMISSIONERS SIEGFRIED/KAPLAN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:26 P.M. Commissioner Caldwell commented that it appeared that the entire subdivision was going to end up being fenced. PLANNING COMMIS•N MINU"1'ES • OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE - 8 - COMMISSIONERS CALDWELi_/SFEGFRIED MOVF.,DTUAPPROVE RESOLUTION NO. SM-94-04. Commissioner Abshire commented that at the site visit, he noticed that the property to be fenced was in a wild state. Ile questioned why the owner would want to fence in the wild area. He understood the fencing of the area around the pool from a safety stand point. However, he felt that this was an area where animals should be allowed to roam freely. He felt that the applicant could save money by not fencing this area, allowing the animals to roam free. He suggested that the applicant consider fencing a smaller area. COMMISSIONERS CALDWELL/SlliCiFRFED WITHDREW TiiEIR MOTION 7'O ALLOW FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. Commissioner Caldwell asked if staff reviewed the landscape plans in terms of. how it relates to the native vegetation. Planner Walgren responded that staff reviewed the landscape plans to make sure that it was consistent with the native and drought tolerant plant list that the City uses for the region. Commissioner Caldwell asked if there were specific requirements prohibiting trenching under the dripline of the oak trees. She recommended that the drip irrigation around the oaks and the landscape plans be reviewed at a staff level. Planner Walgren responded that these requirements have been done during the course of review of this application, but that staff would double check. Fie did not feel that it would hurt to include it as a condition in the resolution. COMMISSIONERS CAI_D W EI..I../SIEG FR [ ED MO V ED TO APPROV E RESOLUTION SM-94-004 WITI1 AN ADDED CONDI7~ION '1'O PROHIBIT TRENCHING UNDER THE OAK TREES AND '1'HA7' ONLY A DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS TO BE USED UNDER THE OAK TREES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). 6. SM-94-005 - Siegler 15061 Gypsy Hill Rd., request for Site Modification approval to allow the construction of a swimming pool with associated decking and an arbor. A request for an exemption to the hillside fencing requirement to allow the area of enclosure to exceed 4,000 sy. ft. is also requested pursuant to the Tentative Map conditions of approval. The subject property is Lot 29 of the San Marcos Heights subdivision and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. Planner Walgren presented the report on this item. Commissioner Caldwell commented that the degree of landscaping that the applicant was proposing appeared to be more intensified around the ordinance size oak trees than that of the last application. She asked if the city arborist should review the landscape plans to make sure that the plant materials chosen ure compatible with the oak trees. Planner Walgren commented that he was not sure if. the arborist has reviewed the landscape plans. He recommended that a condition he included to verify that the arborist h<ts reviewed and approved the landscape and irrigation plans prior w installation. PLANNING COMMIS•N MINUTES • OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE-9- Chairman Asfour opened this item to public hearing :tt 8:34 p.m Ms. Marylee Siegle, 19332 Crisp Avenue, Saratoga, applicant, deferred Commissioner Caldwell's yuestion regarding City arhorist review of the landscape plans to her landscape designer. Robin Atherton, 13050 Pierce Road, responded that the landscaping underneath the oak tree would be drip irrigated with the use of rhododendrons and native plants. COMMISSIONERS KAPLAN/C:ALDWELL MOVED TO CLOSE 'CI-lE PUBI.,IC HEARING AT 8:36 P.M. COMMISSIONERS CAI_DWEI-.L/SiEGFRIED MOVED "I'O APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. SM-94-OOS WITH AN ADDED CONDITION TO RF.,QUIRE ']'HAT TI-IE LANDSCAPE PLANS BE REVIEWED BY '1'FIE CITY ARBORIST, THA'I' HIS RECOMMENDATIONS BE INCLUDED, AND IF MODIFICATIONS ARE NECESSARY, THAT THEY BE MADE. Commissioner Caldwell noted that the rhododendrons were nut compatible with oak trees. Commissioner Patrick expressed concern with the fencing that is being seen along the hillside. She felt that the citizens of Saratoga would want to see hillside open space preserved and would not want to see the installation of fences. She did not feel that fencing was appropriate and that the use of fencing may become a trend. Commissioner Siegfried noted that the site cotrtainccl a publicly accessible easement trail and that the site was unique in that sense. He felt that the property owner may want to retain privacy (drawing a line to indicate the property line and that of the public trail). IIe felt that the issue should have been addressed :tt the subdivision level. Commissioner Caldwell felt that there were other things going on with the site such as the size of [hc home, driveway location, site improvements, pool, etc. Once you get all the accoutrements of this house development in, the size of the fence area seems appropriate. Commissioner Abshire concurred with Commissioner Patrick's comments regarding the amount the fencing that is being seen along the hillside. He expressed concern that the adjacent neighbor may come in to request fencing along the property line. He did not see the need to fence the property line. He would want to see the animals roam free in this area. He responded to Chairman Asfour's yuestion regarding the difference between this lot and the previous one was that this was lot was a larger lot. Commissioner Kaplan asked what options the Conunission had on this issue. Community Development Director Curtis responded that the request could be denied, a reduction in the amount of enclosure could be stipulated, or the Commission could approve the request as submitted. PLANNING COMMIS•N MINUTES • OCTOBER ]2, ]994 PAGE - 10 - Commissioner Siegfried noted that the enclosure was twice the size as the previous application, not five times larger as represented by Commissioner Abshire. Commissioner Abshire clarified that the size difference that he was referring to was that of open space. Commissioner Kaplan expressed a problem with the request because she would want to see a smaller area fenced. Commissioner Murakami comtnettted that the area was a large area to be fenced and concurred with Commissioner Kaplan's recommendation to inyuire what the applicant could live with. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/KAPLAN MOVED '1'O REOPF..N THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:45 P.M. Ms. Siegle stated that the fence was not being used to indicate the location of the property line. She indicated that the fence was proposed due to serious public health and safety problems. She provided the Commission with samples collected from the site (i.e., shot gun shells, package of fire works, etc.). She indicated that a lot of activity occurred on the site and that the road was widely used ctt night. She reiterated that the reason for continuing the fence down the hill was for safety reasons. Chairman Asfour indicated that at his site visit, he did see discarded bottles and a 4x4 vehicle in the area. COMMISSIONERS CALDWELL/KAPLAN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:58 P.M. THE MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLU"LION N'O. SM-94-OOS WITH AN ADDED CONDITION TO REQUIRE THAT THE CITY A.RBORIST REVIEW "1'HE LANDSCAPE PLANS ANU'1'I IA'1~ MIS KECOMMENllA'I'IONS BE COMi'LIEU WI'1'11 PASSED 6-1 (COMMISSIONER ABSFIIRE VOTING NO). DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Community Development Director Curtis provided the Commission with the following information: - On October 19, 1994, the City Council would be conducting a public hearing on the Greenbriar appeal. He also informed the Commission that the public hearing has been changed to 8:00 p.m. - The two Planning Commission public hearing Dates in November are scheduled for Wednesday, November 9 and Tucsclay, November 22 with the site visit scheduled for Monday, November 21. PLANNING COMMIS•N MINUTES OCTOBER 12, 1994 PAGE - 11 - COMMISSION I'fEly1S Commissioner Caldwell asked staff when the Commission would be reviewing the proposed comments for the County General Plan. Community Development Director Curtis responded that review of the County General Plan would be scheduled as part of a work session in November. Commissioner Kaplan asked if there was going to be a committee established and a Commissioner appointed to the design review process. She recommended that one of the items to be considered as part of the design review changes would be that of lot line adjusunents. Shc questioned if lot line adjustment reviews could be removed from the public hearing calendar. Planner Walgren noted that lot line adjustments do not reyuire public noticing but that they do need to be approved by the Planning Commission at a regularly convened meeting. Commissioner Kaplan stated that this was different from what she was original told about the Conunission's role and what was required for lot line adjustments. Commissioner Kaplan noted that one of the items listed in the upcoming agenda was discussion of heritage resources. She asked if a member from the Heritage Commission would he present at the meeting to address the Commission and whether a report has been prepared. Community Development Director Curtis informed the Commission that the Heritage Commission has reviewed the site and that a report would be prepared by the Heritage Commission. He informed the Commission that a member from the Heritage Commission could he present at the meeting or staff would be able to respond to questions. Commissioner Siegfried recommended that if there was time in the November study session meeting, he would like to have discussion regarding hillside development because approval of development has been impacted more than he envisioned 15 years ago. He also recommended discussion regarding Commissioners' thoughts for the Orchids and Onions Committee. Planner Walgren informed the new Commissioners that all the subdivisions that were dealt with this evening were approved prior to the adoption of the current Hillside zoning regulations. Commissioner Caldwell felt that there were a couple of provisions in the code that kept coming up that needed to be changed. She felt that there were some provisions in the code that were not necessarily working. Commissioner Siegfried commented that the changes that have occurred over the past four years did not generate the results that were intended. He felt that discussion would be helpful so that recommendations could he forwarded to the Committee. Commissioner Murakami commented that it ~a•oulcl be helpful to see some of the architectural design work done by Bill Young when the Conunission takes an "Orchids and Onions" field trip. PLANNING COMMi~N MINLJTF_S ! OCTOBER ]2, 1994 PAGE-12- Chairman A.sfr~ur recommended that a tour be arranged prior to the establishment of the design review committee because the tour may result in some suggestions. COMMUNLCATIONS Chairman Asfour noted for the record that a letter from Martha Uelmen was received. Community Development Director Curtis informed the Commission that staff has received approximately SO letters from the surrounding area for the Kosich zone change application. He stated that a date for public hearing has not been scheduled as additional information has been requested. Once the information has been received, it will be scheduled for public hearing. Written 1. City Council Minutes - 9/16, 9/21 ~; 9/27 2. Notices for the 10/26/94 Planning Commission Meeting Oral City Council AD.TOURNMF,NT - There being no further business, the Commission adjourned at 9:00 p.m. to October 26, 1994, Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA IRMA TORREZ MINUTES CLERK ~c~rcio~z<~~s.~K