Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-24-1998 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OI~ Sr1RATOGA PLANNING COMMISSIO\ A~IINUTES Tl1ESDAY. NOVEi`~1BER 2~3. 1998 Civic Center, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. Saratoga, CA Regular Meeting Chairman Pierce called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. Roll Call: Present: Commissioners Bernald, Kaplan, 1~Iartlage, tiiurakami. Pa~~e, Patrick and Chairman Pierce Absent: None Staff: Director ~'~~algren Pledge of Allegiance iVlinutes -November 10, 1998 On a motion b} Commissioners Patricl.;`Bernald, the Commission approved the November 10. 1998 minutes ~~ith the folio.. ing amendments: - Pa_e 1. Line entitled Minutes -October 14, 1998 amended to read: October ~ 28, 1998. - Page ?, last paragraph, line ~, replace the word ~ with eclectic. - Page =], paragraph 4, line 9, replace the name ~5 w`itlt ~'~'anas. - Pa~,e 1 1, paragraph 3, line 3. replace the ~r-ord ~~ with may. - Page 1 1, under "Commission items." replace the word ~'~~° ~•"~~-•-•~•~ with Vice-chairwoman. - Page 1 1, under "Adjournment," replace ~''~••~•-•„°~ n'°-°° with Vice-chairwoman Bernald. The motion carried ~-0-? ~~ith Commissioner ~•tartlage and Chairman Pierce abstaining. Oral Communication Commissioner Kaplan said that the Commission received a document that was sent to the Cite Council from i~9arcia Pariss. She said that Director ~l`algren, at the last Commission meeting, gave the Commission a detailed analysis about the trees and the status of the Argonaut Shopping Center. Also. the Cite Council has received a detailed ~i~ritten anal~~sis about the situation. She said that it is difficult to explain to each and ever~~ citizen in the conununit~~ what happens in the Argonaut Shopping Center. She felt that a blanket statement was made by Mrs. Fariss without getting enough facts. She said that it «•as reported to her that the Planning Commission is being "bad mouthed" in the community for having allo~i~ed this tragedy to happen. She stated that anyone watching the Plannin, Commission meetings or the proceedings should know that the Commission makes ever}~ effort to save trees and prevent them from being bulldozed and that if trees are to be removed, there is a reason for their removal. She said that Commissioners do not take bribes. She felt that this «•as an allegation as the Commission does not allow the removal of trees unless it is absolutely necessary. She recommended that if there are any questions regarding the trees that individuals please contact staff. the Cite Council or the Commission to receive an explanation of the situation. Director ~'l~algren said that at the November l0. 1998 Planning Commission meetin;, staff presented plans of PLANNING COMM1SS10N M~TTES NOVEMBER 24, 1998 PAGE - 2 - what was approved for the Argonaut Shopping Center. He said that the approved demolition and landscape plan that was reviewed. recommended and acted upon by both the Plannin;_~ Commission and the City Council called for all of the parkin~~ lot trees to be removed. The perimeter trees adjoining the residential developments to the north and the east .were required to be retained. The Cite arborist reviewed the plans and determined that the parking lot reconfiguration necessitated the removal of the interior trees. It was felt that the ornamental trees would not be of a significant loss. The trees under question were the seven mature stone pines that fronted Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. An effort was made to retain the trees but that based on the nature of stone pines. their tendency to drop limbs, to be top heave and to be structurally unsound in combination ~yith the Sarato;_~a- Sunnyvale Road widenin~~ improvements, it was determined that the trees should be removed and that the city should take advantage oi'the opportunity of baring the developer replace the trees. These replacement trees will be lar~~e, bored size native trees that ~+ill provide an instant canopy and that the replacement trees should occur this year. Report of Posting Agenda Director ~~l~al~ren declared that pursuant to Government Code ~49~4Z. the agenda for this meeting «-as properly posted on November 20. 1998. Technical Corrections to Packet Director ~'~'algren indicated that there ~~~ere no technical corrections to the packet. CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. SD-95-007.1 (503-19-0=18, 070 & 075) KE\NEDY, Rodeo Creek Hollo~r- (Saratoga-Sunniwale Road and Paramount Drive/Court; Request for cone-rear extension for Phase T~~o (7 lots) of an approved Tentative Subdivision tap fora 1?-lot subdivision located otf Sarato~~a-Sunny-~~ale Road and Paramount Drive and Court. The total site area is 9.4~ acres and is located within both the R-1-12,00 and the R-1- 10.000 zoning districts. Director Vl•`algren presented the staff report. He said that the staff memo notes that there were no chances in the fire district's review. He did not believe that the fire district requested additional conditions on their transmittal but that staff noted that the high fire hazard area boundary has been extended to run north-south along Saratoga- Sunnvyale Road and the middle of Hi~~h~yay 9, including this property. Therefore. an additional condition should be included acknowled;~==ina the requirement that all ne~y homes are to be installed with an early_• warning alarm system required in hi_h fire hazard areas. Chairman Pierce opened the public hearing at 7:4~ p.m. \o comments were offered. COMMISSIONERS PAIRICK.'~1ARTLAGE I~]OVED TO CLOSE THE PI;BLIC HEARING ,4T 7:46 P.19. Commissioner Kaplan stated that she has driven through the Rodeo Creek Drive development. She commended the applicant for the development of a nice project. She requested that the applicant protect the existing large PLANNII~TG COMMISSION MITUTES NOVEMBER 24. 1998 PAGE-3- beautiful oak tree. COMMISSIONERS BERNALD.~KAPLAN MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION \O. SD-9~-007.1 ~'l'ITH THE INCLUSIOI`T OF A CONDITION TO REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF AN EARLY Vl`ARNING ALAiZV1 SYSTE'Vi. THE ti10TION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). 2. GP-98-O1~ (366-29-007 & 009) - PF,NI~ISULA RECREATION D.B.A. SARaTOGA COG\TRY CLUB, 2199(1 Prospect Road; Request for L'se Permit approval to expand the membership of the Club from 4~0 to X00 persons. The site is 34.4 acres and is located in the Hillside Residential zoning district. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Director ~~~al~~ren presented the staff report. He informed the Commission that the only land use issues of concern ~yere the traffic that could be generated around the adjoining residential streets and parking interior to the Country Club. He said that these issues have been satisfied by the applicant's explanation of how the facility is to be used. He said that historically. the city has Weyer been made aware of a traffic problem as a result of members driving to and from the Country Club. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the amendment to the use permit of establishin<, a new membership limit of X00. Commissioner ~Iurakami asked what membership size would trigger a traffic study? Director ~'t:~algren said that in his visits to the area, he has Weyer noticed a noticeable traffic impact as a result of the Country Club activities and that there has been no histon~ of complaints or concerns of area residents about traffic going to and from the country club. If the membership w•as to increase b~~ ~0°,%, it would require the need for a traffic analysis. Chairman Pierce opened the public hearing at 7:~0 p.m. Joe Callan, General ~tana~er for the Saratoga Country Club. stated that the staff analysis ryas accurate. He said that he was tr<•ing to provide a competitive product to other facilities in the area and that it is not in the best interest of the Club to develop a facilin~ that is oyercro~rded as it is run b_y its own membership and would result in complaints from the membership. Steve Stucke}', ??600 Prospect Road, informed the Commission that he has been a neighbor of the Country Club for the past 2~ years. He said that he has Weyer had a problem with the Countr.~ Club and that he has had a `_>ood relationship with the Country Club. I-[e felt that the Country Club was responsible and very fair. ~~"hen the Qolf club expanded eight or nine years a_o. he supported the expansion. He stated his support of the request. He said that a serious problem exists «°ith the illegal parking that is occurring at the regional park located beyond the Country Club. Director ~~`algren informed the Commission that the parking lot of concern is not in the city limits. Chairman Pierce referred 1~1r. Stuckey to the County as the parking lot described is not in the city limits. CO~II\iISSIONERS KAPLAN'PATRICK MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:~~ P.M. COMMISSIONERS KAPLA\'BER\ALD MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. UP-98-014. THE MOTIO\' CARRIED UNANIbIOUSLY" (7-0). aD.IOURNED STUDY SESS10\' BY CONSENSUS, THE CO~iMISSlO\ AND "I"HE APPLIC:IN"I- AGREED TO CONDUCT THE ~'4'ORK STUDY SESSION i\T THE AUDITORIUM. PLANNING COMMISSION M~TES • NOVEMBER 24. 1998 PAGE - 4 - 3. DR-98-00~, Sll-98-002 & UP-98-003 (503-25-01=i) - ZAt~1BETTI, 1464 Big Basin Wa~~; Request for Design Review approval to construct t~yo new townhouses totaling ?.0?4 sq. ft. and 3.317 sq. ft. each. Subdivision approval is required to divide the propem~ into three lots (one lot for each of the riyo units and a third lot for common space). Use Permit approval is required to allow residential development in the CH-? zoning district without a commercial component of the project. Dedicated public open space is also a requirement of approval. The site is 16.160 square feet. (COI~TTIITUED FRO1~I 11/10/98). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following individuals were present at the work session: Gene Zambetti. propern~ owner: Gary Kohlsaat. project architect; Lee Grey, President of the Sarato~ua Homeow°ners Association: Tom and Paula Brennock. Gate House residents located behind this property: and Cathy Boat. resident of Saratoga observing the meeting==. Director ~~~algren presented the staff report and said that at the November 10. 1998 meeting. the Commission expressed concern with another site in the Village being used strictly as a residential development, losing another piece of land designated as commercial. This concern, including issues raised re~~ardin~; the public open space requirement and the east side elevation. resulted in the continuance of this item to an informal discussion under a work study session. The applicant's were directed to look at design and elevation changes to the east elevation and discuss those chances this evening. Residential vs. Commercial Use dir. Zambetti stated that he is planning to lire in Unit B. He addressed the reason why he decided to build two residential units. He said that the lot is a narrow parcel in the CH-2 zoning district and that it only has a ~0-foot frontage. He said that the ordinance does not allow development of the parcel as commercial because it is a narrow lot. He said that a small oftice building could be built but that it would not be viable. If the parking requirements could be similar to those businesses grandfathered in. it would be viable to build as commercial (reduce parking ratio). He said that the Village needs to have people visit it and purchase items. If the site is allowed to develop as residential, it will increase the population of the Village and will have additional residents .~•ho can purchase items from Village businesses. He said that he discussed with the adjacent property owners their willingness to sell their property to him to combine the property for development. but indicated that they were not interested in selling their property. He said that he is surrounded on three sides by residential development. He presented the Commission with a map of the Village and its desicn, including its intensity. Commissioner Bernald inquired as to the number of parking spaces that would be required for commercial development'? bir. Zambetti responded that ei~=ht parking spaces would be needed to develop the parcel as commercial. including handicap parking. He said that he looked at developing a 3,=I00 square foot commercial project that could be used by accountants, attorneys or software businesses. He said that there are several businesses in the Village that have not been leased as office space. It was his belief that they have not been leased because they are small and located off the beaten path. He said that there are now less retail and more office space in the Village. He was looking at a way to have a home that would take in the concept of the creek and still be in the Village to walk to and shop. He addressed the public open space easement and stated that he has a problem with the recommendation of providing access to the open space easement because he would be responsible for the maintenance and the liability associated ~yith the public use of the path to the creek. Further, he would not be able to preclude public access from his property to the park. He stated that he would not object to a restriction that w°ould prohibit construction of the third parcel. He stated his willingness to provide the open space easement. but recommended that access to the open space be from another area such as the adjacent parcel which already has an easement that allows individuals to access the creek. He felt that the w~av to address an access trail would PLANNNG COMMISSION V1~TES • NOVEMBER 2=I. 1998 PAGE - ~ - be to have access from point A to point B that «ould brim nvo parks together. He said that the design team made changes to the desi~~n and felt that it resulted in a wood design. Commissioner l~•lartlage asked if these were three distinct parcels? Director ~Valgren responded that technically. there ~yould be three parcels with two building sites and one common parcel. He said that the creation of three parcels does not imph~ that a third building site has been created. "1'~yo parcels ~yould be owned by the future owners of the townhomes and that the driveway area and the lower part of the parcel ~yould become the third parcel that would be commonly owned b}' the two townhome owners. Conunissioner Bernald said that the parcel is stated to be 16, ] 60 square feet. but that when she adds up the lot sites, she comes up with 1=I.631 square feet. Of this area, she asked where the 20% open space w`as taken against? Director ~l~`algren stated that the 20% open space was taken from the 16.160 square feet which ~yould result in 3.200 square feet of open space. noting that 3.00 square feet is bein~a reserved as open space. Commissioner Bernald said that the Commercial Historic CH-2 zoning district requires a net site area of 7,00 square feet. She asked if this area includes the common open space area? Director \i~'algren clarified that the open space does not hay°e to be deducted from the gross site area. I-le said that the 7,00 square foot limit was not intended to restrict townhome type development or condominium development. Therefore. the 7.00 square foot limit was a limit of what could be parceled off indiyiduall_y and sold whether you put five units or a single commercial building on the propem~. Commissioner Kaplan recommended that it be decided ifi residential development would be considered for the parce I. Commissioner Bernald said that the applicant has indicated that it would be a hardship and not economically viable to develop the parcel as commercial. She asked staff ifi the hardship and economic hardship are overriding considerations that would allow the Commission to change a condition that is required b~~ the General flan or the ordinance? Director ~1~algren said that the parking requirement in itself for a commercial project should not be considered a hardship because the same commercial parkin; standards applies to every commercial project that is proposed in Saratoga. On the other hand. the site condition (i.e.. the narrowness of the parcel. the fact that the property is at the upper end of the Village where there is no intensive pedestrian retail oriented traffic, and the slope of the property) is a relevant consideration. He said that the slope reduction formula is not required for this property as it onh~ applies to single family residential development. [ le said that a good example of applying physical constraints of the property to the proposal was the Hubbard and Johnson site that ryas a ven~ narro~i and deep parcel located in the middle of an intensive commercial district on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. The applicant ~~~as able to place riyo commercial buildings on the front of the propem~ but convincedrthe Planning Commission and City Council that it would not be feasible on the deep narrow parcel to have a viable commercial project throughout the entire parcel. Therefore. 2=I townhomes ~yere approved ro go behind t~yo commercial buildings, noting that this w-as a much big~~er site. He said that the site confi~=oration was certainly relevant. Commissioner Bernald cited the permitted uses in the Village Plan as professional administrative. medical and financial services. These permitted uses are allo~~ed to be located above ground level or at ground level if separated from Big Basin ~Vav by another commercial space. Further. residential units. when located either above ground level or at ground level if separated from Big Basin VVay in a commercial space. are allowed. She asked if the Village Plan allows just residential uses? PLANNING COMMISSION M~TES • \TOVEMBER 24, 1998 PAGE - 6 - Director ~'l~al`~ren said that the Village Plan contains polio statements that state that the Plan should further encourage a mixed of residential uses with commercial uses where appropriate. It further differentiates between the CH-1 and CH-2 districts. It notes that the CH-2 district is primaril~~ residential and ofifice development. He said that if the city requires the propert~~ to be used as commercial, it w°ould most likely be an office use and that it would probably not be of a great benefit to the City. The applicant has stated that with residential development. ~~ou are bringing nyo additional families that would use the Villas*e. Commissioner Bernald asked if it would be more beneficial to have residential uses when the City will lose the economic benefit of a tax base associated with commercial development'? She said that this+is one of the problems that the downtown area has. You have the traffic for restaurants but that there are only a few commercial properties that exist small office buildings) that do provide a tax base during the da~~. Commissioner Kaplan said that the ordinance states that ~~ou have to have commercial in the front with residential up above or behind the commercial building. Director ~~'algren said that the zoning and the master plan recommendations that led to the zoning specifically did not preclude residential development at street frontage. He noted that residential uses are permitted under the use permit process that allows the Planning Commission to decide on a case by case basis if the site is suited for residential versus commercial development. He said that the big distinction is if this was a piece of property in the middle of the Village in the CH-1 zoning district. it would be hard to say that a tow-nhome project with street frontage was appropriate. Once you ~7et past Fifth and Sixth Streets. sites «ith ph~~sical constraints are probable reasonable candidates for residential development. He felt that all of the ph~•sical criteria can be considered as to whether this particular site is appropriate for this particular proposal. Commissioner Bernald expressed concern that the City would be giving up commercial zoning, the loss of a tax base, but that it would provide the applicant with an economic benefit b_v allowing residential development. She felt that the Conunission can consider these issues. Commissioner Patrick said that the parcel already has residential development. Therefore, the Commission would not be changing its current use. She did not believe that the Commission is precluding commercial development b~~ doing an~thin<, to the property one way or the other at this time. y Commissioner ~lartlage expressed concern with the vendors located at this end of the Village. She asked i1'the vendors are hoping that commercial development might enhance their businesses? Director ~Val~7ren said that Measure G does not apply to the site for nvo reasons: 1) it has to be a residentially designated property or an open space designated property to have Measure G apple; and 2) there has to be a proposal to chan~~e the land use designation. I-le noted that a townhome development is a permitted use in this commercial district and that there is not a proposal nor need to change the land use designation. Commissioner Kaplan said that having read the Village Plan. there is a feeling that when the street turned and the line of site was lost, residential uses could be allowed. She did not believe that the Commission would be suing against the document by approving residential development. ~ V Commissioner Page noted that by allowing residential development under a use permit. the Commission still retains the ability to review- the use. y Director ~Valgren informed the Commission that it retains jurisdiction of a use permit but once townhomes are PLAN;ITING COMMISSI0~11~11~![JTES NOVEiVIBER 2=1. 1998 PAGE - 7 - built. they would remain as townhomes Commissioner ~turakami said that it has been difficult to promote businesses in the Village. Vl`hen you see the loss of usa_e. you wonder if you are doin_ the rivht thine. He felt that all facts need to be considered. Mr. Kohlsaat noted that only one more parcel would be available for residential development. Commissioner Bernald said that the Davis propern~ exists as an office-commercial use and that there has been consideration for development of bed and breakfasts in the past. Commissioner Martla~Te said that she does not have a problem with having the propert~ develop as residential. However, she felt that individuals get up in the morning and leave their homes. She said that she resides within a block from the Village and that she does not patronize the Village as often as she might like and as frequently as individuals who live further away might do. To state that there is ~joing to be a famih~ that will shop in the Village is subjective and shouldn~t be a consideration as to whether or not the site becomes '`residential". IT VAS THE CO\SEtiSUS OF THE COVIMISSIO\ THAT RESIDENTIAL COULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THE PROPERTY. Open Space L-.asement Commissioner Kaplan said that the applicant raised a good point and stated her support of the creekside trail concept with public access. Director ~Valsren said that the recommendation for a creekside trail has been tried in the past and w•as found to be unpopular in certain areas as individuals thous*ht that it would infringe on the use of their property. noting that a creekside trail is not what is being considered this evening. The requirement is for a public plaza with the desire to have it located in the street front where most people can use it. [f the applicant prefers to remove it from the lower creek setting, then it could be placed in the front of the propem~ where the Village Plan and zoning ordinance intended it to be in the first place. He said that he would hate to see the hyo issues of the creekside trail and the open space requirements be mixed tonether because there is a lot of histor~ associated with creekside trails that is not related to this project. Chairman Pierce recommended that the Commission confine its discussions to the public open space. Director \1~~algren clarified that the original intent was to provide a public ~~athering place or public plaza. As this ~i°ould not have physically fit in front of the propem~. this led to the recommendation of a private w-alkw~av that would go down the units, ending up in a sitting area down at the creek. Commissioner Bernald read from the Open Space Element relatin~_= to creekside trail restrictions. It states that "The City shall not acquire. plan or develop public access easements along Saratoga Creek. across single or multi-family land uses as designated in the Saratoga General Plan abuttin~~ said creeks or adjacent to said creeks." She asked why the city can allow this one parcel that abuts public access and is located along Saratoga Creek to develop as residential? Director ~~`algren explained that this language came directly from the community's opposition to creekside trails. He said that this is a public open space dedication at the back of the property whether or not a creek exists. Commissioner Patrick said that the issue is where the public open space is to be located. She noted that the open PLANTiING COMMISSION M1~UTES • NOVEMBER 24, 1998 PAGE - 8 - space is a Village requirement. She said that the applicant is try°ing to build as much as he can on his propert~~ and that the part that he cannot build upon is goin~~ to be dedicated to public use. The applicant has expressed concern with access to the open space. noting that the access was designed to accommodate his proposed development. She said that the buildings can be moved back and.~or reduced in square foota~=e in order to place the public open space at the street frontage. She recommended that the applicant decide «here the open space is to be located. Commissioner Kaplan said that there is a limit as to how tar the building could be setback based on the riparian corridor. Mr. Brennock informed the Commission that he resides across Isom the propem~ wider discussion. He said that there is a natural ambiance that is associated with the creek. He said that people who access the creek below ~+~alk in the creek. I-Ie felt that there is a safety concern as ever. couple of ~~ears the fire department rescues teensgers who use the creek. He said that the creek attracts a nuisance problem. He recommended that the Commission look at the amount of vacant commercial square footage that exists in the Village. He felt that the parcel is more viable as residential. He expressed concern ~ ith public access on private propem~. Director ~~`alaren said that the maintenance and responsibility would fall on the new owners of the townhomes. If there is an~~ liabilit~•. it would fall more to the cite as this is a public right of way than on the future owners. Chairman Pierce questioned the realit~~ of individuals using the open space. Commissioner 1~9artlage recommended that the open space be moved to the front to maintain the Village atmosphere and to allow individuals to use the area (i.e., as a lunch area). iVlr. Kohlsaat said that the use permit is for residential usc. He said that it is being requested that the Commission waive the requirement for a pedestrian open space as it does not make sense to require this as pan of the use permit for a residential use. Director ~~`al<<=ren said that pocket parks and plazas can work. He noted that the request is for a conditional use permit. If problems arise in the future where loitering becomes an enforcement problem. the propert~~ can revert back to prig°ate open space. If it is found after a couple of ~~ears that no one uses the open space. this would be another basis for reconsidering the public open space requirement. Commissioner Bernald recommended that something be built that is practicable and useable as it has worked on Mrs. Davies propene. Commissioner Patrick asked if the relocation of the open space to the front of the parcel eliminates the fear that people will be walking past the townhomes. invading privac~~. and loiterins at the creek? Director ~~`algren said that he did not know if it would be feasible to place a usable public plaza at the front of the propertm• and still construct tw-o townhomes on the propem~. Commissioner Patrick said that consideration ma~~ need to be ~,~iven to one tow~nhome with the placement of the public area up in front. Otherwise, if in a period of time it is deemed that the public open space is unsuccessful. it would revere back to Mr. Zambetti as private open space. The cite. at that point. «ould lose the front public area. This would result in a lose-lose situation for the cite. Director l~`algren said that this ~~as seen as an opportunit~~ to have one ofi the few connections down to the Sarato.a Creek in the Village other than ~~'ildwood Park. PLAI~'~lING COMMISSION M~TES • NOVEMBER 24. 1998 PAGE - 9 - Commissioner Bernald asked if there were other easements recorded against other properties that would allo~~ access to the creek? She asked if access to the creek would be eliminated if an access is not approved as part of the use permit? Chairman Pierce said that applicant indicated his willingness to dedicate land and that he is still open to providing access to the public open space. Commissioner Kaplan said that it is being stated that there is not a continuance of a riparian easement. Director ~~~algrcn clarified that the majorit~~ of the easements are not riparian easements. The cih~ has been requiring these easements on development for the past five to ten ~~ears. The existinn rights of w-a~ s belong to the Santa Clara Valle~• ~?~~ater District. noting that these easements do not continue alon;~ the entire length of Sarato_a Creek. In response to VIr. Kohlsaat's question. Director ~Valgren said that the Blackwell project just approved up the road provided a similar ri;ht of w~av and provided a public plaza in front of their commercial buildinss. The~° «~ere allo~~~ed to use their landscape area as part of the 20% requirement. In this case, the lo~~°er end of the parcel is being used as the public open space requirement. Mr. Kohlsaat asked if a variance to the open space requirement could be applied for? Director ~Val~ren responded that a reduction or elimination of the open space easement can be considered as part of the use permit process. If it cannot be modified through the use permit process, it would require a variance to eliminate it or reduce the amount of open space. Mr. Zambetti submitted minutes from the June 14. 1989 Planning Commission Meeting relatin~~ to the reduction of the 20% open space requirement. He said that he wants to control who accesses the open space area. 1-le stated that he would avree not to build on lot 3. He said that he would be open to alternatives in lieu of the open space requirement to improve the Villaffe. (i.e., good signage, install a sign that states "\ext lodQin~=, food. gas ?~ miles"). He would do what he could to help the Village commercially He clarified that the building could not be pushed back on the lot because of the slope. He said that building one unit would not necessitate the need for the open space. Director ~Val~~ren said that the objective of the open space is to be functional. Commissioner Bernald said that she would like to see open space in the front. She agreed with Mr. Zambetti that the open space in the back is a nuisance and that she did not believe that it would add to the Villa~~e ambiance. She felt that it would help the Villa~~e ambiance to have a small public area Ill the front. She noted that Mr. Zambetti «•ants a home and an economic advantage to build the townhomes. However, the Commission still wants to have an open space area provided. Commissioner Kaplan said that when she walked the propertp~, her immediate response was that it ~~°ould not work to have the public use the steep path to access the open space in the back and have the public go past the residents' windo~ts. She said that she ~~~ould approve the open space to the rear of the propem~ if the third parcel is held iu open space so that in the future. it can be used as an access. If residential is to be approved, althoush this is out of the normal Village foot traffic. maybe someone ~~ould walk to sit down and have a cup of coffee if a bench was made available. She felt that maybe a Spanish style fountain with a sitting area around it. incorporatin~_ landscaping, could be supported. Commissioner Ylurakami concurred w°ith the comments expressed by Commissioner Kaplan. If there is a need for more space and less buildin;, there could be a consideration for the elimination of a three-car ~ara,e. He said PLANNING COMMISSION M~TES • NOVEMBER 24. 1998 PAGE - 10 - that there «•as plent~~ of room on the top to add the square footage being lost at the bottom as an alternative Commissioner Page said that he was drawn to the open space b~ the creek as this is a peaceful area. notin~~ that the Commission has the ability to convert the open space to private open space should problems arise in the future. It has been indicated that there is not a whole lot of foot traffic at this end of the ~'illagc so maybe this will encoura~Te more foot trafl7c. He supported the idea of the open space down below and recommended that the pathwa,~ be located on the other side to gig°e residents a sense of privacy. Commissioner Vtartlave said that she w°as adamant about preservinv the open space as it is part of the ordinance. She said that every time the Village is changed. somethin~~ is lost. She felt that the ordinance ~~as in place to preserve the character of the Village. She said that she would prefer to see the open space located in the front to provide the residents with some privacy. but that she could support the open space in the back too. Commissioner Patrick said that others w°ere required to provide open space to provide individuals a place to vo. She likes the idea of the park in the back more so than the front. She recommended that the buildings be made smaller to distance the path~~~ay. She lelt that there was a way to pave the path~i•ay to delineate it. y Chairman Pierce said that he was leanin~~ toward Commissioner Kaplan's recommendation about a small sittins area to front if individuals choose to walk up and down Big Basin ~~`av and to have the area preserved do«-n b~~ the creek for later use. He recommended that the garage size be reduced. Mr. Kohlsaat stated that he is providinv the required five parkin; spaces for the tw•o units. He said that a nvo-car garage and a parking stall would require the same amount of area as a three-car garage. Director ~'~~algren clarified that the ordinance requires one. one car fully enclosed _garage per unit and one and a half spaces per unit either in a garage or unenclosed area. "fhe Planning Conunission can modify these requirements throuvh the use permit rcvie«~ process. Chairman Pierce noted that there are some existing easements to the creek and if further easements are acquired, the public open space can ~tiork. He recommended that the open space easement be preserved to see what happens in the future. Design Review° Mr. Kohlsaat presented the Commission with realistic perspectives created on a computer that add a few trees to give the design some realism as elevations do not do the project justice. He presented the Commission with a design sketch and addressed the changes made to the east elevation as requested by the Commission. He said that if the size of the `,crave is reduced_ he could create a break but that the parking rules would be violated. Commissioner Vlartlave noted that on street parkinv «ould be available. therefore. the Commission could vrant a variance from the parking requirements. She asked if thought was given to varvinv the use of materials based on the craftsman style design? ~Ir. Kohlsaat said that he has considered the use of a belh• band and other design features. r Commissioner Patrick asked why the pathway could not be sited on the right side of the building? VIr. Zambetti said that he ~.ould prefer access throush the drive~~~ay as he did not ~;~ant the public in the back of the house due to the location of the air conditioner and garbage containers that are located in the back. He agreed that this is a beautiful area that should be shared with others. He stated that he objects to havin~~ individuals he does not know PLANNING COMMISSION Ni~?TES • NOVEMBER 24. 1998 PAGE - I I - accessing the open space through his propem•. IIc also stated that he does not want to lose the three car garage as it is crucial to his lifestyle. Director ~'l`algren said that in terms of making the pathwa~° usable. wood signs and different paving material alone the drivew~a~• would be sufficient to delineate the path~ya~~ to the open space area. Chairman Pierce noted that the open space would not be open to the public at night. Commissioner Kaplan expressed concern with the east elevation as it would be the elevation ~~ou would see when you approach it from Big Basin ~t~av. ~1r. Kohlsaat said that the east elevation would be screened. Commissioner Kaplan said that she w-as willing to give that project a chance as the Commission can review' it if problems arise. tilt. Zambetti said that he would like to have the opportunity to discuses the issue of the open space with his architect and to have more discussions «-ith the neighborhood. iT ~'I~AS THE CONSENSLS OF THE C0~1~11SSiON TO POSTPONE FLRTHER DISCL?SSIOI`'S ON TI-IIS ITE~•1 T~O [TS DECEMBER 9 ~1EETING. DIRECTOR ITEMS Director ~Valsren updated the Commission on the following: The December 9 and the first meeting in January ~yill be held in the Adult Da~~ Care room. iie has been in touch with the school district through their architects and the environmental consultants. The Cite :~1ana~=er ~.~ill be meeting with the ~1ar~• Gardener to ha~~e the school district present their plans for the Saratoga Elementary School and the Redwood Middle School to both the I-Ieritage Preservation and the Plannim~ Commissions. The City Attorney stated that the school district can exempt themselves from the Cit~~'s local regulations in terms of the tree protection ordinance if they can show that the removal of the trees is related to a classroom activit~~. He said that recent court cases have said that pla~~ fields are integral to classroom activities. If the school district has to remove the trees to expand a play field, they can exempt themsehes from city ordinances. He said that the school board has to officially take this action as this is not an automatic action. The school board has to pass a resolution that they are consciously° deciding to ~~aive local re~aulations. This information is beinyg shared with the school district. Regarding the review of the building`s. this is bey. and the cit~~'s purview but that it w°as his belief that the school district will allow° the city to review- the buildin~Ts. Ho~yever. the elementary school is listed on the city's local historic inventory ~rhich makes it subject to CEQA anah~sis. This information was shared with the school district's consultants. Therefore. at a minimum. the school district will need to come before the Heritage Preservation Commission. He said that he would be on vacation nett week. Should the Commission need assistance during this time. they should contact Judi Crowley. PLANNING COMMISSION M~-TES NOVEMBER 24, 1998 PAGE - 12 - COI~IMISSIO\ ITEMS Chairman Pierce asked the Commission if December 10 or 17 «ere Good da~~s to hold the Christmas parn~? IT ~'~~AS THE CONSENSUS OF THE COl~tl\f]ISSiON THAT THE CHRISTLtAS PARTY IS TO BE HELD OI~T DECEMBER I0. 6:30 P.1\1. AT CHAIRMAti PIERCE'S HOME. CO1~I~~7<UNICATIONS ~'~`ritten - City Council Minutes dated October 27 and Noy ember =i. 1998 - 1\otices for Planning, Commission hteetin~ of December 9. 1998 ADJOURViVIENT TO NEXT NIEETIVG There being no further business. Chairman Pierce adjourned the meeting at 9:3~ p.m. to ~t~ednesda~~_ December 9. 1998. Adult Care Center. 196~~ Allendale Avenue. Saratova, C.a. ~tl\LTTES PREPARED AtiD SUB1\~tITTED BY: Irma Torrez Nti~tutes Clerk