Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-26-2000 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chairwoman Bernald called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Jackman, Kurasch, Page, Patrick, Roupe and Chairwoman Bernald Absent: None Staff: Director Walgren PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES - January 12, 2000 IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONERS BARRY/JACKMAN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 12, 2000, WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS. PASSED 7-0. Page 4, paragraph 5, line 2, “...and hoped that urged the applicant would follow the arborist’s wishes to follow the arborist’s recommendations found in the brochure regarding planting under old trees.” Page 9, paragraph 7, line 8, “... yoga, imbalance...” Page 12, paragraph 14, line 3 “...oppressive a precedent for...” ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Walgren declared that pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 21, 2000. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET Director Walgren make a correction to Item No. 2, page 4, 4th line under Fence, Not Aallowing the fence to exceed...” CONSENT CALENDAR PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 2 JANUARY 26, 2000 1. V-99-012 (517-07-024) − CONGLETON, 14771 Bohlman Road; Request for Variance approval to permit a previously constructed six-foot fence where only a three-foot fence would otherwise be allowed. The site is 1.3 acres and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. (CONTINUED TO 2/9/00 AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT) COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/PAGE MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR. PASSED 7-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. V-99-013 (397-24-087) − PETERSCHMIDT, 18881 Hayfield Court; Request for Variance approval to construct a six-foot fence within the front and exterior side-yard setback, where three feet is the maximum height permitted. Variance approval is also requested to construct an 18-foot tall detached garage/carport, where 15 feet is the maximum permitted, and to allow the carport to exceed the 10 foot height limit allowed for unenclosed accessory structures. The site is the historic Hayfield Estate located on a 134,014 (net) square foot parcel in an R-1-20,000 zoning district. Director Walgren presented the staff report, noting the application is a two-part variance request. He said the applicant’s plans and letter describe in detail the site improvements for the historic Hayfield Estates. The request is for a variance to construct a six-foot fence within the front and exterior side-yard setback, where three feet is the maximum permitted and a variance to construct an 18-foot tall detached garage/carport where 15 feet is the maximum permitted. He explained that the north boundary would be considered the rear property line, the west boundary would be considered the exterior side and the southern boundary would be considered the front of the property. He said the property owners were proposing to restore the property to its original configuration with the front of the property being the northern property line. The proposed fence around the perimeter was open iron bar, six feet high, with seven-foot columns. The garage variance was necessary to achieve the same roof pitch to match the main residence. Staff found there were special circumstances applicable to the property: 1) the configuration of the historic house on the lot, and 2) the configuration of the property. with three frontages. Staff recommends approval of both variances requests. He reviewed the findings required to grant a variance and said a three-foot fence in the rear would be uncommon, and the project would not be a grant of special privilege. Commissioner Patrick asked about the proposed six-foot fencing. Director Walgren said the six-foot fence would surround the entire perimeter. Commissioner Roupe stated when the subdivision was made, one portion was designated as front and the applicant wants to change front designation. He asked whether the Planning Commission had the latitude to call the front of the property the north and say six feet does not PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 3 JANUARY 26, 2000 need to be there. Director Walgren said the configuration of the yard orientation was not a critical issue of the subdivision, and the objective was to retain the historic building as part of the subdivision. He said the variance could be conditioned that the fence be a certain height. Chairwoman Bernald opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. Gary Kohlsaat, architect, P.O. Box 1500, Los Gatos, said much thought has gone into the planning stage of the project, and the property is very unique to the Bay Area. He said the lot has an odd frontage, and siting of the house is different. He said the house originally had a five- car garage with stable, designed by Julia Morgan and was probably 22-24 feet high. The proposal included a two car garage with two carports and was designed in keeping with the house and guest house. There were questions about the front and rear of the property. The lot’s front and rear were defined by the subdivider. When they tried to switch the front and rear property, the house would end up in the setback and would be nonconforming. He said a six-foot fence was needed close to the rear yard to achieve necessary space for a rear yard. He said Pinn Bros. asked that the fence be moved back five feet into the property easement. The plans do not reflect that but they are agreeable to the change. Commissioner Barry said there was no green line on the drawing indicating a fence around the pool. She asked if the fence continued on the property line. Mr. Kohlsaat said a fence is not proposed but the Planning staff indicated a condition would be added to fence the pool. He said the owners of the property also own Lot 8 but do not have plans to put anything on Lot 8 at the present time. He added that the status of Lot 7 was unclear. Commissioner Barry asked if the status of Lots 7 & 8 were clear, what would be the eventual intention with respect to a six-foot fence. Mr. Kohlsaat said the intent would be to fence all three properties as one property. Chairwoman Bernald asked that in light of the new information, would a decision tonight be premature. Director Walgren said that would be a decision of the Planning Commission, but from staff’s and the Building Code’s perspective, the condition in the resolution that would approve the variance requires that the two interior property lines be fenced to protect the pool. Commissioner Kurasch asked if any thought was given to a lower fence on the front yard. Mr. Kohlsaat said that was considered. He said a six-foot high fence was allowed on one side but not on the other side without a variance. He said aesthetically he could do a three-foot high solid rock wall. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 4 JANUARY 26, 2000 Chuck Bommarito, Pinn Bros., said Pinn Bros. supported the variance for the six-foot fence and the variance for the 18-foot garage/carport. The historic Hayfield house was the cornerstone for the development. The existence of the house and the design by the famous architect set standards for the subdivision They worked with staff and neighbors in an effort to produce a subdivision of homes that creates a setting that embellishes the historic Hayfield house. The Peterschmidts are dedicated to restoring and preserving the houses’ grandeur. The request of an 18-foot high garage emulates the original garage/stable. The six-foot fence would be open and historic in design and would be compatible with the new Hayfield Estates. Commissioner Barry asked if Pinn Bros. has a problem if there was an altered design along the entry road. Mr. Bommarito said they would want to review the design because it is the entrance into the subdivision. Commissioner Jackman said on Lot 7, it appears that the only the frontage is a small portion of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Bommarito said that is correct. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/PAGE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING (AT 8:20 P.M.). Commissioner Roupe commended the Peterschmidts and their architect for attempting to restore the property and supported the location of the guest house and garage. He favored a lower, stone fence on the north side because it would capture the estate look, but he could accept a six-foot fence all the way around. Director Walgren said the Planning Commission could approve the variance with the condition that the north property fence not be more than three feet in height. Commissioner Roupe said he liked the idea of a rock wall fence but added that proposal was not before the Planning Commission. He recalled a comment made yesterday about a resident arborist, but he did not see that as a condition. Director Walgren said that was not a condition in the resolution but it was proposed by the applicant, and the condition could be added. Commissioner Kurasch commended the applicants and said the house is incredible and a tribute to Julia Morgan. She was concerned with the amount of frontage and was not convinced about the entire variance for the front of the property. She questioned whether the applicant should come back with a complete application for all sides. She said the garage was architecturally very appropriate. Commissioner Page supported the garage and additions on the side of the driveway. Ideally he PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 5 JANUARY 26, 2000 would like to see a smaller fence in front, but had no objections to the six-foot wrought iron fence. Commissioner Jackman asked if Lot 8 is acquired, would it be landscaped. She said the garage is appropriate for the style of the house. She would like to see a three-foot fence between in the front yard between the two driveways but would approve a six-foot fence, if necessary. Commissioner Patrick said the garage meets architectural standards of the house. She said she was originally concerned about the trees being taken out, but that was no longer a concern. She does not like wrought iron fences. She said the findings could be made because of the special circumstances of the lot. She thought it was a waste of everyone’s time to try to put a three-foot fence on one of the sides that arguably was a front but not actually the front. She said the hillside people should have the same benefits, and that the same standards need to be provided for everyone. She is not opposed in general but as a practical matter sees an open wrought iron fence that will be blocked by hedges. She said she would vote in favor of the variance with the conditions that are being discussed such as arborist, set back and transplanting of one tree. Commissioner Barry agreed with Commissioner Roupe’s comments and said her reason for considering a three-foot wall is to get away from a claustrophobic feeling that a tall fence would have on either side of the entry road. She said the finding for the six-foot fence could be made, but she did not think a three-foot fence would impact privacy or security. She encouraged the applicant to consider lowering the fence. She hoped that, with other fencing requests, the Planning Commission gives as much attention to the applicant’s particulars as was done in this case. Chairwoman Bernald supported the garage and the six-foot wrought iron fence. She said the openness and the landscaping will be a tremendous addition to the historic home. She asked the Commissioners if the discussion should be opened up to discuss lower fences or higher fences. Commissioner Roupe recommending reopening the public hearing to allow the applicants and opportunity to respond. Commissioner Kurasch agreed and said she is not comfortable with the unknowns about the fencing. She asked if it would be appropriate for the item to come back for a design review. Commissioner Page agreed to reopen the public hearing for further discussion. Commissioner Jackman said she would like to see the fencing plan that included Lots 8 and 9. She was not comfortable with the fencing between Lot 7 and Lots 8 and 9. She also wanted the public hearing reopened. Commissioner Patrick had no objection to reopening the public hearing but saw no reason to defer any action. Commissioner Barry said she would be happy to reopen the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 6 JANUARY 26, 2000 COMMISSIONERS PAGE/PATRICK MOVED TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:40 P.M. David Peterschmidt, 15670 Peach Hill Road, Saratoga, said he and his wife debated on the property because they would have to commit to a two to two and one-half year development project. They were fortunate to find the Julia Morgan’s original blueprints of the house. The spirit of what they were trying to do was to get back to the essence of what Julia Morgan wanted for the property. With regard to the fencing, they tried to take the house, landscape, and formal gardens to the period of Julia Morgan. The fence will remain open in keeping with English tradition. He added that there is no conclusion on the adjacent lots. He said the amount of architectural work going into the property is greater in the grounds than in the physical buildings. Michael Tebb, landscape designer, 35 Barbee Lane, Alamo, said combining a stone fence with wrought iron fence would look cobbled. COMMISSIONERS PAGE/ROUPE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING (AT 8:46 P.M.). Commissioner Roupe supported the six-foot fence all around the property. Commissioner Page said he could make the findings that the six-foot wrought iron fence did not constitute a special privilege, but by not having it would deprive the owner of the same rights as other property owners have. Commissioner Jackman liked the wrought iron fence. Commissioner Barry supported the six-foot fence. Commissioner Patrick said she did not change her opinion. Commissioner Jackman said she was a fan of wrought iron fences and supported the application. Commissioner Kurasch said the application is not complete because the fencing is not on all sides. She said part of the fence falls in the front set back. Director Walgren said the variance would allow the fence to extend to the southeast corner, and a condition in the resolution requires that fencing. He said the condition could be clarified to state that the property would be the wrought iron fence per the detail. Commissioner Barry asked Commissioner Kurasch if she would be agreeable if the formal language was included. Commissioner Kurasch said she probably would then agree. She added that she thought a lower fence would aesthetically look better. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 7 JANUARY 26, 2000 Director Walgren said the condition is not included in the packet but would be incorporated in the resolution. Chairwoman Bernald said she would support the variance with the suggested conditions, including the inclusion of the resident arborist, the transplant of the Coast oak, and the increased setback of additional five feet from the north property line. COMMISSIONERS PAGE/ROUPE MOVED TO APPROVE V-99-013 WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE ADDITIONAL 5-FOOT SETBACK ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THE RESIDENT ARBORIST TO BE PRESENT, THE TRANSPLANT OF THE YOUNG OAK, AND INCLUDING THE WORDS ABOUT THE SOUTHEAST CONNECTORS FROM THE SOUTHEAST POINT OF THE CUL-DE-SAC UP THROUGH LOTS 7 & 8 TO HAYFIELD COURT. PASSED 7-0. 3. DR-99-054 (397-24-082) – PINN BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION, INC., 20034 Spaich Court; Request for Design Review approval for the construction of a new 5,321 square foot, two-story residence. The site is 55,442 square feet and is located within an R-1-20,000 zoning district. Commissioner Kurasch recused herself because of a contractual agreement with an adjacent property owner. Director Walgren said the applicant requested Design Review approval to construct a new 5,321 square foot, two-story residence. He said the home is consistent with conditions of the subdivision approval and is in conformance with the City’s Zoning Code. Staff recommends approval of the Design Review application. Commissioner Roupe said the structure looks compatible with others that were approved. Chairwoman Bernald opened the public hearing at 8:56 p.m. Chuck Bommarito, representing Pinn Bros. Construction, said the arborist is working with him on taking care of a bug called Phytophthora that attacked oaks on Lot 7, adjacent to Lot 8. Chairwoman Bernald asked about guaranteeing trail path maintenance. Chuck said there were no plans; it would be up to the clients who purchased the home. Director Walgren said the back of the property is contained in a riparian open space easement that would preclude any type of yard improvements. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/PAGE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING (9:02 P.M.). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 8 JANUARY 26, 2000 All the Commissioners supported the project. COMMISSIONERS PAGE/JACKMAN MOVED TO APPROVE DR-99-054. APPROVED 6-0 (COMMISSIONER KURASCH RECUSED). 4. DR-99-050 (517-22-104) − METZ, 15102 Montalvo Road; Request for Design Review approval for the addition of 1,475 square feet and remodeling of an existing 4,397 square foot, single-story residence. The new roof will extend to a height of 26 feet. The site is 41,638 square feet and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. Director Walgren said the applicant requested Design Review approval for the addition of 1,475 square feet to an existing 4,397 square foot, single-story residence. He said the application meets all zoning standards in terms of allowable floor area, required set backs, permitted lot coverage and building height. The addition and reconstruction of the home resulted in the roof height exceeding the 18-foot high plane that the City used for administrative versus public hearing. The maximum height of the residence will be 26 feet. He said staff heard no opposition or concern from adjoining neighbors. Staff recommends approval of the application. Chairwoman Bernald opened the public hearing at 9:04 p.m. Dan Winklebleck, designer, 80 Gillman Avenue, Campbell, said he worked with the property owner to create a design that is compatible with others in the neighborhood. He agreed with all the recommendations in the staff report. Commissioner Kurasch asked about the plans for protecting trees, noting that the arborist report referenced one of the large oak trees close to the property which was heavily watered.. Mr. Winklebleck said the plan did not address re-landscaping that would be done in conjunction with the addition to the house. He added that any concerns regarding the trees would be addressed when the landscaping design was done. Commissioner Page said a condition in the ordinance about landscaping is included. Commissioner Roupe asked if there is a project arborist assigned to look after the trees. He suggested making that a condition. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/PAGE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING (9:09 P.M.) Commissioner Page supported the project and said it is a great redesign. Chairwoman Bernald said she had a question she forgot to ask. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/ROUPE MOVED TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 9 JANUARY 26, 2000 9:10 P.M. Chairwoman Bernald said the plan shows two existing wood burning fireplaces. She noted that last year, the City adopted an ordinance regarding fireplaces. Pointing out that the remodel was extensive, she asked if the applicant would consider making one of the existing wood burning fireplaces a gas log fireplace. Mr. Winklebleck said he could replace one of the fireplaces with a gas log fireplace and that it would be a simple condition to meet. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/PAGE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING (9:12 PM.). Commissioner Jackman said she supported the project, noting there were many restrictions on traffic and access to protect the trees. She wants to be sure that is strictly observed because the trees are fragile. Commissioner Barry said the additional roof height is supported by the general neighborhood and heights of other houses. She would like the condition of the gas log fireplace included and suggested adding a condition that applicant come back to Director for final approval on the copper gutters, following the Planning Commission policy decision on copper roofs and gutters. Commissioner Roupe said there is a concern that copper can leach into the soil and groundwater. He noted that the Commission would be asking experts to provide more information in order for the Commission to come to a uniform decision on how to treat copper. Director Walgren said this would set an awkward precedent. He said that projects are not normally conditioned on a policy or ordinance that might change in the future. He heard from water quality experts that they perhaps would lend their support to the City in regulating entirely copper roofs, but they were not as concerned with copper rain gutters. He suggested waiting until a policy prohibiting or regulating copper is in place. COMMISSIONERS PAGE/JACKMAN MOVED TO APPROVE DR-99-050 WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT A PROJECT ARBORIST BE ENGAGED FOR THE PROJECT AND THAT ONE OF THE WOOD BURNING FIREPLACES BE CONVERTED TO GAS BURNING FIREPLACE. APPROVED 7-0. DIRECTOR ITEMS - March 10, 2000 Planning Commission Retreat topics Director Walgren said the annual retreat is scheduled for March 10, 2000. He suggested it would be useful to have a presentation from the City Geologist, discussion on copper materials, an annual project tour, an item for General Discussion, and a report from the City Arborist. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 10 JANUARY 26, 2000 Commissioner Patrick said she would be interested discussion on environmental pollution in construction, noting issues such as fireplaces and copper. Commissioner Jackman mentioned concern about with construction debris and recycling of building materials. Director Walgren agreed the suggested topics were important but might have to be considered in a study session. Commissioner Barry recommended having a facilitator for part of the retreat who would deal with working relationships on the Planning Commission. Commissioner Kurasch agreed and suggested considering the Planning Commission’s role, the expectations of the Planning Commissioners and the community. She said it was important to define the Planning Commission’s role and find available resources. Director Walgren said that team building was a traditional aspect of a retreat and would become a full topic. He said he could look into a facilitator for team building and goals and policies which would take about half a day and in the afternoon discuss the water quality issue and the geologist. COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Jackman said she noticed that the three-inch drains under the sidewalk in front of Longs and Jamba Juice had a lot of water running into the parking lot. COMMUNICATIONS Chairwoman Bernald recommended Planning Commissioners try to attend the Planning Institute Conference to be held in Monterey, March 1-3, 2000. WRITTEN - City Council minutes for regular meeting of January 5, 2000 - Noted - Notices for regular Planning Commission meeting of February 9, 2000 - Noted - League of California Cities’ brochure offering a Planning Institute conference to be held March 1-3, 2000 - Noted ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 11 JANUARY 26, 2000 The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. to Wednesday, February 9, 2000, Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Ruth Swanson Minutes Clerk MINUTES AMENDED AND APPROVED BY: James Walgren Secretary to the Planning Commission