HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-14-2004 Planning Commission Minutes
MINUTES
SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: Wednesday, July 14, 2004
PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
Chair Garakani called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Hunter, Garakani, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi
Absent: None
Staff: Associate Planner John Livingstone, Associate Planner Christy Oosterhous and Assistant
Planner Lata Vasudevan
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Regular Meeting of June 23, 2004.
Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Rodgers, the
Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of June 23, 2004, were
adopted as submitted. (6-0-0-1; Commissioner Zutshi abstained)
ORAL COMMUNICATION
There were no Oral Communications.
REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA
Associate Planner John Livingstone announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda
for this meeting was properly posted on July 8, 2004.
REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS
Associate Planner John Livingstone announced that appeals are possible for any decision made on this
Agenda by filing an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the
date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15.90.050(b).
CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no Consent Calendar Items.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 2
***
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 1
APPLICATION #04-048 (517-13-027) PINN, 14960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3): The applicant requests
Design Review and Use Permit approvals to construct a 5,530 square foot two-story home with a
basement on a vacant lot in the Les Chateaux de Notre Dame subdivision. The applicant is seeking a
Use Permit pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-12.100 because the proposed “French Country”
style home will have a maximum height of 30 feet. The net lot size is 52,838 square feet and the
property is zoned R-1-40,000. (LATA VASUDEVAN)
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan presented the staff report as follows:
• Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review and Use Permit approvals to allow the
construction of a 5,530 square foot two-story home that will have a maximum height of 30 feet.
• Explained that the Municipal Code requires a Use Permit approval to exceed the 26-foot maximum
height of a residence.
• Stated that such a permit can only be granted after carefully assessing the architectural style and
finding that a maximum 30-foot height is required to achieve architectural purity.
• Said that there was not good discussion on the French Country style of architecture in the Field
Guide to Architecture resource book. Therefore, staff asked the applicant to provide good examples
of the proposed French Country architecture.
• Said that the style incorporates old and new, formal and informal elements. Details include tall thin
windows, often with shutters, steep slate or wood shake roofs, wide chimneys, stones with over-
wide grout and a mixture of materials giving it somewhat of a patchwork effect.
• Informed that this application reflects the first Use Permit request to exceed the height limitation
since this particular Municipal Code Section was adopted.
• Said that the southeast property owner, Mr. John Sobrato, has no issues with this proposal. The
other parcels in this subdivision have yet to be developed.
• Stated that additional screening trees to Lot 5 have been conditioned.
• Said that staff had requesting a fencing plan, which requires Planning Commission approval as a
condition of the subdivision approval. However, the fencing would be installed in the future rather
than soon.
• Pointed out that no homes can be viewed from this lot and that there are no significant impacts on
views or privacy. Additionally, there are no windows on the side elevations.
• Said that there are no heritage trees at risk.
• Said that the perception of bulk and scale are reduced because the new home would be located far
back on the site and is surrounded by mature trees. The facades are well articulated.
• Reminded that only under strict circumstances can this 30-foot height be approved.
• Said that the required findings are consistent and can be made as this proposed residence
incorporates all of the architectural elements of a French Country home.
• Recommended approval of the Design Review and Use Permit for this proposal as well as the
fencing plan.
Commissioner Zutshi asked if the front yard fence is three-feet high and how far back this fence would
be from the front property line.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 3
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that the fence is proposed on the property line.
Commissioner Rodgers questioned the resource materials considered on the French Country
architecture.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan said that staff placed the burden on the applicant to provide research
data on this style. She advised that she also did library research herself.
Commissioner Rodgers said that she would like to see a list of sources provided in the future to allow
the Planning Commission to also consult these materials. She asked if there would be a fireplace in the
loggia.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied yes, there would be a fireplace on the east side of the loggia.
Commissioner Rodgers asked if this represents the fourth fireplace.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan advised that a property could have as many fireplaces as they like
but that only one could be wood burning.
Commissioner Hunter pointed out that one wood-burning fireplace was recently denied for a second
dwelling unit because it was situated on a hillside property.
Commissioner Rodgers asked staff if they had discussed with this applicant the potential for a future
second dwelling unit or sports court.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied no.
Commissioner Schallop asked if there has been any other application for residential height above 26
feet.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied no, this is the first.
Commissioner Schallop asked if this Municipal Code Section was intended to apply only to residences.
Planner Lata Vasudevan replied yes, for single-family dwellings.
Commissioner Rodgers sought clarification that the Commission should be considering impacts on
adjacent properties even if they are currently undeveloped and unoccupied.
Planner Lata Vasudevan replied yes.
Commissioner Nagpal asked what sort of specific restrictions the Planning Commission imposed on
this subdivision when it was approved.
Planner Lata Vasudevan replied the requirement for Planning Commission review of any proposed
fencing, the requirement for additional screening between each property and compliance with current
Zoning Ordinances.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 4
Commissioner Nagpal stated that any time the Commission is dealing with an application such as this,
she likes to see story poles and asked staff to take that request into advisement.
Commissioner Uhl asked about the fencing request.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan said that the Planning Commission put the requirement for
Commission review into the conditions of approval for the Subdivision.
Commissioner Uhl asked if this applicant is asking for fencing approval.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that they might not actually install fencing for a few years.
Commissioner Nagpal asked how the City would know it had been done and suggested establishing a
schedule.
Associate Planner John Livingstone pointed out that the entitlement would last for two years. If not
installed, the approval lapses.
Commissioner Uhl asked if the three-foot height of the fence at the front of the property meets Code.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan replied yes.
Commissioner Nagpal pointed out a discrepancy in the project application number on the staff report
cover.
Commissioner Schallop asked if this approval of a height of 30 feet would create a precedent. He asked
for clarification between this provision of the Municipal Code as compared to a Variance.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan:
• Explained that Variances have different circumstances, which are basically some sort of hardship
with the land.
• Stated that staff believes that any proposal for this 30-foot height must be reviewed on a case-by-
case basis and that any future requests would be evaluated as carefully as this one was based on
architectural style requirements.
Commissioner Rodgers asked staff what other styles of architecture might result in a need for height
above 26 feet.
Commissioner Hunter reported that nothing has been seen here in the last three years that she has
served on the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Schallop asked if this home represents the first of this style.
Commissioner Hunter reminded that the house on Sobey Road that was discussed at the last meeting
and continued was also of French-style architecture. The Planning Commission was not comfortable
with the height in that case.
Chair Garakani opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 5
Mr. Greg Pinn, Applicant and Property Owner, 20855 Saratoga Hills Road, Saratoga:
• Thanked the Commission, Lata Vasudevan and Tom Sullivan for their consideration.
• Said that he wanted to address comments made.
• Stated that he and his wife came up with this French Country design and that if they had gone with
a Tuscan design, which he is partial to, they would not need to be here.
• Informed that there are six different French styles in the American Field Guide of Homes. The
Tudor style and French eclectic styles are the closest to their proposal, incorporating a steep pitch
roof, heavy over-grouted stone, etc.
• Said that staff had made it clear that excellence in design to an architectural style is required to
exceed the 26-foot height.
• Explained that one good reason to allow 30-foot height in this situation is that a two-story home
with eight-foot plate heights is ridiculous.
• Added that while this application is the first for a 30-foot height in current day, other homes exist
that are that tall or taller but these are older and historic homes.
• Said that they will bring excellence back to design.
• Assured that if other property owners come forward with a request for 30-foot height to
accommodate architectural excellence, he will support them if they have met the same standard of
review and excellence in design that he has met.
• Reminded that their home would be set back 65 feet from the street.
• Pointed out that this is not a large footprint for this lot and that they had to go with a two-story
design on this lot due to geotechnical considerations.
• Explained that having any fencing plans approved by the Commission is a requirement of the
subdivision approval but he did not intend to install any fencing unless he is required to do so.
Instead they may limit fencing to enclose a pool if and when they decide to install one. Fencing
would be high quality iron and stone.
Commissioner Nagpal said that she would rather consider a pool now rather than later if one is planned
for this site.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that constructing this house is taking all of their attention right now. If things go
well, a pool will be considered in the future. If so, it would be located where the lawn is depicted on
the conceptual landscape plan. Added that there is not a lot of room on this lot and that they will be
maxed out on allowable square footage so no other structures would be allowed.
Commissioner Rodgers asked if any hard surfaces such as sports courts would be installed.
Mr. Greg Pinn replied no, he has three girls, who are getting a ballet studio in the basement space.
Commissioner Rodgers asked about the fireplace in the loggia.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that the loggia is a covered patio. There will be an appliance there that keeps
people warm but it is not a large fireplace.
Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Greg Pinn how many wood burning appliances there will be.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 6
Mr. Greg Pinn said that the wood-burning fireplace would be located in the great room. However, they
may actually elect to install gas instead due to convenience. He said they are not sure but if there is to
be wood burning fireplace, it would be just one as allowed.
Commissioner Rodgers asked how much usable attic space there would be.
Mr. Greg Pinn replied he is not sure. He added that most of the home would actually not exceed 26
feet. There would be very little attic space.
Chair Garakani pointed out that there appears to be a nine-foot area of attic space.
Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Greg Pinn if they plan to use this space.
Mr. Greg Pinn replied no.
Commissioner Rodgers asked about the driveway material.
Mr. Greg Pinn replied paver stone. As an alternative, they may go with decomposed granite.
Commissioner Rodgers pointed out the Arborist does not want Tree #2 to have its roots cut into.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that the driveway is five to seven feet away from the trunk. Protective fencing will
be installed prior to construction. Agreed that this is a beautiful tree.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan reminded that the final landscape plan would be reviewed and
approved by the City’s Arborist.
Commissioner Uhl asked Mr. Greg Pinn to explain the architectural basis to support the 30-foot height.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that the typical height of houses in France is 40 to 50 feet. The reason for the height
is to achieve nine-foot high ceilings inside. Added that his company has constructed approximately 30
homes in Saratoga.
Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Greg Pinn what regions of France have this proposed style of
architecture.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that this style is not from the South of France but rather more from the North. It is a
French eclectic and Tudor style home. Added that practically all French countryside homes have these
elements.
Commissioner Rodgers disagreed. She advised that she lived in France for three years and had never
seen anything like this. Asked Mr. Greg Pinn to describe the French eclectic architectural style.
Associate Planner John Livingstone advised that the source says eclectic when architectural styles cross
over from one to another.
Commissioner Uhl asked if the roof pitch requirement is called out for this style.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 7
Mr. Greg Pinn replied yes, a tall, steeply pitched roof is the first requirement. Both Victorian and
French architecture have steep pitched roofs.
Commissioner Uhl asked if it is possible to achieve this architectural style on a smaller footprint
without requiring the 30-foot height but rather staying with a maximum height of 26 feet. Stated that
this proposed home is both big and tall.
Chair Garakani agreed and said that the maximum square footage allowed is 5,532 and this proposal is
for 5,530.
Commissioner Uhl again asked if the size and height could be shrunk.
Associate Planner John Livingstone replied that someone could build a French Country home that is
smaller than this one. However, floor area is concerned with bulk. Reminded that the applicant has
provided three versions of this house. This represents the purest design, the highest quality in materials
in order to meet the Municipal Code requirements to support a 30-foot height. The Code allows this
height under specific conditions.
Chair Garakani said that where this is going to be built must be considered. The applicant could go
with a less steep pitch to the roof. The problem is building on a hillside.
Mr. Greg Pinn:
• Reminded that there is no one located behind his property where Norton Road is located. Lot 5 is
10 to 12 feet higher than his property.
• Said that by shrinking their footprint, they would have to take rooms planned for the first floor and
place them on the second. This would also result in 8-foot ceilings, which is not what is wanted.
• Pointed out that 800 square feet represents the garage.
Commissioner Uhl said that pushing a project to the maximum on square footage and heights represents
a dangerous road.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that this is an exciting road. He reminded that they have set back their home 65 feet
when 30 is required. Only a small portion of the second story is at 30 feet. The lot is one acre and in a
French themed subdivision.
Commissioner Uhl said that he does want to see architecturally strong homes built but he feels this is
big and represents a dangerous road.
Mr. Greg Pinn pointed out that this is such a massive and expansive area.
Commissioner Uhl said that having the hill located behind this lot makes a special circumstance.
Chair Garakani asked whether Mr. Greg Pinn would support a 30-foot high house on Lot 5 or across the
street from him.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that the lot across the street is approximately 10 feet lower than his and on a corner
lot. Therefore, the house on that lot would likely consist of a side yard facing his property with the
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 8
house facing the other street. Said that if the owner undergoes the same six-month process of review,
he would support what is proposed.
Commissioner Hunter expressed concern about the materials of the fencing and potential danger to
deer.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that the wrought iron spikes would be capped off.
Commissioner Uhl asked about fencing and said that since the area is full of deer he does not support
lots of fencing in the area.
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan reminded that the subdivision approval requires any fencing to be
approved by the Planning Commission. However, the applicant indicates that fencing may not be
installed for years.
Commissioner Hunter said that there is lots of deer in the area and that Mr. Sobrato was told he could
only fence around his pool.
Commissioner Nagpal pointed out that this applicant is not really interested in fencing right now.
Mr. Greg Pinn said that he would rather not have any fencing. If he does, it would be in the future.
Said he is okay with only having pool enclosure fencing.
Commissioner Rodgers asked if a materials board is available.
Mr. Greg Pinn pointed out that he has been told that the actual materials may not be exactly the same as
there are some natural variations.
Mr. Bob Thurman, 20634 Victory Lane, Saratoga:
• Said that his home may be closer even than Mr. Sobrato’s.
• Said that similar screening being provided to one side may also be required between his property
and this project site.
• Advised that he is supportive of this proposal and is not concerned with the proposed 30-foot
height, saying that scale and proportion are most important.
• Stated that he understands what Mr. Pinn is trying to accomplish and this home would be in keeping
with the entire area. This development is an enhancement.
• Pointed out that he could see the two-story structure on this site from his property when the Sisters
of Notre Dame were located on this property.
• Requested that story poles be installed to better judge the visual impacts.
Chair Garakani asked what concerns Mr. Thurman has about screening.
Mr. Bob Thurman:
• Said that he thought story poles were used to demonstrate impacts on an area.
• Stated that he wants to protect privacy and views.
• Said that this home has a wonderful design and looks good. He has no issue with the 30 foot height.
• Opined that as long as each site is taken on its own merits, approving this height would not be
establishing precedence.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 9
• Pointed out that there are lots of oak trees providing shielding.
• Said he is supportive and wants the same screening as Sobrato is getting.
• Stated that he does not want to see either a Ranch or Prairie style home in this area.
Mr. Mike Haynes, 1069 Audrey Avenue, Campbell:
• Confirmed that the French style house requires a high pitch, 9 and 12, roof.
Mr. Jeff Currin:
• Advised that architecture has changed and that no one builds eight-foot high ceilings today.
• Suggested that even a 30-foot height is already restrictive.
• Said that this process exists to exceed the 26 foot maximum height to 30 feet. It is site specific.
• Pointed out that this is a French-style development with a hillside behind it.
• Expressed support.
• Stated that the FAR restrictions protect a site from being overbuilt.
• Said that this home would fit well into this particular setting.
Commissioner Rodgers told Mr. Jeff Currin that he appears to have some expertise on this subject and
asked if he does.
Mr. Jeff Currin replied no, he has just remodeled his own home.
Mr. Greg Pinn thanked his neighbors for their support. Pointed out that today is his birthday and it is
somewhat appropriate that it is also Bastille Day.
Commissioner Zutshi asked Mr. Greg Pinn if an arborist would be retained during construction.
Mr. Greg Pinn replied absolutely. This is a condition of approval. Said that there are five at risk trees
outlined in the Arborist’s report that he is hoping to save and keep.
Chair Garakani closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1.
Commissioner Zutshi:
• Said that she is glad that the provision exists now to allow 30 foot heights in special circumstances.
• Advised that she had to lower the height of her own Tudor style home when it was designed.
• Said that with authentic materials and being true to this specific architectural design, this is going to
be a beautiful house.
Commissioner Uhl asked how tall the Sobrato home is.
Commissioner Hunter replied 26 feet. She reminded the Commission that they did not support the
French-style home discussed at the last meeting and that she is concerned about consistency in the
review process.
Commissioner Nagpal stated that there were different issues with the last proposal.
Chair Garakani agreed, saying that the previously reviewed proposal did not match the land.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 10
Commissioner Rodgers added that there is a tree-covered hillside located behind this proposed home
site.
Commissioner Uhl:
• Said that this is a unique situation. This is a big lot that is adjacent to other large lots. This is a
French-inspired subdivision. There is a hill located behind the proposed house site.
• Stated that the proposed architecture is beautiful and that this proposal seems to fit.
• Expressed his concern about fencing within fencing, as this is a deer populated area.
• Said that he wished he could see how big this home would be on the lot as could have been
demonstrated by story poles.
• Proposed a continuance.
Chair Garakani pointed out that one of the neighbors had the same concern about story poles.
Commissioner Uhl said that the Commission and neighbors should be able to see how high this
structure is going to be.
Chair Garakani said that he tried to visualize the proposed height by comparing tree heights.
Commissioner Rodgers said that the Commission has to consider the impacts on currently vacant lots
that surround this one.
Commissioner Hunter pointed out that Montalvo could not be constructed today and neither could other
historic homes. Said that she has never reviewed a 30-foot high house in her three years on the
Commission.
Commissioner Nagpal explained that the adopted ordinance was intended to allow for architectural
integrity. The Commission must determine if this house is what it would like to see.
Commissioner Hunter said that it is a judgment on a values system.
Commissioner Uhl asked Commissioner Hunter about her opinion on this particular house.
Commissioner Hunter:
• Replied that this is an absolutely beautiful home.
• Stated, however, that this is a tough call.
• Pointed out that this house would be fine and will always blend into the area since stone cannot
someday be painted pink. The house would blend into the countryside.
• Stated that she likes flexibility and hates to have things so definite.
Commissioner Uhl questioned whether there is a need to continue so that story pole markers can be
installed.
Commissioner Hunter pointed out that the house on Pierce Road is not yet posted. She pointed out that
more story poles used to be installed in the past. Now they are rarely seen.
Commissioner Nagpal said that story poles should be required more often, particularly in a case like
this one where the height requires a Use Permit.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 11
Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan said that in this situation staff did not feel that story poles were
required since there is the hillside as a backdrop.
Commissioner Hunter pointed out that this house may actually be visible from her own property and
pointed out that she was not noticed about this item while she was for the Sobrato home. Suggested
that staff look into the story pole issue.
Chair Garakani suggested to staff that when they have any doubts about the need for story poles, ask the
Commission for its input.
Commissioner Uhl said that if there is any question, the story poles should be required to let the
neighbors know the impacts.
Commissioner Rodgers said the Planning Commission needs to see them too.
Commissioner Nagpal asked if the majority believes that a decision on this application cannot be
reached without installation of story poles.
Chair Garakani:
• Said that there are reasons for height limits.
• Stated that height and style should go hand in hand.
• Said that he would be more comfortable if Mr. Greg Pinn could readily support a 30 foot height if
proposed for next door to him. If so, he is okay with this.
Commissioner Nagpal:
• Pointed out that the Municipal Code Section was added to give flexibility to look at architectural
design.
• Said that a very high level of effort has been undertaken.
• Stated that an architecturally attractive home has been proposed.
• Reminded that each application is looked at on its own merits on a case by case basis.
• Said that the other French style house evaluated at the last meeting had other issues including
topographic, neighbor and trees.
Commissioner Hunter agreed that flexibility is good but that the case has to be made to support the
extra height.
Commissioner Nagpal said that staff needs to document its supporting resource materials for the file.
Commissioner Schallop:
• Said that based upon the report and comments, he is generally supportive of this proposal.
• Agreed that approving it would not set precedent and can be justified.
• Supported the contention that the Commission must look out for the currently vacant sites that
surround this one.
• Suggested that requiring story poles is not an unreasonable request.
• Stated he is generally supportive.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 12
Chair Garakani pointed out that there are not many windows on the side of the house nearest to Lot 5 to
impact privacy there.
Commissioner Nagpal asked if the screening solves any concerns there.
Chair Garakani replied yes. He said that this is a good design.
Commissioner Rodgers:
• Stated that she is conflicted. She likes the house design but is concerned about exceptions to exceed
the 26 foot height up to 30 feet based upon purity of architectural design.
• Said that the Code requires the Commission to state specific resource materials used to make this
determination in the record.
Associate Planner John Livingstone advised that Assistant Planner Lata Vasudevan spent three
weekends at Berkeley researching this matter. He assured that staff would increase its own library of
resources as it is able.
Commissioner Rodgers:
• Pointed out that the Code requires that the Commission authorize specific source books used.
• Agreed that it is their duty to represent the neighbors who are not yet there.
• Pointed out that this house will establish the pattern for this new neighborhood.
• Stated that the question is how to apply this provision in the Code in the future.
• Said that she can support 30-foot height with a definition of resource material, with a provision that
there be no wood burning appliance in the loggia, that there be no second dwelling unit on the
property and that the Arborist’s tree protection directions are carefully followed.
• Stated that she too does not want to see lots of fencing out of consideration for the deer that inhabit
the area.
Commissioner Hunter pointed out that there is already a gated entrance to the subdivision. She added
that this home might well ensure that all of the other houses in the subdivision are also of French-style
architecture.
Commissioner Nagpal said that she does not expect all of the homes to be of a French style in this cul
de sac.
Commissioner Hunter questioned whether Mediterranean style architecture requires 30 feet in height.
Associate Planner John Livingstone agreed that a variety of architectural styles could be constructed in
this neighborhood.
Chair Garakani asked for a final decision on resource materials.
Commissioner Rodgers said that the decision must be based upon resource materials the Planning
Commission has seen.
Chair Garakani suggested that the resource materials be brought to the Commission and that story poles
be installed.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 13
Commissioner Hunter questioned the need to continue at this stage.
Commissioner Nagpal asked staff to provide the basis for support within the staff report in future.
Chair Garakani advised those in attendance that the reason this item is taking so long this evening is
that this is a test case for a new provision in the Municipal Code. This is the first time the Commission
has worked with this particular Code.
Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the Field Guide was used and that the applicant also
incorporated resources on the plans. Said that making a decision this evening with those resources
provided would be fine. Staff will provide more detailed lists of resource materials in the future.
Commissioner Rodgers said that she is uncomfortable with the materials provided to prove architectural
purity.
Chair Garakani asked Commissioner Rodgers if she was comfortable with the house itself.
Commissioner Rodgers said that the house is fine but that she does not like to approve the 30 foot
height without the required resources.
Commissioner Nagpal asked if there is support in the Field Guide.
Commissioner Uhl said that the French Country architectural style is not called out specifically.
Commissioner Nagpal said that she supports Commissioner Rodgers’ points but that she hates to
penalize Mr. Pinn for a procedural issue. She recommended approval with the information provided.
Commissioner Hunter pointed out that the staff planners have the education and knowledge to guide the
Commission.
Commissioner Nagpal advised that she had recommended the inclusion of other resource materials in
the text of the Municipal Code to make sure that one resource was not solely depended upon.
Commissioner Hunter suggested that this item proceed this evening.
Commissioner Uhl restated that fences should be limited except around pools.
Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the
Planning Commission approved a Design Review and Use Permit request to
construct a new home that has a maximum height of 30 feet on property located at
15960 Cuvilly Way, with the following requirements:
That there be no wood burning fireplace or appliance in the loggia and
That no fencing be included,
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Garakani, Hunter, Nagpal, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi
NOES: Rodgers
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 14
***
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 2
APPLICATION #04-152 (397-28-061) – Appellant MARATHE, Site Location – 13997 Alta Vista
Avenue: Appeal of an Administrative Decision to DENY a Tree Removal permit at 13997 Alta Vista
Avenue to remove a large Coast Live Oak tree. The tree in question is a 35-inch diameter 25-foot tall
mature Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) and has a canopy spread of 40 feet. (JOHN
LIVINGSTONE FOR TOM SULLIVAN)
Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows:
• Advised that the appellant is appealing an Administrative Decision to deny a Tree Removal permit.
• Explained that the original request for a Tree Removal permit was evaluated by a building inspector
and denied. The appeal comes to the Planning Commission.
• Informed that once the appeal was filed, the City sent out its Arborist to evaluate the tree. The City
Arborist found decay and stated that the tree is a danger to public safety and should be removed.
• Said that as a result, staff is supporting the appeal and removal.
• Advised that the applicant has provided a conceptual landscape plan. While there is a pool
depicted, there is no application for a pool at this time.
Chair Garakani asked why this item has come to the Commission if staff now supports removal of this
tree.
Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the appeal process brings the matter to the Commission
for final action.
Chair Garakani sought clarification that the reason the City Arborist was sent to evaluate this tree was
the appeal process.
Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes.
Commissioner Hunter questioned why remove the whole tree.
Commissioner Nagpal asked if cost is the only reason that the City Arborist is not sent out before
denying a Tree Removal permit.
Associate Planner John Livingstone said that building inspectors initially look at Tree Removal requests
and make the decision.
Chair Garakani opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2.
Mr. Vaishali Maranthe, Appellant and Property Owner, 13997 Alta Vista Avenue, Saratoga:
• Said that this tree is a hazard and distributed photographs of the diseased limbs.
Commissioner Hunter advised Mr. Maranthe that swimming pools could interfere with oak trees.
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 15
Mr. Vaishali Maranthe said that he would work with the City when the time comes to consider the
installation of a pool.
Commissioner Hunter pointed out the letter from a neighbor on behalf of retaining the tree. She added
that this particular tree is clearly not one of the more worthy oaks in this condition.
Commissioner Rodgers asked if the tree has three trunks.
Mr. Vaishali Maranthe replied that it has two. There are three trees in the area and screening is not lost.
Commissioner Zutshi asked how this tree would be removed. Would it be pulled from the roots or
would the trunk be cut. Cautioned about potential impacts on the other trees nearby.
Mr. Vaishali Maranthe assured that he would use a licensed contractor for this work.
Ms. Nancy Sanquini:
• Said that she had come this evening to plead for this tree but that if this tree is going to die, it should
be taken out.
• Recounted that the developer of this area was careful to invite surrounding neighbors to the property
to assure that trees would be retained. However trees are increasingly at risk and several have been
lost.
• Pointed out that this is a Riparian corridor and that it is important to keep the tree canopy.
• Said that she was going to support retention tonight but if there is danger, the tree should be
removed.
Commissioner Hunter advised that when she went to visit the site she was not supportive but when she
saw the condition of the tree she agreed it should be removed.
Mr. Vaishali Maranthe said that he loves the trees on his property and seeks to protect them. He does
not want to cut this tree but it is leaning toward his house.
Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that if he is proposing to replace the tree with fruit trees he is
required to plant a 48 inch box tree.
Chair Garakani closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2.
Commissioner Hunter thanked David Wetherhold for his lovely letter.
Commissioner Uhl pointed out that the City is strict with removal requests.
Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Rodgers, the
Planning Commission granted an Appeal and overturned the Administrative
Decision (Application #04-152) to deny a Tree Removal Permit thereby allowing a
35-inch diameter Coast Live Oak tree to be removed from property located at
13997 Alta Vista Avenue, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Garakani, Hunter, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 16
ABSTAIN: None
***
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 3
APPLICATION #04-158 (392-21-006) – AT&T WIRELESS, 13000 Glen Brae Drive Request for
modification of a Use Permit approval to install one two-foot diameter microwave dish at the top of
existing utility lattice tower. Use Permit approval was granted in the fall of 2003 to install six panel
antennas and an equipment enclosure at the location of an existing utility lattice tower near Congress
Springs Park along the railroad tracks at Glen Brea Drive and Chardonnay Court. The panel antennas,
equipment enclosure and landscaping have been installed. (CHRISTY OOSTERHOUS)
Associate Planner Christy Oosterhous presented the staff report as follows:
• Advised that the applicant is seeking a modification to a previously approved Use Permit to allow
one two-foot diameter microwave dish atop an existing utility lattice tower.
• Explained that this original Use Permit was approved in the fall of 2003.
• Recommended that the Planning Commission modify the Use Permit.
Chair Garakani asked that this request is just for the two-foot dish and nothing below.
Associate Planner Christy Oosterhous replied correct.
Chair Garakani opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3.
Mr. Eric Breedlove, AT&T Representative and Applicant:
• Said that this request is to modify the Use Permit to allow a two-foot diameter dish at about the 130-
foot level of an existing PG&E high voltage tower.
• Said that this dish would be located between two existing panel antennas. The supporting cabinet
equipment room is existing and this site was originally approved in the fall of 2003.
Chair Garakani closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3.
Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Zutshi, seconded by Commissioner Uhl, the
Planning Commission approved a modification of a Use Permit (Application #04-
158) to install one two-foot diameter microwave dish at the top of existing utility
lattice tower on property located at 13000 Glen Brae Drive by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Garakani, Hunter, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
***
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 4
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 17
APPLICATION #04-106) – AT&T, 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, CalTrans right-of-way at the
corner of Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and Fruitvale Avenue Request for Modification to an existing Use
Permit approval to add fixtures to an existing wireless antenna system. The project is located in an $-1-
40,000 zoning district. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE)
Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows:
• Advised that the applicant is seeking a modification of a previously approved Use Permit to allow
new equipment to be adding to an existing facility that was originally approved in 1995.
• Said that the installation includes two new cabinets and a new GPS antenna.
• Stated that two antennas would be replaced with two new slightly larger antennas. The old antennas
were 28 by 11 feet and the new are 51 by 10 feet.
• Informed that the proposal meets Use Permit findings and recommended approval.
Commissioner Nagpal sought clarification that the Commission is not looking at exposure related
issues.
Associate Planner John Livingstone replied correct.
Commissioner Uhl pointed out that two neighbors had concerns.
Chair Garakani advised that the Commission cannot discuss health issues and exposure.
Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the applicant can explain these issues.
Chair Garakani opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4.
Mr. Eric Breedlove, the AT&T representative for the previous agenda item spoke on behalf of AT&T
for this site:
• Said that this antenna installation has low emissions and poses no health concerns. Home
microwaves and computers emit more than this installation will.
Commissioner Nagpal asked if Mr. Breedlove could speak to the issue of maintenance issues for this
location.
Mr. Eric Breedlove apologized and said no. He advised that he had not even been aware that this
second AT&T site was on tonight’s agenda but had stayed to represent his company when he saw it
was.
Chair Garakani closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4.
Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the
Planning Commission approved a modification of a Use Permit (Application #04-
106) to add fixtures to an existing wireless antenna system on property located at
19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road (in the CalTrans right-of-way at the corner of
Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and Fruitvale Avenue), with the following requirements:
That the applicant maintain the structure and minimize pathway obstructions
caused by the maintenance vehicle,
by the following roll call vote:
Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2004 Page 18
AYES: Garakani, Hunter, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop, Uhl and Zutshi
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
***
DIRECTOR’S ITEMS
Appeal to Council
Associate Planner John Livingstone advised the Commission that the Planning Commission’s action on
15301 Peach Hill Road has been appealed to Council and would be considered at the August 4th
Council meeting.
Story Poles
Associate Planner John Livingstone reminded that staff was directed not to make story poles an
Ordinance requirement. He pointed out that an engineer must certify story poles and they can cost up to
$10,000 to install. He advised that he would pass along the comments made this evening to Director
Tom Sullivan.
COMMISSION ITEMS
Chair Garakani and Commissioners Rodgers and Uhl advised that they would be absent from the July
28th Commission meeting. Commissioner Hunter added that she would be coming in from New York
late that day. While she plans to make the meeting, any delays in her travel times could cause her to
miss.
Commissioner Hunter advised that she attended the recent Heritage Commission meeting at which two
items of interest were discussed. One was the remodel of the Corinthian building and the second was a
review of an old historic house.
COMMUNICATIONS
Written
City Council Minutes from Regular Meeting on June 16, 2004.
ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING
Upon motion of Commissioner Uhl, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, Chair Garakani adjourned the
meeting at 9:40 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of July 28, 2004, at 7:00 p.m.
MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY:
Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk