Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-10-1999 Planning Commission MinutesCITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1999 Civic Center, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA Regular Meeting ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chairman Pierce called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. Roll Call: Present: Commissioners Bernald, Martlage, Murakami, Page, Patrick and Chairman Pierce Absent: Commissioner Kaplan Staff: Director Walgren Pledge of Allegiance Minutes - February 24, 1999 On a motion by Commissioners Patrick/Murakami, the Commission approved the February 24, 1999 minutes with the following amendments: - Page 3, last paragraph, replace the word flute with flue. - Page 7, paragraph 4, second sentence amended to read: He said felt that he inquired about the roof pitch because the Commission may wish to increase the vaulted ceiling effect interior. the applicant may be trying to increase the ceiling space with the use of a vaulted ceiling. The motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioners Bernald abstaining and Commissioner Kaplan absent. Oral Communication No comments were offered. Report on Posting Agenda Director Walgren declared that pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 5, 1999. Technical Corrections to the Packet Director Walgren indicted that there were no technical corrections to the packet to report. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. DR-98-009 (389-28-007 - SAGHEZCHI, 13762 Serra Oaks Court; Request for Design Review approval to convert an existing 462 sq. ft. garage to living area and add a new garage and a 453 sq. ft. second story to an existing 2,990 sq. ft. residence. The property is 14,450 sq. ft. and is located in an R-1-12,500 zoning district. (CONTINUED TO 3/24/99 AT APPLICANT’S REQUEST). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/MARTLAGE MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 1 BY MINUTE ACTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0 WITH COMMISSIONER KAPLAN PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 2 - ABSENT. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. DR-98-035 (503-14-028) - ZHANG/LI, 13612 Vaquero Court; Request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing 2,574 sq. ft. two-story residence and a 1,020 sq. ft. accessory structure and construct a new 5,417 sq. ft. two-story residence. The site is 34,465 sq. ft. and is located within a Hillside Residential zoning district. (CONTINUED FROM 2/24/99). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Director Walgren presented the staff report and informed the Commission that at its last meeting, the applicant was directed to pursue design and material changes to the building and to an incorporate rustic or earth tone colors and material scheme. The Commission also directed that consideration be given to relocating the garage to the side of the residence where the current garage exists to reduce its prominence and reduce the amount of driveway, paving and grading. He informed the Commission that the applicant and their architect decided to redesign the home, noting that the design is much more compact on the property and that it is not as wide and rectangular in design. He said that the driveway area has been significantly reduced. The materials have been modified to use earth tone brick and painted wood siding and wood shake composition style roofing material. Staff finds the project to be compatible with the natural setting of the area as well as the existing homes on Vaquero Court. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the project subject to the conditions contained in the resolution. Commissioner Page inquired as to the amount of cut and fill to be required? Director Walgren responded that the quantities of the cut and fill have slightly increased from the original proposal and that a total of 987 cubic yards of combined cut and fill on the site will be required. Chairman Pierce opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Stephen Clark, project architect, stated that he took all of the Commission’s comments under advisement and decided that instead of trying to manipulate and make minor changes to the existing residence, he redesigned the home. He stated that he reduced approximately 600 square feet of non-countable area and that the residence has been reduced by approximately 700 square feet in total. He said that the whole structure has been compacted and that his clients like the design. By changing materials and looking at the design anew, it has some dynamics that are very nice and in keeping with the area. He said that after the submittal of the redesign, he may want to manipulate the entry stair slightly. Commissioner Page asked if two chimney/smoke stacks are proposed? Mr. Clark said that one chimney is a false smoke stack, one being used for the gas fire flue and the other one is the true chimney. He said that he has not made a decision as to the roofing material to be used. It will be either a one hour cedar shake, a cement fiber asbestos, or a new concrete tile that has a rake to it that gives it the appearance of a shake. He indicated that the roofing material will be a brown tone. Commissioner Martlage said it was her recollection that when the application was previously considered, the play area was to be eliminated; however, the play area is still shown on the plan. Mr. Clark said that with the previous plan, he was abutting up against the structure. It was not something that he wanted to maintain because the new structure was so close to the old structure. He said that the play structure is one that the applicant would like to maintain because it provides shelter and has value. However, in the future, when the applicant prepares their master plan for landscaping, it would be removed. COMMISSIONERS BERNALD/MARTLAGE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:45 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 3 - Commissioner Murakami said that this was a difficult lot to work with and stated that he was satisfied with the redesign as it is an improvement to the original design. He felt that the redesign addressed all of the Commission’s concerns relating the driveway and the garage. He stated that he could support the approval of the application. Commissioner Bernald concurred with the comments expressed by Commissioner Murakami. She stated that she liked several of the elements being utilized. She was impressed with the short turn around and the quality of work incorporated in the redesign. She stated that she could support the application this evening. Commissioner Page stated that he liked the redesign. However, he expressed concern with the play structure. He asked if the structure meets the height and setback requirements? Director Walgren said that it would take a careful site measuring to determine if the play structure meets the city’s current open accessory structure ordinance requirement. He noted that it is an existing structure and that it would be considered a legal, non conforming structure, even if it was slightly taller. Commissioner Page indicated that the existing play structure was his only concern as it does not seem to blend with the home. He stated that he liked the redesign and the use of the brick work and the colors. He would recommend that it be taken down but said that he would support its retention should the other commissioners feel that it is appropriate to retain the structure. Commissioner Martlage felt that the redesign of the home was good. However, she expressed concern with an aesthetic problem with the play structure. Mr. Clark indicated that the applicant was willing to eliminate the play structure. Commissioner Patrick said that architect did a very nice job in providing good architecture in the redesign. Chairman Pierce stated that he also liked the design. He said that it was refreshing to see the use of brick. He stated that he could also support the project. COMMISSIONERS MARTLAGE/PAGE MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. DR-98-035 WITH THE ELIMINATION OF THE PLAY STRUCTURE. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0 WITH COMMISSIONER KAPLAN ABSENT. 3. V-98-022 (517-14-038) - THUSH, 15395 Kittridge Road; Request for Variance approval of retaining walls exceeding 5 ft. in height. Retaining walls have already been constructed to a maximum height of 8 ft. The site is 44,431 sq. ft. and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. (CONTINUED FROM 2/24/99) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Director Walgren presented the staff report and informed the Commission that upon inspection, the retaining walls that were originally shown to be masonry vertical walls of no more than five feet in height, clearly exceeded the height limit. He noted that the retaining walls, in some areas, were up to eight feet in height and necessitate approval of a variance before the home can be finaled and completed. He informed the Commission that the applicants have been cooperative with staff. It was evaluated whether the walls could be reduced in height through steeper grading and other amendments to the property which could not be done due to slope and soils stability reasons. He said that staff attempted to look at this project as though it was a proposal to build new retaining walls and not prejudice this by the fact that it is an after the fact permit. It was his belief that the project could have been designed to be within the five-foot limit if several parallel walls were incorporated into the design. He said that having a few walls exceeding the five- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 4 - foot height limit would provide a greater aesthetic benefit. He felt that special circumstances are applicable to the property such as the terrain, the steep slope, the configuration of the property coming down to a very steep swale, and the difficulty of accessing the site from Kittridge Road. Based on these circumstances, staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions contained in the resolution, including the requirements that the applicant address unrelated drainage issues that have been raised by neighbors as well as the city’s engineering staff. Commissioner Martlage thanked staff for its clarification, including the colored diagrams. Chairman Pierce opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Sandy Thush, applicant, stated that she could not address the technical issues relating to the retaining walls. She informed the Commission that she and her husband cooperated with the city and that she assumed that the house was being built according to all regulations. She said that she did not realize that the retaining walls were not acceptable. She indicated that the walls needed to be built as designed because this would be the only way that she would have access to the house due to the contour of the land. She felt that the house is an asset to the neighborhood and to Saratoga. As far as the grading issue that was raised, she said that this has been addressed as the drain and the road have been cleared. Commissioner Martlage said that at the site visit, the Commission noticed that interlocking cinder blocks were being used and that it looked like the cinder blocks were facing both directions. She asked if this was being corrected or whether this would be the final product? Ms. Thush said that what was seen is the completed job. She said that she intends to install planting and landscaping to soften the area. Commissioner Bernald said that it appears that the retaining wall has been designed with a flat surface coming down the stairs in addition to the rounded concrete block. She asked if Ms. Thush was going to plant landscaping in the retaining wall along the right side of the stairs? Ms. Thush responded that the area described by Commissioner Bernald is part of a retaining wall and not a planter area. Commissioner Bernald said that the retaining wall does not appear to be a correct application of the retaining wall product (an unfinished job). Norm Stout, Stout Built Homes, informed the Commission that this particular block has only one finished face with the finished side being to the area that the property owners would access up the walkway. Commissioner Martlage asked if a planter box could be built to give the wall a better looking face in both directions? If so, it would allow the property owner to fill and plant landscaping as the current finish gives it a “Lego” appearance. Mr. Stout stated that he would agree to incorporate groundcover and planting to screen the wall. He said that it was unfortunate that this product is made with only one finished face. Commissioner Martlage said that the stones are nice and very sculptural. To intersperse flat cinder block looking stones would be optimistic to think that planting would eliminate the problem. She felt that her concern could be mitigated with a planter box with two sides facing out. Commissioner Page said that there is a letter dated 12-19-98 from GeoForensics that talks about some PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 5 - recommendations, specifically a suggestion that based on the use of concrete which is reinforced, it is recommended that the tilted sections of the wall be re-stacked at the top and that the spacing of the steel reinforcement within three feet of the back of the retaining wall be doubled. He asked if this recommendation has been completed? Mr. Stout responded that it was his belief that all of GeoForensics comments were addressed and that he was not aware of anything that was done contrary to their recommendation. Dan Dyckman, GeoForensics, said that the eight-foot section of the retaining wall was located on the first section on the down hill side of the driveway. He stated that the eight-foot section of the retaining wall was necessitated by the fact that it was moved down the hill to save an oak tree and to avoid placing a loose fill in a tight area on top of oak tree roots. Commissioner Murakami asked if Mr. Dyckman’s firm is willing to state that the load bearing wall will hold up during an earthquake and hold the dirt back? Mr. Dyckman indicated that the retaining walls were a lot better in sustaining earthquakes than the reinforced cast concrete masonry material for the simple reason that they are flexible. He said that the cost to repair these blocks is substantially reduced versus the more conventional retaining walls. COMMISSIONERS BERNALD/MURAKAMI MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:02 P.M. Commissioner Bernald stated that she could support the application as recommended by staff. She recommended that the property owner continue to talk to her neighbors because the site may continue to have problems. She stated that she has no problem with the height of the wall given the constraints of the site. However, she felt that there was a way of making the wall look better. She did not know why the wall could not be brought all the way around so that the back side would not be seen. She felt that maybe once they are filled with dirt, it would solve the problem. Commissioner Page stated his support of the application as presented. Commissioner Martlage concurred with the comments expressed by Commissioners Bernald and Page. She stated that the application is not the problem. However, she would insist on the aesthetics if she was the applicant. Commissioner Patrick concurred with the comments expressed by her fellow commissioners. Commissioner Murakami said that his concern was that of the load bearing capability of the wall as they appear to be stacked bricks. He said that he has seen walls similar to this fall down. However, if the geotechnical engineer and the contractor are willing to back up their construction and their calculations, he could support the request. Chairman Pierce said that he figured out that the eight-foot wall was required due to its proximity to the oak tree. He said that it was unfortunate that so many walls and so much reinforcing of the slope occurred. He agreed that this is a beautiful home that adds to the character of Saratoga and the neighborhood. He said that he could support the project as it appears to have been designed correctly. COMMISSIONERS BERNALD/MARTLAGE MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. V-98-022. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0 WITH COMMISSIONER KAPLAN ABSENT. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 6 - 4. UP-99-003 (517-09-015) - FIRST CITY MORTGAGE, 14440 Big Basin Way, #9; Request for Use Permit approval to allow a professional office located at street level and fronting on Big Basin Way. The site is located within a CH-1 (Commercial Historic) zoning district). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Director Walgren presented the staff report and recommended approval of the use permit subject to the conditions contained in the resolution. Chairman Pierce opened the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Sharon Butler, First City Mortgage, stated that she was unaware that there was going to be an issue when she picked out the building space. She said that she dealt with an uncooperative management company who did not allow her business to use a real estate person who probably would have alerted her to some of the problems involved with use permits. She said that at the time that she was bringing this business on line, she had two other offices that she was bringing on line. Due to these factors, things just slipped through the cracks. COMMISSIONER PATRICK/BERNALD MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:10 P.M. Commissioner Martlage stated that she was disappointed that things fell through the cracks because timing seemed to be a big issue with securing a business license and installing a business sign. She was hopeful that things like this would not persist. She said that she was glad to see businesses in the Village. With the parking lot located up front, she did not have the issue with the frontage on Big Basin that exists according to the ordinance. Therefore, she could support the request. Commissioner Page stated that he was also disappointed that things were not acted upon. He felt that the planning department made the right efforts in notifying First City Mortgage, noting that things still slipped through the cracks. He said that taking an additional four or five months to tack onto things is more than slipping through the cracks. He felt that it was a stretch to call this use a retail establishment. However, based on its location behind a parking lot, he could support the use permit. He did not know if this use was the right use for the other existing retail establishments that are located within the shopping center, noting that there was no one present to state that it was not an acceptable use. Commissioner Patrick said that she was initially concerned with this use adjacent to retail businesses. As there has been no comment addressing this concern, she assumed that the surrounding businesses are not concerned with this use. She also agreed that this is more than an issue of falling through the cracks. Because of the use’s location, she would concur with Commissioners Martlage and Page but stated that she was unhappy about the situation. Commissioner Bernald stated that she looked at this request as though it was a new application. She felt that the city needs to encourage as much retail use as it can in the downtown area. She felt that it would be more conducive to retail if the property manager rented to retail users and made an effort to reach out to retail businesses. She said that there are three offices that could have been used for retail and that she would have encouraged the property manager to do so if this was a new application. She felt that this was clearly an office use and that she did not feel that under section 1519.050 that this supports the zoning ordinance. Therefore, she would not be supporting the use. She felt that the city was losing another opportunity for retail space. She stated that the city keeps giving up retail space for apartments, condominiums, and office space. She said that this was a problem that the Commission could not fix. She expressed concern with fixing downtown Saratoga. Therefore, she could not support the application this evening. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 7 - Commissioner Murakami agreed with Commissioner Bernald’s comments. He said that it bothered him that it took so long to apply for this use permit. He commended staff for their detective work. Had staff not found this business, the business would not have applied for the required city approvals. He agreed with Commissioner Bernald that the area should remain retail as it is a retail strip center, noting that this is an office use. He said that he would vote “no” on this application. Chairman Pierce said that he is also opposed to the office use as the code is in place to encourage retail businesses and that the city wants individuals to go into the Village and purchase items. This results in street and foot traffic. He felt that this application contradicts what the ordinance is specifically written for, noting that this center is in the heart of the Village. He did not blame First City Mortgage for delaying their application for a business license. He felt that it was the management company’s responsibility to tell users of city requirements, bearing the liability should the mortgage company not be able to secure a use permit. He said that the city wants to encourage individuals to come into downtown Saratoga and to use the facilities in the downtown area. He did not believe that this use is one that would encourage this. Therefore, he would vote against the use permit. Commissioner Patrick inquired as to the difference between this use and a real estate office fronting the street? Chairman Pierce felt that a real estate office fronting the street could be a problem too. He said that the ordinance is clear about encouraging retail establishments such as the gourmet market that opened up recently. He said that he would like to see more of these type of uses. Commissioner Martlage stated that everyone agrees that retail is desired in the Village. However, the fact remains that the area is separated somewhat by the parking lot. She noted that there are other empty establishments in the center and that the vacancies are not healthy for the Village. Commissioner Bernald said that city has experienced parking problems near retail shops, especially around the holidays. She felt that this was an ideal location where you have parking built in for retail on the spot. She did not believe that the property manager was doing his/her job in renting the space as retail. The city has stated for a long period of time that it wants to see a vibrant downtown Saratoga. She questioned whether the city should give up the area to office space just because the property manager failed to do his/her job in seeking new retail businesses. She did not believe that just because two empty spaces exist, that these spaces should be filled with office uses. She felt that it has been mandated by the ordinance that the Village has retail in this area to maintain a vibrant downtown. She noted that the shopping center has been vibrant for some time, except in color. Chairman Pierce said that the city does not know why the spaces are not rented. The city does not know whether or not the rents being charged are exorbitant or whether retail is not relocating to the center because the property manager is not encouraging retail. He felt that the Planning Commission’s decision is to rule on the request based on what the ordinance states. Commissioner Page stated that he was on the fence on this issue. He said that when he looks at the shopping center, he felt that this was the Argonaut Shopping Center of the Village. He said that he was not sure which was worse, to have a non-retail establishment or to have an empty store. He felt that an empty store gives a negative connotation. This is what places him on the fence on this issue. Commissioner Bernald asked about the precedent that is being established by giving into office space? PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 8 - Commissioner Page asked if there was anything the city can do to figure out why the spaces are not being leased to retail users? He said that it was obvious that the property manager is renting out the spaces to office use and that he/she is not communicating the right information to renters. Director Walgren stated that based on the result of what the city has accomplished with the three businesses and ultimately getting in touch with the property manager, he did not believe that the city would have this problem in the near future. He said that staff’s recommendation was strongly based on this particular location and the fact that the space was located behind the parking lot and not abutting the sidewalk of Big Basin Way. He said that staff informs potential users in prime retail locations that their chances of getting a conditional use permit for office on prime frontage that has direct sidewalk access would be nil. He informed the Commission that the latest news that staff has heard is that the city will see retail activity in the former Ferrari space. He did not believe that a precedent would be set as a conditional use permit is site specific. Commissioner Bernald noted that the Commission is split on its support of the use permit and felt that the Commission was given up its decision making ability to the city council unless a commissioner decides to change its vote. Commissioner Martlage noted that the three commissioners who have indicated their support of the use permit are not giving up the ordinance. She asked what would be the result should there be a split vote? Director Walgren indicated that a split vote is technically a denial of the use permit. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/MARTLAGE MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. UP-99-003. THE MOTION FAILED 3-3 AS FOLLOWS: AYES: MARTLAGE, PAGE, PATRICK; NOES: BERNALD, MURAKAMI, PIERCE; ABSENT: KAPLAN. Director Walgren clarified that the application would automatically be continued to the next meeting for a revote unless the applicant chooses to accept a 3-3 tie vote as a denial and appeal this action to the City Council. DIRECTOR ITEMS - SD-98-003 & SD-98-003.1 - PICETTI, 13650 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road; Request for approval of fencing and landscape improvement plan for Saratoga-Sunyvale Road frontage. Director Walgren presented the staff report. He said that the original subdivision map included schematic details of how the exterior Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road improvements would be built, including a good neighbor wood fence that would be continuous along the entire subdivision to ensure that future homeowners do not install piecemeal fences that would be visible from Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Also, included was the planting of oak trees with sidewalks meandering between the oak tree. He said that there was a requirement at time of approval that a plan had to be submitted that included details of groundcover, irrigation details, including installation and maintenance. This plan has been submitted to staff in order to attain final map approval. He said that a maintenance agreement would be recorded against each of the four lots to assign responsibility for the maintenance of the landscape perimeter. Commissioner Page said that as he drives down Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and other roads, he does not see lawns but that he sees a lot of fences. He asked if there was a conscious decision to allow the installation of fences versus lawns in order to allow individuals to enjoy their backyards more? He felt that this PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 9 - subdivision was nicely done with the inclusion of a sidewalk and fence, noting that there was one area of grass in a mass of fences. Chairman Pierce clarified that Commissioner Page’s concern is that the city is seeing a wall of fences built instead of having some homes front onto roads. Director Walgren said that it has been a conscious decision to have access to homes internal to residential subdivision and not necessarily have homes fronting onto Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Commissioner Murakami stated that it was nice to see that native trees and plants being incorporated. - Response to Redwood Middle School Initial Study. Director Walgren said that similar to the Saratoga Elementary School initial study, staff is reviewing this initial study document. The Public Safety Commission, City Council, and Planning Commission are all being given the opportunity to review the document. Staff will be composing a response letter for the mayor’s signature at the end of the public review period which was originally slated to end March 18, 1999 following the City Council’s meeting. He informed the Commission that staff met with the school district’s superintendent and their architects this morning. Staff discussed preliminarily what it anticipated the city’s responses were going to be. He said that the school district requested this meeting in order to receive early input from the city versus the approach that they took on the elementary school which was to wait for the formal response only to find out that there were deficiencies in the initial study. Based on the meeting held this morning, the school district will be preparing an addendum to the traffic analysis section as neither project included a comprehensive circulation and car queuing analysis that is prepared by a traffic engineer, noting that these are clearly the most significant land use issues associated with the two projects, particularly at the Middle School with cars backing up onto Fruitvale. The school district has agreed to postpone their action and gave the city a further extension to review the initial study. The school district will be releasing a specific traffic analysis as an addendum to the initial study which will be presented primarily to the Public Safety Commission and the City Council in late March, early April. He recommended that the Commission endorse this effort or provide any additional comments that have not been raised. Commissioner Page said that his comments relate to circulation issues as they seem limited when you consider that 50% more students will be accommodated. He noted that the school district added something in the circulation element that states that the school district and the city will be working together to create a suggested route to school. He asked if the school district was making funds available to the city for this? Director Walgren noted that the same statement was made in the elementary school initial study. He said that the study was deferring mitigation that the school district cannot confirm will or will not be done. He said that this is not acceptable according to the state environmental quality laws. He said that the city was not consulted in the first place. He said that staff will be pursuing something like this with the update of the circulation element this year, noting that it will be approximately six months before a draft document will be ready for public hearing. - Topics for 3/23/99 City Council/Planning Commission/Heritage Preservation Commission joint meeting. Commissioner Patrick recommended that there be discussion regarding designating heritage houses in the City of Saratoga. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 10 - Director Walgren said that the Heritage Preservation Commission will present an overview of their function, their philosophy and their goals and objectives. He recommended that the Planning Commission also provide a brief overview of its philosophy. Commissioners Murakami and Patrick recommended that the new Council Members address their philosophy to the Commission. Commissioner Patrick further stated that the Commission is concerned with the coordination and the gating of Saratoga, including trees. Director Walgren recommended that the Commission present an overview similar to what was presented to the Good Government Group by Commissioner Bernald, Chairman Pierce and staff. He recommended that an overview be presented of what the Commission perceives are its primary responsibilities and its philosophy toward land use. He also recommended that there be an update on the progress of the circulation element, including the distribution of an executive General Plan summary document in draft form. Commissioner Bernald felt that it would also be helpful to hear the Council’s philosophy on various issues. Commissioner Patrick said that it would be helpful for the Commission to address its concerns when appeals are made to the City Council. She said that she would be interested in hearing the Council’s feeling about signage, including neon signage which has always troubled the Commission. Commissioner Murakami recommended that the City Council provide the Commission their thoughts on land use of the Village Plan. Director Walgren informed the Commission that the Loh appeal was unanimously denied by the City Council last week. He said that he received correspondence from the Good Government Group dated February 15, 1999. He informed the Commission that their observer was concerned about how they perceived a resident was treated. The reference was on the Peck family who removed an oak tree from their backyard to accommodate a detached garage structure. The tree removal was considered by the Planning Commission through the conditional use permit process. He distributed to the Commission his response to the Good Government Group. He said that he has not heard back from the Group so he is assuming that they have accepted and are satisfied with staff’s response. Commissioner Page asked if the Peck family planted a tree anywhere? Director Walgren stated that staff has a specimen, boxed native oak tree located in the maintenance yard. Staff is looking for a place to plant it in a public area other than city hall. COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Page asked if corrected minutes are forwarded to the City Council as he did not note changes to the January 27, 1999 meeting? Director Walgren indicated that he would investigate the process. Commissioner Page informed staff that a resident asked him to look into the home located at 13654 Ronnie Way. It was noted that two prefab portions of a home or a classroom are parked in the driveway. He requested that staff look into this issue. Commissioner Bernald asked if the Blue Rock Shoot would be placed on a future Planning Commission Agenda? Director Walgren said that the use permit for Blue Rock Shoot would be tentatively scheduled PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1999 PAGE - 11 - for the Commission’s second meeting in April. COMMUNICATIONS Written - City Council Minutes dated February 9 and February 17, 1999 - Notices for Planning Commission meeting of March 24, 1999 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman Pierce adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. to Wednesday, March 24, 1999, Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED IRMA TORREZ, Minutes Clerk