The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-08-1965 Planning Commission Minutes (2) SIIMMARY OF .MINUTES CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION TIME: Monday, February 8, 1965, 7:30 P. Mo PLACE: City Council Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION The meeting was called to order by Chairman Norton at 7:30 P. M. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cowley, Crisp, Kellum, McFall, Norton, O'Rorke and Wright. Absent: None B. MINUTES Commissioner Kellum moved, seconded by Commissioner O'Rorke, that the read- ing of the minutes of january 25, 1965 be waived and that the minutes be approved as submitted; motion carled unanimously. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS The Chairman declared public hearings open for the evening at 7:32 P. M. A. C-76 - Robert Taylor Constructiqn Company~ Prospect ~oad - Change of Zoning from "R-I-40,000" (Single Family Residential) to "R-I-40,000 P-C" (Single Family Residential 'Planned Community) - Continued from January 25. 1965 The Secretary advised that the applicant had submitted a letter re- questing an extension of 60 days in connection with the tentative map for SD-529 (subdivision application submitted in connection with the subject application for change of zoning) on the basis that a revised tentative map would be submitted prior to the next regular meeting. Mr. Seagrave, applicant~s r'epresentative, was present and confirmed that the new map would be submitted within a week to ten days. Commissioner Crisp moved, Seconded by Commissioner Kellum that the Commission grant the 60 day extension proposed by ~. Seagrave; motion carried unanimously. Chairman Norton then direct'ed both C-76 and SD-529 continued until the meeting on February 23,. 1965. B. C-78 - Mrs. Chincy Orlando. Prospect Avenue - Change of Zoning from ;'R-I-10,000" (Single Family Residential) to "C-S" (Commercial Service) - Continued from December 14, 1964 See C-79. C. C-79 - Edwin Cox et al, Prospect A~enue - Change cf Zoning from "R-l-10,000" (Single Family Residential)l to "C-N" (Neighborhood Ccmmercial) - Continued from December 14, 1964 The Secretary read a letter requesting the withdrawal of both C-78 and C-79. Commissioner Crisp'moved, seconded by Commissioner Kellum, that the request for withdrawal of C-78, Mrs. Chincy Orlando, and C-79, Edwin Cox et al, be granted; motion carried unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes - Fepruary 8. 1965 - Continued II. D. UP-65 - Sarato~o Lutheran Church (Amer~can)_~J~a_t~!]a Avenue - Use Permit for Church - Continued from January 25, 1965 The Secretary briefly reviewed this application and read a letter submitted by Jane Piper of Squirrel Hollow Lane opposing the grant~ ing of the subject Use Permit. Ed Kolstad was present toirepresent the Church but sta~ed that he had no further comment at this time. The Secretary read a Staff Repcrt recommending approval of UP-65 subject to certain conditions. Comnissioner Crisp advised that the S~division Conmxittee concurred with the recommendation set forth in the Staff Report. Conm~issioner Crisp moved,.seconded by Commissioner Kellum, that the public hearing on UP-65 be closed; motion carried unanimously and the hearing was closed at 7:42 P. M. It was moved by Commissioner McFall and seconded by Commissioner Crisp that the Staff Report of January 25, 1965 relative to UP-65 be adopted and that UP-65 'be approved as outlined in said report; moticn carried unanimously. E. V-254 - Thorn Lo b~yes, Sullivan Way - Variance to allow 7' Side Yard in lieu of required 12' Side Yard - Continued from January 25, 1965 At the request of the Variance Conmittee, Chairman Norton deferred discussion of V-254 until after intermission. Fo UP-73 - Mrs. Theodore Samford, FoOthill Lane - Use Permit to allow maximum of three Lodgers or Boarders The public hearing on UP-73 was opened at 7:45 P. M. The Secretary advised that Notices of Hearing had been mailed and there were no written communications on file. LEROY GARRETT of Foothill .Lane was present to represent Fa~s. Samford and advised 1) Mrs. SamfOrd is presently caring for her invalid father and felt that she could easily care for another elderly per- son 2) this was her only source of income 3) the house is more than adequate and 4) while perhaps this would benefit only ~s. Samford, he felt it would certainly not be detrimental to anyone else in the neighborhood.. CLARENCE ROESSL of Foothill Lane stated 1) because of the condition of Foothill Lane he would be opposed to additional traffic but 2) he had no objection to=an older person who would not be driving. After further discussion, .Chairman Norton directed UP-73 continued until the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for study and a 'report at that time. G. Ordinance NS-3.9 - Proposed Amendment to Ordinance NS-3 relating to the Definition of "Site Area" The public hearing on proposed Ordinance NS-3.9 ~,~a~ opened at 7:51 P.M. The Secretary advised that a Notice of Hearing had been published and there were no written communications on file. He then read the proposed ordinance. After a brief discussion Conunissioner O'Rorke moved, seconded by Commis- sioner McFall, that the hearing on proposed Ordinance NS-3.9 be closed; motion carried unanimously and the hearing was closed at 7:56 P. M. Commissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Ccmmissioner McFall, that proposed Ordinance NS-3.9 be approved and transmitted to the City Council with the recommendation that it be enacted; motion carried unanimously. The Chairman declared public hearings closed for the evening at 7:58 P. M. with the exception of V-254 which was deferred until later in the evening. Planning Corrmission Minutes - February 8. 1965 - Continued III. S1~DIVISICMS AND BUILDING SITES A. SD-529 - Robert Ta~lor Construction Company~ Prospect Road - Subdivision - 180 Lots - Continued from January 25, 1965 See discussion relative to C-76. B. SDR-534 -Donald R. McCormack, Dou%las L~ne - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from December 14, 1964 The Secretary advised that the applicant had requested that this application be continued for a period of six (6) weeks. Commissioner Crisp recommended that this request be granted since proposed Ordinance NS-3.9 (under discussion earlier in the evening) would have a direct effect on the subject application. On the basis of the foregoing, Chairman Norton directed SDR-534 continued until the meeting on ~rch 22, 1965. C. SDR-539 - William G. Clark, Horseshoe Drive - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from January 25, 1965 Commissioner Crisp recommended that this matter be continued until the next regular meeting since the applicant had been unable to obtain the desired information from P. G. & E~ Chairman Norton so directed. D. SDR-544~ Charles Wynn. Pike Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Commissioner Crisp explained the condition relative to the require- ment for improvement of Pike Road. The Commission concurred that it was a policy requirement in accord with the recent policy state- ment issued by the Commission. The Secretary advised that while the applicant was not present, the requirement for the improvement of Pike Road had been fully explained to him earlier. Commissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner McFall, that the Building Site Committee Report of February 8, 1965 relative to SDR-544 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed January 25, 1965) be approved subject to the conditions out- lined in the Building Site Committee Report; motion carried unani- mously. E. SDR-545- Mrs. R. B. Wilds, Ambric Knolls Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot After reviewing the proposed conditions of approval, }~s. Wilds questioned Condition II, C, on the basis of financial hardship, since theirs is the last undeveloped lot on Ambric Knolls Road and there would be no one to share in the cost of improving the street. During the discussion that followed, the Commission concurred that San Jose Water Works and Bell-Scott Developers had a certain amount of responsibility toward Ambric Knolls Road. The Building Site Committee directed that the following note be added to the Building Site Committee Report of February 8, 1965 relative to SDR-545: "It is recommended that the developers of the adjacent subdivision (Bell-Scott Developers) and San Jose Water Works, as well as the other residents on Ambric Knolls Road, participate in the cost of improving Ambric Knolls Road." It was moved by Commissioner Crisp and seconded by Commissioner Kellum, that the Building Site Committee Report of February 8, 1965 relative to SDR-545, as modified, be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit:"A", filed January 28, 1965) be approved subject to the conditigns outlined in said report; motion carried unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes - February 8, 1965 - Continucd RECESS AND RECONVENE Chairman Norton reopened public hearings at 8:46 P. M. for the purpose of discussing V-254. ' II. E. V-254 - T_b~rn L. Mzyes?. Su.~.~iyan' Way - Variance to allow 7' Side Yard in lieu of required 12~ Side Yard - Continued from January 25, 1965 = Mr. Mayes was present to discuss this application further with the Commission. Commissioner O~Rorke advised that the Variance Committee felt that aI1 members of the Commission should make an on-site inspection since action on V-254 could set a precedent for future applications in the area. tie requested, therefore, that 1) the subject appli- cation be continued until the meeting on February 23, 1965 and 2) each of the Commissioners try to visit the site prior to that time. Chairman Norton so directed. The Chairman extended a welcome to Mrs. Owen and Messrs. Wilberding and Lull of the Good Government Group, and expressed appreciation for the coffee served by Mrs. Swan at recess. IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-168 - Bro~ & Kauffmann~.Inc.~' Miller Avenue - Final Design Review - Subdivision Homes - Tracts 3145 and 3146 - Phase I, 29 Lots - Continued from January 25, 1965 Commissicner Cowley advised 1) the Committee had reviewed the subject plans 2) it was felt that they were equal to if not better than previous plans 3) the applicant had requested that the require- ment for 25% curved driveways be waived 4) four curved driveways were shown on the plans in lieu of the required seven and 5) while there was no doubt' that curved driveways presented a problem on cul-de-sacs, there was a question in his mind as to whether such concessions should be granted. During the discussion that followed, the Commission concurred that it would be acceptable to make exceptions for lots frontinS on cul-de-sac bulbs. The Commission further concurred, however, that perhaps the applicant could provide at least five curved driveways in this first phase (29 'lots). On the basis of the foregoing, Chairman Norton directed A-168 continued until the meeting on February 23, 1965 to allow adequate time for further consultation with the applicant. B. A-169 - SaratoRa Avenue Baptist Church, Prospect Avenue - Design Review - Identification After discussion Commissioner Cowlay moved, seconded by Commis- sioner Cowlay moved, seconded by Commissioner O'Rorke, that A-169, sign for Saratoga Avenue Baptist Church, be granted design approval as shown on Exhibit "A" subject to the intensity of illumination not exceeding 430 milliampcres; motion carried unanimously. V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT Commissioner Kellum gave a brief report on action taken at the City Council meeting on February 3, 1965, with emphasis on items of particular interest to the Commission. -4- PlanninR Conmission Minu~s - February 8~ 1965 - Continued VI. NEW BUSINESS SD-537 - Fay Jones? .Pierce Road - Request for Reconsideration After reading the report of the Subdivision Committee relative to the request for reconsideration of conditions established in connection with approval of the tentative mad for the subject subdivision, the conditions were discussed individually as follows: CONDITION 5 Mr. Jones expressed satisfaction with the modified condition set forth in the Subdivision Committee Report of February 8, 1965. CONDITIONS 14 Commissioner Crisp advised that the Subdivision Conm]ittee felt that 'Section 2.4-2(b), Part Two, of Ordinance NS-5 left no choice except to reconnnend that there be no change in this condition. Fir. Jones agreed that a hazard exists but explained 1) their contract excludes liability 2) they had contacted the Flood Control District and found that it is responsible for only a small portion 3) the hazard is contained within the right-of-way used by the quarry and a few residents 4) they do not plan to use the right-of-way and it does not affect the subdivision 5) their subdivision does not increase the hazard 6) they are willing to dedicate the subject property (approx- imately 2-1/2 acres to the City and 7) they would be willing to fence the subject washout. The question was raised as to whether filling the washout might encourage the re-opening of.the quarry. After further discussion Chairman Norton suggested that the applicant and the Committee investigate the possibility of working out a satis- factory arrangement by fencing the washout. It was agreed that the applicant would take the initiative and submit a proposal to the Committee. CONDITION 15 Mr. Jones expressed satisfaction with the modified condition as recommended in the Subdivision Committee Report of February 8, 1965. CONDITION 22 (Standard En~ineerin~ Conditions) Commissioner Crisp advised that this was a standard condition for subdivisions and that the circumstances in connection with the pro- posed development of this property are no different than those of others who have complied with this requirement. He further advised that the Committee did not favor the streamlined type of underground installation, nor street lights in general. b~. Revise, representing the applicant, explained 1) they would like to have street lights and would need poles for them 2) the area was heavily wooded so the wires would not be objectionable and 3) it would cost approximately $10,000 more to place the primary wiring underground. After further discussion Chairman Norton suggested that further consideration be given this request for street lighting. The Chairman then directed this matter continued until the next regular meeting and referred the Subdivision Comnitttee Report back to the Committee for further consideration. -5- Plannln~ Commission Minutes -.F~uary 8, 1965 - Continued VII. OLD BUSINESS A. SDR-535 - Dr. ArthUr Anderson, Sperry .Lane - Request for Reconsideration - Continued from January 25, 1965 The Secretary suggested that this matter be continued until the next regular meeting since the cost estimate had not been submitted by the applicant. The Chairman so directed. B. SD-527 - Maxmar InVestment Corporation, Walnut Avenue - City Council Request for Recommendation relative to Flood Control Require- ment for Dedication and Improvement ~ Continued from January 25, 1965 Commissioner Crisp suggested that Mr. Resner meet with the Subdivision Committee to discuss this matter. Mr. Resner expressed willingness to meet with the Committee and the meeting was set for Monday, February 15, 1965. Chairman Norton then directed this matter continued until'the next regular meeting. VIII. COM2~UNICATIONS A. WRITTEN SDR-470 - Ben Gullo, SaraToga- Los Gatos Road - Request for an Extension The Secretary read a letter requesting an extension of one (1) year in connection with SDR-470. After discussion Commissioner Kellum moved, seconded by Commissioner McFall, that an extension of one (1) year from the present date of expiration be granted in connection with SDR-470, Ben Gullo; motion carried unanimously. B. ORAL IX. ADJOURNME~ Chairman Norton declared the meeting adjourned at 10:39 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Stanley M. Walker, S~Cretary SMW/v/jml CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COFtIISSION AGENDA TIME: Monday, February 8, 1965, 7:30 P.:M. PLACE: City CounCil Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting .. I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL B. MINUTES II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ~-76 - Robert Taylor Construction Compa~ Prospect Road - Change of Zoning from '~-1-40,000" (Single Family Residential) to "R-I-40,000 P-C" (Single Family Residential Planned Community) - Continued from January 25, 1965 B. .C-.78 - Mrs. Chincy Orlando~ ProspeCt.Avenue - Change of Zoning from '~-1-10,000" (Single Family Residential) to "C-S" (Commercial Service) - Continued from December 14, 1964 C. C-79 - Edwin Cox et al~...Prospect Avenue - Change of Zoning from "R-l-10,000" (Single Family ReSidential) to "C-N" (NeighbOrhood Commercial) - Continued from December 14, 1964 D. UP-6__..j5 - Saratoga. Lutheran Church (American~,~,· Saratoga Avenue - Use Permit for Church ~ Continued from January 25, 1965 .V-254 - Thorn L. Mayes~ ,Sullivan. We% - Variance to allow 7' Side Yard in lieu of required 12' Side Yard - Continued from January 25. 1965 F. ..UJ?-73 - Mrs. Theodore Samford, Foothill Lane - Use Permit to allow maximum of three Lodgers or Boarders G. Ordinance NS-3.9 - Proposed Amendment to Ordinance NS-3 ~elating to the definition of "Site Area" III. SUBDIVISIONS AND BUILDING SITES A. SD-529 - Robert Taylor Construction Company~ Prospect Road.- Subdivision - 180 Lots'- Continued from January 25, 1965 B. SDR-534 - Donald R. McCormack~ Douglas.Lane - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from December 14. 1964 C. SDR-539 - William G. Clark, Horseshoe Drive - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from. January 25, 1965 D. SDR-544 - Charles Wynn, Pike Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot E. SDR-545 - Mrs. R. B. Wilds, Ambric Knolls Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-168 - Brown& Kauffmann, Inc., Miller Avenue - Final Design Review - Subdivision Homes - Tracts 3145 and 3146 - Phase I, 29 Lots - Continued from January 25, 1965 B. A-169 - Saratoga Avenue Baptist Church. Prospect Avenue - Design Review - Identification Sign Planning Commiss.ion.ARend.~ - Feb.r. uary ~, 19'6~- Continued V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. OLD BUSINESS A. SDR-535 - Dr. AirhUt Anderson~ Sperry Lane - Request for Reconsideration - Continued from January 25, 1965 B. SD-527 - Maxmar Investment Corporation, Walnut Avenue - City Council Request for Recommendation relative to Flood Control Requirement for Dedication and Improvement - Continued from January 25, 1965 VIII. CO~4UNICATIONS A. WRITTEN B. ORAL IX. ADJOURNMENT