Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-24-1957 Planning Commission Minutes SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION TIME: 7:40 P.M., June 24, 1957 PLACE: Flreman's Hall, Oak Street, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular meeting Y ROUTI~ ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Anderson, Bennett, Cameron, Crisp, Pasetta, Webster Absent: Hlggins B. MINUTES Commissioner Webste~ moved that the reading of the minutes be waived and approved as submitted.. Carried unanimously. II NEW BUBI~YSS A. NEll ZONING PETITIONS 1. C-6 - Fred and Maud D. Smith Petition to fezone certain areas at the inter- section of Cox Avenue and Saratoga Avenue. The secretary read a letter from the petitioners' #C-6 Fred & Maud Smith attorney, J. E. Bean, Jr.,.datedJune 19, 1957, explaining the proposed uses for the area when rezoned. Chairman Crisp fixed July 22,1957 at 7:30 P.M- as the date for a public hearing at which time more definite plans for the use of the area to be fezcried are to be presented. B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None III PUBLIC HEARINGS A. P~ZONING 1. #C-4 - Robert H. Taylor The secretary read a letter from the Saratoga -1_ Orchards Association dated June 6,1957, in #C-4 opposition.to the proposed rezoning. Robert H. Taylor He also read s planning analysis from theCounty Planning Commission dated.June 24, 1957. After the reading.of these.two co_mmunications, Chairman Crisp asked for further specifications and specific uses to be made within the proposed PO Zone, Nestor Barrett, planning consultant representing Mr. Taylor, presented Exhibit A, a map showing the uses of the area. He explained that there were three main building groups within the area, the first of which to be an administration building, facing Reid Lane, with 17,600 sq. ft., a small hospital of 35,200 sq. ft. in.two stories, and a medical center, with offices for doctors. and dentists, having 18,000.sq. ft. of space. Petitioner. Taylor then asked for a postponement in the hearings to enable him to_bring more complete plans for the use of the area before the Commission as well as to inform theCommission as to the starting date o~ construction.on the medical center. Commissioner Pssetta questioned the use of the Medical Cente~ building.by as many as 18 doctors and dentists for an area as.small as Saratoga. Petitioner Taylor replied that he expected outside clientel..to be attracted.by the doctors and dentists using the medicai. center. Commissioner Pasetta also questioned_the adequacy of parking space for -2- the patients_o~ that number of doctors and dentists. Petitioner Taylor.made reference to..the amount of land coverage, stating that there was a great deal of lost land in that he only.had 20% coverage of the area by buildings.. However, he'stated he would make his investment profitable. Chairman, Crisp stated at this point that in view of the need for.greater detail,..the hearing would have to be continued without-prejudice to either side at the next meeting of the Planning Commission. Hal Bias, president of Saratoga Orchards Association, reiterated statements made..in his letter of June 6, 1957- Mr. Rhodes,.attorney.for the Saratoga Orchards Association stated the strong opposition of the residents..in. Saratoga Orchards. subdivision to any change from. an R-l.zoning to P0 and stated that suitability for R-1 use and cited the continued growth. in_residentiaL. construction.in the area. He also pointed out t~t. further PO areas could be developed on Big Basin Way within.existing zones providing for that type of use, and pointed out that the proposed West ValleysHospital would pro- vide adequate Hospital facilities for the residents in this area. He cited.the traffic hazard in the school district. especially to children walking to school. He also pointed out that Taylor's pro- posals are subject to further change after an original zoning change, and ~hat he may, in the -3- future, apply for a.commercial zone. Several..other residents of the Saratoga Orchards Association spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning with special.reference to school.children walking to the Foothill School and the increasing traffic hazard.. Also mentioned were the invest- merits_made in_residential property in the area being on the basis.of.future R-1 development, of this type of property. Mrs. H. Doke of Reid Lane, Saratoga, California stated that many of the children using the Foothill School walk to.school_rather than being transported in buses and.that they use Reid Lane, Elvira and Canyon View as a means of getting to school. Use of the area for a hospital and medical center would bring an increase in.traffic especially in emergency vehicles.such as ambulances, police cars, etc. Frank Davis of Reid Lane, stated that his front yard faces.the proposed.PO zoning.and that he had a sizeable investment.in~.property that he felt would be adversely.effected.by a PO zoning. He cited the promise .of the .incorporationcommittee to keep Saratoga rural. Charles_White.of. Canyon View Drive,.Saratoga, etated his agreement.with.the objections,and.his opposition to the.change in zoning.. D. Adams,.Reid Lane, Saratoga, stated his agreement -4- with all objections made, Philip Ward,.of Canyon View Drive, Saratoga, stated his agreement with the objections. There.followed a discussion between the Commissioners and the opponents and proponents of the rezoning with reference.to the depth.of the Taylor property and its use as a buffer between_the two schools. Commissioner Bennett asked what objection there would be to P0 zoning of a strip along Highway #9 between the two school sites. Nell Chase of 3321 Stevens Creek Road, San Joss, California, a realtor and developer stated in his opinion there would be no damaging effects to. Saratoga Orchards as a residential area. Attorney Rhodes disagreed.with Mr. Chase's remarks: (1) A professional zone in a mere portion of the Taylor property would he spot zoning; (2) Danger of access from..residential development on to the highway could be lessened by common access roads; (3) No objection to living across from the high school; (4) PO zoning would bring rapid deteriora- tion of proper~y values in the rssidential area and would lead to commercial..,development of the highway. Chairman Crisp stated at this point that the hearing would be continued without prejudice to either side to July 8, 1957, at which time Taylor was to submit further plans. Commissioner Passtta structed Taylor to tell also at this time the starting date for the medical building. 2. #C-5 - Dorothea Johnston A petition to_change the zoning at Saratoga Inn from R-1 to R-4. Gardner Bullis.of Los Altos,, attorney for the petitioner, stated_the historical._background of the inn; described the.6~acre piece for which rezoning was requested. and asked that the zoning be given in accordance.with .the present use and also.as a buffer.against the commercial zone leading into the residential areas along Saratoga Avenue. c-5 Dorothea Johnston Chairman Crisp inquired. into the future use of the property.and the statement was.made that no change preJudical.to.the name of the Saratoga Inn was contemplated.but there may.be ~uture development of the area,_along.~he same...lines,.by some party other than. the present owners. Peck Merrick,_Herriman.Evenue, Saratoga, spoke as an owner of. adjoining property expressing his intention to come before the Planning Commission in the future.with.a plan for garden court development of the. area adjoining Saratoga Inn property. He referred to a possible commercial zoning in the front part of. the.property and garden courts in the rear for use_by retired people. Mr. Eugene Mancini...of Toyon.Lodge, Saratoga, asked.the Commission. to descnibe the change con- templated and also .to inform him.as to the difference.betwe.~n R-1 and R-4 zoning. (Explained by Chairman.Crisp). Mr. Mancini took this oppor- -6- tunity to go on record in favor of the change of zoning. The .County Planning Commission report, dated June 24, 1957, was read. Commissioner Webster questioned Attorney Bullis as to further. changes contemplated in the use of the property. Mr. Bullis stated that further change is contem- plated and tb~t the Johnston's hope to make the change withy outside help, and to keep a part of the Inn control.in their hands with less of the financial and managerable burdens and that the further development of the Inn property would act as a buffer between residential and commercial zones and at the same time, oarry on the Saratoga Inn traditions;.the Jobnstons.realize that they cannot be proprietors of the Inn indefinitely and that they want to keep future use a credit to Saratoga. Commissioner Bennett stated.that while he had no desire to do anything to hurt the Saratoga Inn or any other existing hotel uses in Saratoga, with reference also to Toyon Lodge, that on the other hand, he did no~ want_to leave any openings for motel development and he wanted to keep up present use.- Attorney Bullis replied that there was no desire on the part of the Johnstons.for a motel and that any future ~edevelopment would.maintain the present use of a central building as.a dining hall. and as a -7- hotel structure. and that control could be main- tained through.the.use permit. Commissioner Cameron stated at this point that in an R-4 zone mo~els may exist.unde~ a Use Permit, but that in an RE zone no motel is permitted, use permit notwithstanding. Commissioner Pasetta moved.that the petition be taken under advisement for further study. Motion carried.unanimously. B. VARIANCE Ak~ USE PERMITS 1. #V~31 - Sieben and Dodge Requested.variance affects Lot No. 148, Woodside Drive, Brookview Subdivision. Required.adjustment.of front and rear set-backs to ~V-31 conform.to a desirablelbuilding lot. There Sieben & Dodge fellowed.an explanation and discussion and petitioner Sleben was present to answer theequestions of the Commissioners. Commissioner Webster moved that.the request for wzrianoe be granted. .Carried unanimously. Public hearings adjourned. IV MLTTEP~ HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT None V COMMITTEE REPORTS A. ARCHITECTUP~AL AND SITE CONTROL None -8- B. SUBDIVISION 1. SDR #34 - Dr. L. E. Case Mr. Montague of Los Gatos and Mr. Rhodes of Saratoga, representing Mr. W. W. Powers, developer of the remainder of the Case property appeared before the Commission at this time. .Mr. Montague presented the Commission with a 5' contour SDR #34 - interval map showing also locations of surrounding Dr. L.E. Case properties as requested by the commission. The question was then. brought. up.as to which of the two tentative maps submitted to theCounty were to be considered at this.meeting. Commissioner Webster stated his feelings_that it would be poor precedent to adopt a blanket approval of either map before a final decision had been made between.the two parties of interest and that. furthermore it would be unfair for the Commission to. side indXrectly with one party or the other and.he felt that a final proposal should be.forthcoming. before the Commission made its final ..decision. Commissioner_Cameron mo~ed.that the record of survey be approved.on the basis of the original conditions on the_map. submitted.. Passed uhanimously. 2. SDR #33 - Fisher and Burke - Record of Survey The matter was discussed in connection with the Moucressy subdivision layout and a letter from SDR #33 the County Health Department, dated June 20, 1957, Fisher and Burke was read by the secretary in connection with this case. Commissioner Webster moved that.the record of -9- survey be approved for the four lots in the Moucressy subdivision subject to all conditions of the tentative map applying.to the three lots facing Saratoga Avenue with the proviso t~?~ erection of build lngs be made only on.Lots.1 and 53 adjacent to Saratoga Avenue. Seconded.by Commissioner Cameron. Adopted unanimously. 3. SD #17 - Moucressy Secretary read County Health Department letter dated.June 20, 1957, and.the Commission discussed location of sewer line and laterals within sub- division and at the insistance of Commissioner SD #17 Bennett, it was decided. to add the condition that Moucressy house lateral. sewer lines extend. to.the property line. This is a feeling of the_entire Commission. No further.action taken. 4. SD #25 - Wandemere Company A report of a conversation between Mr. Pederson of the County.Health Department and Administrative Assistant Milsted concerning sanitary problems in the proposed subdivision was read to the Commission. The subject of future sewers being annexed to District #4 and the probability of that Annexation was discussed. It was decided to~walt until final determination from. Mr. Pederson of the Health Department before submitting tentative map. To be continued on the agenda for July 8. Chairman Crisp asked for.a discussion for the proposed lot size ordinance and appointed Commissioner Webster as a committee of one to confer with City Attorney Faber Johnston, Jr. on the inclusion of a definition of a -10- building site area within the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Webster. movsd for adjournment. Carried.~nani~ously at 10:30 P.M. Present: 30, 2 press