Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-09-1998 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SAR~TOGA PL:~N;~'ING COMiVtISSION 1~1INUTES TlrESDAY, DECEI\]BCR 9, 1998 Civic Center. 1.3777 Fruitvale Avenue. Saratoga. Ca Regular ~leetin* Chairman Pierce called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll Call: Present: Commissioners Bernald, Kaplan, >Vtartlage. 1~lurakami, Page. Patrick and Chairman Pierce Absent: None Staff: Director V1'algren Pledge of Allegiance Minutes -November 24, 1998 On a motion by Commissioners Patrick.: ~•lartlage, the Commission approved the November 2=], 1998 minutes with the folio«°ins amendments: - Page 1. under Roll Call. indicate Commissioner Bernald in attendance. - Page 1, under Oral Communications. correct the spelling of lVlarcia Fariss. - Page 1. under Oral Communications. line ~, amended to read: "...community what happens in the Argonaut Shopping Center...She felt that a blanket statement was made by Vlrs. Fariss ~~•ithout `Jetting enough fiacts..." - Page ?. Agenda Item 1, paragraph 1. line 2 amended to read: "...Fire district's review. He did not believe that tl~e fire district requested additional conditions on their transmittal but that staff noted that the high fire hazard area boundarv° has been extended to run north-south along Saratoga-Sunnyti•ale Road and the middle of Hi~h~t•ay 9..." - Page 6, paragraph 2, line 4 amended to read: "...You have the traffic for restaurants but that there are onl~~ a few commercial ••••*~~ •~•~~~ properties that exist (small office buildings) ~ that do ••° provide a tax base during the dad." - Page 6, paragraph 7, line ?amended to read: "She asked if the vendors are ~ hoping that *"~•~J~ *•••-•~ ~~' *'•°* *'•° -~" a°••°'^^ - commercial development might ate enhance their businesses? - Page 7, paragraph =I amended to read: "C'onunissioner Bernald said that the Davis propert}• exists as an office-commercial use and that there is~~~tie~~ei-zr~s has been consideration for development of bed and breakfasts ^•- ~•~°~"°~ ••-° in the past. - Page 7, paragraph ~. amended to read: "...block from the Village and that she does not patronize the Village as often as she might like and as frequently as individuals w•ho live further a~~a~~ might do. To state that there is ;oing to be a famil~~ that ~~ ill shop in the Village is ~~ subicctive and shouldn't be a consideration as to «~hether or not the site becomes "residential". - Pane 8, paragraph 9, replace his= ~~ ith Davies'. PLANNING COMMISSION IV~TTES • DECEMBER 9, 1998 PAGE - 2 - Oral Communication No comments were offered. Report of Posting Agenda Director ~~`alaren declared that pursuant to Government Code ~49~4?. the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on December 4, 1998. Technical Corrections to Packet Director ~Valgrcn indicated that there were no technical corrections to the packet. CONSE\T C ALE\TD AR 1. V-98-011 (503-19-1~7 - LOH, 20651 Leonard Road; Request for Variance approval to allow a recenth~ constructed detached accessory structure to both exceed the maximum permitted tloor area for the site and to encroach into the required 30 foot front yard setback. The structure was built without City building permits. The Variance application includes a gazebo structure and a detached rear yard deck that also encroach into required setbacks and were also built without permits. The subject property is 1.=18 gross acres in size and is located within an R-1-40,000 zonin`* district. (CONThTUED TO 1/13/99 AT THE REC0I~IIVIENDATION OF STAFF). O~~ A titOTION BY COtii'~tISS[OtiERS PATRICK/BERNALD_ TF1E COl~il`tISSION UNA\'IMOLSLY (7-0) APPROVED CO\SE\T CALF\DAR ITEM 1. PI;BLIC HEARINGS 2. DR-98-00=1, SD-98-002 & UP-98-003 (503-25-014) - ZAt~IBETTI, 14645 Big Basin VVa~~; Request for Design Review approval to construct two new townhouses totaling 2.071 sq. ft. and 3.317 sq. ft. each. Subdivision approval is required to divide the property into three lots (one lot for each of the t1i~o units and a third lot for common space). Ilse Permit approval is required to allow residential development in the CH-? zonin; 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. (CONTINtiED FROM 11/24/98). Director ~?l-al~ren presented the staff report. Chairman Pierce opened the public hearing at 7:4~ p.m. Gene 7_.ambetti, applicant. informed the Commission that he would be occupying rear unit B. He stated his agreement with the staff report, includin; the open space to the rear of the property. He said that he «ould like the surroundin~~ nei~>hbors to know that he will be workin`= to make sure that the open space fits within the community and that no problems will result with the open space and its access. He requested that the project be approved this evening. He informed the Commission that he kill be preservin~_ some of the existing tiles and incorporate them in the design of the garden. Fie said that he is willing to strike a balance with the ope~t space to allow the community to enjo} the creek area. PLANNING COMMISSION M~~TES DECEMBER 9. 1998 PAGE - 3 - Gar.' Kohlsaat, project architect. reflected on what was discussed in the study session regarding the architecture of the building. He said that he ~.•orked with the constraints associated Frith the site and that he created shadow- lines to articulate the design. He stated that the nest door neighbor may base a view of the building*(s) but noted that a fence would be installed and that the existin{~ trees ~~ill screen this development. He said that additional screen trees can be planted to provide prisac~ to the residents. if necessary. Commissioner lturakami referred to the second page of the revised dra.yings. I-Ie asked if the chant=es mentioned b~ VIr. Kohlsaat Isere being incorporated'? Nlr. Kohlsaat informed the Commission that the changes he indicated would not be reflected on the revised drawings. 1Ie indicated that the existin~> pines will be removed and that they ~r~ill be replaced Frith either red~~ood or oak trees. Commissioner Kaplan asked if there was any room on the sidewalk front parking strip to provide public access seating such as the installation of a bench at the curb as discussed in the past? 1~9r. Kohlsaat responded that the entire parkin, strip is taken up b~~ the transformers, utilities and a street tree. He said that there is a small section in the park strip that could accommodate a bench similar to that of a bus stop bench. He stated that the project is proposing to dedicate more than the minimum amount of open space required do«~n below and that it is preferred to keep the open space down below to give the resident of the front unit asemi-private area. Lee Grey, President of the Saratoga Homeo~~ners Association. expressed concern with the courtyard access to the Saratoga Creek. He said that the creek is polluted and that individuals walk up the creek and access his property and Bi~= Basin (private propert~•). He expressed concern with the health of the stream. the habitat and the preservation of mature trees alon~1 the creek bank. He stated that the architectural rendering is satisfactory but expressed concern that the city will be allowing the public to enter the property off of Big Basin. He expressed concern that at the last meeting. the applicant did not a~~ree to allow access to the open space and that he is now agreein== to alloys access to the creek. l-le also stated that a resident from the Gate 1-louse previously raised an objection to facing the property. ~~Ir. Lambetti said that he ~sould be meeting= with the Saratoga Homeowners :lssociation and Gateway residents as he goes through the process of building and the final map to «ork out the problems relating to the open space. COMiV11SSIOtiERS MARTLAGE.`PATRICK ti40~'ED TO CLOSE TIIE PI;BLIC }-TEARING AT 7:~~ P.l~t. Commissioner Page expressed support for the open space and felt that it could be desi_ned in such a way that it ~yould not generate a lot of foot traffic that would make it a public nuisance. As the use is being approved under a use permit. the Planning Commissio^ has the ability to revic~s and chance the open space. Therefore. he stated leis support of tl~e project. Commissioner ~~lartlage concurred with the comments expressed b_y Commissioner Page. She said that she appreciated the articulation of the IOn~= gall and that she ~~as glad to hear that the applicant is sensitise to preserving the heritage design. Commissioner Patrick concurred with the comments expressed by Commissioners Page and Martlace. Commissioner Bernald stated her appreciation of the redra~+•inv and articulations presented. She felt that the draw-ini=s were very nice and ~yould fit in. I-io.veyer. she felt that this ryas a loss of a chance for a commercial tax base and the lossrof a potential mix by offering the residential and leaving out the option of having= small business offices ~shich ~sould be well supported if the site is developed as residential. respecting the fact that it would be difficult to desi;=n a commercial use with the constraints of the site. She felt that approval of residential units is a`*ainst the spirit of ~•leasure G even though ~~leasure G does not apple in this case as this development PLANNING COMM1SSlOi\i IV11!RTES • DECEMBER 9, 1998 PAGE - 4 - would be increasing residential density. Therefore. she could not support the request. Regarding the open space. she said that she was ~_lad to hear that the applicant was ~yilling to allow the open space to the rear. She said that she w°ould have liked to have seen open space both in the front and in the rear because if the rear open space does not work. the city would be left without any dedication ~~ ith the exception of the open space by the creek. She noted that at the last meeting. Vir. Zambetti stated three times his objection to a public walkway and the open space. She expressed concern that if vlr. Zambetti has these objections. the use permit would come before the Commission with the possibility of the open space bein`, eliminated should problems arise in the future. She stated that she would not be supporting the open space as part of the use permit. Re~ardin; the design review. she felt that it was well designed and liked the crafts-nan style. However. she stated that she did not want to see a house built in this area. Commissioner ~lurakami thanked the applicant for the submittal of improved drawings. He said that he too felt like Commissioner Bernald about the uses. However. based on what he has seen in this part of the Village, he would be willin~~ to ~*o along and give this project his approval as he did not believe that making this area commercial would change this part of the Village. Commissioner Kaplan concurred with the comments expressed about the "nice" design and felt that it would work. She asked staff ~yho would be responsible for the repair and maintenance of the benches to ensure that they remain viable to the open space and users? She asked if a maintenance district would be formed for its maintenance`? Director ~,Valgren responded that the open space would be maintained by the two future townhome o~+~ners. He said that a maintenance agreement would be required to be entered into as part of project approval that «-ould bind any future owners and make them aware that they are responsible for maintaining the public access easement. Commissioner Kaplan asked ~~-hat the city would do should the neighbors want the cite to clean up the area'? Director ~4~algren said that staff would contact the propert}` owners to make them aware of their responsibility to maintain and.or repair dammed benches or public quasi public structures. He stated that the city also has the option to maintain the open space and bill the property owners. He said that these t~ pes of maintenance agreements are not unusual. Ho~yever. it is unusual in this case because this is a hybrid proposal to what is normally seen in the Villa~,e or what is normally seen in terms of common or open space. Commissioner Kaplan expressed concern that accessing the open space through private property is not ~,oina to be user friendly and that she would have preferred to see a seatin~* area in the front. She said that she ~+aoted to see some of the influence from the Village Design Plan and the historic documents discussed previously incorporated such a sitting or ~Tatherin`J area in the front area. She said that she did not like the statement made that individuals should not be allowed access to the natural resources. She felt that individuals should be allowed to access the creek. She recommended that a condition be added that would stipulate the mer~~ing of the open space to the creek area to the conti~~uous open space should the opportunity arise in the future. She said that she understood the constraints of the frontage of the property to develop it as commercial. It was her belief that a small office with a house in the back could have been accommodated to satisfi~ the intent of the Village Plan. She recommended that paragraph 1 ~ of the subdivision resolution of approval be amended to replace Plannin`_ Director with Community Development Director should the Commission approve the application. Chairman Pierce stated that he was in support of the project because the citizens want more park land and open space. He said that one of the big~7est problems that the City has is maintaining? this open space and that this was an opportunity to have someone else responsible for the maintenance of the open space and small park. He felt PLANNING COMMISSION M1~CITES DECEMBER 9, 1998 PAGE - 5 - that the open space belo«° was a beautiful spot and felt that the Cite will need to watch it to make sure that it is not abused. He did not believe that problems would arise. He stated.that he liked the design as it looks like it will tit in with the Village with the use of ~~ood siding and that it is contoured to the slope. He stated that he .vas in support of the Village and that he would like to see it ~~et more commerciall~~ viable. He did not believe that the ~0-foot wide frontage would ever make the it a commercially viable site. He stated that he was not supportive of a bench in the front and that he would rather see a nice area down belo~~. Commissioner Patrick said that commercial areas alread}' have benches in front and felt that they were beautiful. She stated that she was struck by the variation in architecture and the design. Director ~~ algren said at the last meetin_. he suegested some kind of pavement treatment along the driveway be incorporated that would delineate that this is a «~alkw•av or sidewalk different i=rom the driveway. He informed the Commission that the drivew•av is proposed to be interlocking concrete pavers and that the patterns can be mixed up to provide a three to tour toot wide visual walkway connecting the walks+ay and the drive~~~av. Commissioner Kaplan asked if the signaL7e in front is goins to indicate the hours that the open space is accessible to the public? Director ~'~'algren said that there is a plan to have trail markers that state "public access" and that a sign at the top of the stairs would indicate public access hours. ON A 1~IOT[ON [3Y COM~IISSIO\ERS M:4RTLAGE:`PAGE. THE COiIIMISSION UI\ANIMOUSLY (i-0) :APPROVED RESOLUTION \TO. DR-98-004 WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS: I) REQUIRE A V4'ALKWaY" PAVI\G ~fRE:'1~f~tE\T :~\D 2) THE ;1UDITION OF A CONDITIOti "f0 STIPULATE THAT T[IE PROPERTY' O~~TIER(S) DO NOT OBJECT TO A1~'Y FUTURE MERGING OF THE OPEN SPACE ~VI"TH CONTIGUOUS OPEN SPACE. COMMISSIONERS MARTI_.AGC%PAGE ~90VED TO :APPROVE RESOLUTIO\ NO. SD-98-002. THE N10T[O\T CARRIED ~-2 ~~`ITI-I CO~]~tiSSIO\ERS BERNALD AtiD KAPLAN VOTING NO. CO~TMISSIONERS hiARTLAGE.~PAGE MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. UP-98-003. THE tiiOTION C:IRRIED ~-2 ~~`ITH COl\1MISSIONERS BER\ALD AND K.-1PLA\~ VO-fh~'G \O. DR-98-050 (397-22-0~7) - SINGER, 20320 Orchard Road; Request for Design Review° approval to add a 618 sq. ft. second story and 166 sy. ft. to the first floor of the exiting 1.23 sq. ft. single sto~~• residence. An existin;_T 1.000 sq. ft. detached ~ara~re and guest house ~+ill remain. The total floor area on the site will be 3.03' sq. ft. with a maximum buildins height of 23 It. The site is 8.400 sq. ft. and is located within an R-1-10.000 zoning district. The application includes a request for an exemption from the floor area reduction requirement fior building heights over 18 feet. Director ~Val_ren presented the staff report. He said that staff noted in its review of the application the potential impacts of the second story deck off of the master bedroom that is relatively a deep deck relative to the size of the home. He said that the deck did not appear to have a great impact on the properh• o«ner's land to the north since the deck would be looking onto their roofline. However. it could potentially have an impact on the property owner to the southeast. Given the fact that the balcony w•as located central to the lot and provided a large setback. staff agreed to allow the application to come before the Commission as is and reh~ on the public noticin<,~ process to see if the adjacent neighbors have any concerns or objections to the proposal. He informed the Conunission that to date_ staff has not heard any objections to the proposal. Staff has received tw°o letters submitted after the staff report was distributed from Fred Proctor indicating support of the project and another letter signed by Grey PLANNING COiV11V1ISSION M~TES • DECE1~iBER 9. 1998 PAC:F _ ( _ Denari. 20300 Orchard Road. residents who reside at 2030 Orchard Road and 1~~larcy Davis. 20301 Orchard Road. indicating their support of the project. He said that staff is recommending approval of the application with the conditions contained in the resolution. Commissioner Page noted that the executive summar~~ states that the application «•as filed on October 16, 1998 and that within the Analysis, it states that as of October 16. 1998 the request for exception for floor area reduction is no longer an option. He asked if this statement was inclusive of the October 16. 1998 date? Director ~~~algren said that staff made an effort to accept applications on October 16 that have been in process for several months ~yith the ordinance developing concurrent. As the application «°as accepted on the date it w•as submitted makes it ~°alid to use the ordinance that became effective. Commissioner ~lartlage stepped do«°n from discussion of this item as she resides within the proximit~~ of the property under discussion. Commissioner Kaplan said that there was a former connection by her husband with the applicant. However, she did not believe that it was significant enough to influence her decision to abstain from this item. Chairman Pierce opened the public hearin~_ at 8:1 ? p.m. Norman Burdick. project architect. informed the Commission that the size of the deck is 10' x 1S. He said that he sug~?ested the deck to his client because they wanted a covered porch to the rear of the house. He indicated that the size of the structure could be reduced but that his clients would like to retain the size of the porch. He said that the neighbor that would be most affected b_v the yie~w of the deck are the Proctors. He noted that the Proctors' wrote a letter in support of the project. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK'~1tiRAKA~tI MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:21 P.~i. Commissioner Kaplan expressed concern that this is a small lot ~i~ith a lot of structures in the back, acknowled~~ing that the shed is to be removed. She also expressed concern with the application not adhering to the ne~~ ordinance regarding floor area exceptions. Therefore. she stated that she would not support the request for an exception to the floor area reduction. Based on the size of the garage and the guest house. she did not believe that it is was unreasonable to require that the size of the home conform to the current ordinance requirement. She said that she would like to see the deck structure pulled back toward the house because there could be a priyac~ issue. Otherwise. she stated that she liked the design of the home. Commissioner iViurakami stated that he liked the desi~=n. He said that he has a problem with the size of the balcony as it was a little lame as far as a top floor balcony for this size ofa home. He said that he understood the architect's reason for making it such a large structure to coyer the patio area. I-Io;-ever. he recommended that the balcony area be reduced. Commissioner Bernald concurred with the comments expressed by Commissioner ~lurakami. She expressed concern with the deck on the second floor off the master bedroom and recommended that the deck be pulled back. Other than the concern regarding the deck. she stated that she could support the project. Chairman Pierce asked if Commissioner Bernald objected to the size of the deck or the size of the structure? He noted that the applicant is stating that the deck is being used as a roof. Commissioner Bernald stated that she has t~;o concerns: 1) a large deck projecting into the backyard that would PLANNING COMMISSION M~TTES • DECEMBER 9, 1998 PA(:F _ 7 - result in a short space between the deck. the existing garage and the suest house: and 2) the issue of a large structure. If the deck off the master bedroom was pulled back. the porch down below would not be a problem as she does not want to see a large structure. Commissioner Patrick stated that this was a nicely designed home but that it includes 300 square feet of decking in the back, 1?~ square feet of front porch, and X90 square feet of basement. She said that she was not supportive of the request for a floor area exception to the size. She said that she would not be voting in favor of it because she felt that the applicant has large structures. including a west house. She noted that appro~:imately 4,000 square feet of structure is being proposed and felt that this was too much for the small lot. COn1n11S51oneC Palle agreed that this was a nicely desi~_ned home and that the inclusion of a second stor~° is in keepin~T with the character of the nei~*hborhood. He expressed concern with the size of the deck on the second store. He agreed with CommissioneryBernald that the applicant will lose a lot of space in the back yard with approximately 1? feet of open space ben~een the garage and the home. lfthe roof was shortened. you would also have to shorten the bottom. He did not believe that the deck upstairs off the master bedroom would create a privacy issue for the applicant. He said that he could support the application if the deck area .vas reduced. Chairman Pierce said that this is a nice nei~~hborhood and noted that the homes are fairly packed in (tightj. He said that he does not have a problem ~+ith the fact that the applicant is proposing to use a lot of space and that he could support the floor area exception as it fits in with the neighborhood. He a~~reed that the deck area seems large. He said that he understood why the applicant wanted to cover the porch but felt that the applicant could come up with an alternative. He supported cutting back the size of the deck and supported the application. COMMISSIONERS BER\ALD;`~~1CRAKA~11 MOVED TO :1PPROVE RL=SOLUT101~~ NO. DR-98-0~0 «~ITH AN AMENDMENT TO REQl1IRE THAT THE APPLICANT ~~`ORK «'ITI-I STAFF TO DOWN SCALE THE DECK ABOVE "THE PORCH. THE L10"TfO~i CARRIED 4-?-1 AS FOLLOWS: :1YES: BERtiALD. 1~•IURAKA~II. PAGE. PIERCE: NOES: KAPLAti. PATRICK: ABSTAIN: ~t.ARTLAGE: ABSENT: \ONE. Commissioner Martlage resumed her seat on the dais. Director ~~'algren requested that items 4 and ~ be considered together as they are described in a single memo, noting that they are both distinctive ordinance amendments. y ~. AEIPO-98-001 -CITY OF SAR~TOGA; Consideration of proposed amendments to Article 13 of the Municipal Code -The Saratoga Eleritage I'resenation Ordinance. Amendments would include revisions to the Definitions._ Permits and Miscellaneous Provisions sections of the Article. to chance the term Planning Director to Conununit~° Development Director and to add the term heritage resource inventory property. l~he new• rep*ulations ~~•ould allo~~ the Herita`,e Preservation Commission the opportunity to review proposed changes to properties on the Heritage Resources Inventory list. An Environmental Initial Sn,dv and \egativc Declaration have been prepared for this amendment pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Director Wal~_ren presented the staff report. He said that the proposed ordinance amendment would not change what the Plannin~~ Commission is used to reviewing and stren;__thens what the City is already doing. Commissioner Bernald felt that the more teeth that the city can live the Historic Preservation Commission would result in the protection of the cih~'s historic treasures. v PLANNING COMMISSION M1~.~CJTES • DECEMBER 9, 1998 PAGE - 8 - Commissioner Patrick said that the reports from the Historic Preservation Commission are cryptic. She said that she would like to see the Planning Commission receive more input from the Historic Preservation Commission and that she «•ould welcome the Historic Preservation Commission to attend the Planning Commission meetings to provide input on their items. ~ y Commissioner Bernald said that the Planning Commission can also attend the Historic Preservation Commission meetings to provide comments when certain items are scheduled for their reyie.v. Director ~'l~algren said that the Historic Preservation Commission is looking at historic designated structures very carefully and that they are givin~~ staff clear recommendations and opinions on said structures. He informed the Commission that staff does ask the Historic Preservation Commission to advise it on a broad range of issues. He informed the Commission that the Cit_v Attorney will prepare these proposed text amendments in ordinance format for the City Council. Commissioner Kaplan brought to staffs attention that there are several places in the test where the title still reads PlanninU Director and not Conununity Development Director. COMMISSIONERS KAPLAN,•'PATRICK MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTIO\ NO. AHPO-98-001. THE MOTION CARRIED L'NANI~IOL~SLY (7-Oj. COti1tiIISS[ONERS KAPLA\;~PATRICK MOVED TO RECOi~II\~tEND CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A \EGATIVE DECLARATIOti. "fHE ti10TION CARRIED UNANINIOL'SLY (.-0). ~. AZO-98-002 -CITY OF SAR.~T'OGA; Consideration of a proposed amendment to Article 1 ~ of the Municipal Code -the Saratoga Zonin= Ordinance. The amendment would be to the P-A: Professional and Administrative Office District list of permitted uses. The new regulation would allow temporary pumpkin sales with similar restrictions to apph~ to the currently allowed sales of Christmas trees. An Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration hay°e been prepared for this amendment pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Director ~~'algren presented the staff report and informed the Commission that this proposed test amendment is a staff driven clean-up item to allow- the temporary sales of pumpkins. COti1~tISS10\ERS KAPLAN~PATRICK 1%10~'ED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. AZO-98-002. THE MOTION C:1RR[ED U\A\Ih10USLY (',•-0). C01~lN1ISSIONERS E3ERNALD.%PATRICK MOVED TO REC01~1N1E\D CITY COUNCIL _'1DOPT[ON OF A NEGATIVE DECLARA~iION. THE ~10T[ON CARRIED UtiANI~tOUSLY (7-0). Chairman Pierce opened items ~ and ~ to public hearing. Charles Thomas, Sarato`Ta resident. informed the Commission that this is his second year on the Board for Good Government Group and that this is his the second time that he has come to observe the Planning Commission. I-Ie stated that he was present as an observer. Commissioners ~~turakamiBernald moved to close public hearing for agenda items ~ and ~. PLA\i~iING COiV1M[SSION N1~TES • DECEMBER 9. 1998 PAGE - 9 - DIRECTOR 1TEMS Director ~~~alQren informed the Commission that there ~yere no director items to present. Commissioner Bernald noted that the Historic Preservation Commission gill be reyiewinR the Oak Street School. She asked if the Planning Commission requested its revie~i~ or did it appeal the revie«•? Director VValgren stated that he requested a reyiew° of the Oak Street School on behalf of the Planning Commission. COiyl~l[SSION ITEMS Commissioner Pa~7e asked staff if it received any complaints re~7ardin~ the :lrgonaut Shopping center? Director ~~'alaren said that he has not received an~° complaints to date. He said that he has heard that with the last storm. one of the stone pines tipped over because their root ball ~~as too small relative to its canop~~. He reported that no damage «°as done to the townhomes to the north. Commissioner Kaplan said that the Saratoga News sho.ys a lovely drawing of an outdoor seating area in the middle of the ,lrsonaut Shopping Center. Director ~~ algren stated that a seating area was approved to the right of the Safeway expansion and that it is a public ~Tathering spot in an open area of the center improvements. Commissioner Bernald said that on December 2. 1998 the Blue Rock Shoot roasted their coffee again at =I:1~ p.m. She said that she received photos of the coffee roasting and another photo depicting an illegal banner hanging outside the establishment. She for«•arded these photos to staff. She said that there has been discussion about the option of callin~~ up the use permit. She said that there has been discussion benyeen the owner and Director ~?l~algren as to whether the owner would a~_rec not to roast coffee during business hours because it is very smoky. smelly and uninviting to individuals who are in the downtown area. The Commission attempted to go with a gentleman's agreement and that apparently it has not been followed. She asked what is the next step that the City can take? Director \'l`algren said that staff sent the owner a courtesy letter last September pointing out the problems that the Commission has been hearing about. Staff asked the owner to work w ith them to resolve the matters informally. He said that this arrangement worked to date as tar as he was aware. He suggested that another letter be sent to the owner that is more detinitive that the city is continuing to receive complaints with evidence being received. "this would be a last w•arnin~ letter and that if further complaints are received, the owner can anticipate that the use permit will be called up.~ Commissioner Kaplan said that a citizen asked her about development at the Odd Fellow, site. She said that she understood that the Odd Fellows had a ground breakin~~. She was asked as to the sequence of development. Director ~t`algren said that the first phase of construction at the Odd Fellows cannot begin until the spring. at the earliest, and that it would include the expansion of the Villas apartment, construction of the new health care facility. and the construction of the independent cotta~~es on the undeveloped ten acres. Commissioner Patrick said that it ~~as her recollection that a condition of approval ~.~as that the Odd Fellows had to advertise priority of construction to Saratoga residents. Director ~~`algren concurred that the development agreement stipulated that the Odd Fellows needs to notify residents of upcomin`T construction dates. PLANNING COMMISSION M~TES DECEMBER 9, 1998 PAGE - 10 - COI~IMU\ICATIO\S ~~'ritten City Council Minutes dated November 18. 1998 ADJOURNMENT TO \'EXT 1~IEETING There being no further busincss_ Chairman Pierce adjourned the meetin~_ at 8:~~ p.m. to ~'l~ednesda~~. January 13. 1999. Adult Care Center. 196~~ Allendale :=lvenue. Saratoga. CA. tiilNl.~TES PREPARED AND SI.~BMITTED BY: Irma Torrez Minutes Clerk