Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-08-1969 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SAP~ATOGA PIANNING CO!.~MISS!ON MINUTES TIME: Monday, 8 September 1969, 7:30;.P.M. PLACE: City Council Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070 TYPE: Regular Meeting ****~****~******** I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION The meeting ~,ms called to order' by Chairman Norton. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Crisp, Lively, Metcalf, Norton, and Smith. Absent: Commissioners Bacon and Kraus. B. MINUTES Com~aissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, that the reading of the minutes of the 25 August 1969 meeting be ~ived and they be approved as distributed to the Commission subject to the following changes: page 2.. .under II. A.. .paragraph 4.. .line 1'. . .change "Mr. Milt Christensen" to read "~.' William Christensen"; page 7.. .under II. LF.. .paragraph 2.. .line 2.. .change the word "DOt" tO "no"; page 8.. .under II. Io . .between paragraph 2 and 3 add the following: "The Secretary read the Staff Report dated 25 August 196.9 reco~mnending that the variance (V-336) be granted."; page 11.. .under VII. A.. .paragraph 1.. .line 2.. .delete the word "the"~and in the same paragraph. . .lines 4 and 5 enclose the following in parenthesis: '~a point made by Mr. Rankin at ~he last meeting)'/; page 12.. .under VII. C.. .paragraph 2. . ..line 2.. .change the word "to" to "for"rand in line 3. . .change the word "the" to "any"; and in paragraph 5. . .same page. .line 1. . .delete the word "not"; page 12. . .'under VII. C.. .paragraph 6. . .line 2. . .delete "to the City Council that the applicant be denied any further" and instead insert "denial of future" and in paragraph 10. . .same page. . . change "Co~issioner" to "Conmission"; page 12.. .under VII. C.. .paragraph 12.. .line 2.. .delete "to the City Council" and add the following to line 5. . .of the same paragraph "and forward this recommendation to the City Council"; page 12.. .under VII. C.. .~aragraph 13.. . line 5.. . delete "or grant" and instead insert '~to d ~ ; en ~" page 13.. .under VIII.. .para. graph 3.. .line 1.. .between the words "made" and "that" insert "'by Commissioner Bacon" and in paragraph 4. . .line 5. . .add :~the following sentence "It was agreed that the agenda and minutes of the Council and the Park Commission need not be ~iled to Planning Co~issioners." page 13.. .Under IX...paragraph 2.. .line 3. . .change the word "stated" to "state"; motion carried unanimously. -1~'' T' Planning Con~nission Minutes - 8 September 1969 - Continued II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PARKS AND RECREATION - Element of the General Plan for 1969 - Continued from 25 August 1969 Chairman Norton re-opened the hearing at 7:40 P.M. The Assistant Planner stated that a memo had. been received from T. M. Norton and addressed to the General P.lan Committee. Chairman Norton stated that he drafted the subject memo (as a resident of Saratoga) since he ~ranted the contents to be put before the 'Planning Commission. in a formal manner. ; The Assistant Planner read the the author feels. strongly that'. the park plan submitted by ~. Beck and the Park and Recreation Co.mmission is defective insofar as it disregards a site twice reconnnended in the General Plan (both originally in 1960 and.as revised in 1968).. The subject area being located in the "gore" between Saratoga and Fruitvale Avenues and at a major road intersecti.on at the approximate geographical center of the City. Chairman Norton stated that MrZ. Wade (Chairman of the Park and Recreation Commission) was preZsent and asked him if he had any further details to add to what'. has already been presented. Mr. Wade answered that he ~as present on a consulting basis and would be happy to explain any area of the park proposal and/or answer any questions. Commissioner Lively (Chairman of.the General Plan Committee) stated that he would like to explain (in order to keep the Planning Commission informed) what is developing at the General Plan Committee meetings: 1) the General Plan Committee'. met with Mr. Wade to discuss the differences in the plan proposal presented by ~;r. Beck and the one outlined in the General Plan 2) the location and size of the Central Park as well as some acreage owned by individuals (proposed as park sites) and the objections raised by these people were discussed at great length and 3) there will be several more;meetings held prior to submittal of a General Plan Com~ittee Report Or reconmaendation. He further stated that the Park Proposal submitted by.~. Beck and dated 25 Jd!y 1969 was discussed at the General Plan Committee meeting held on 6 September 1969 and as a result of that meeting the Sub-Co~anittee is considering the following: ...... AREA 1 -'Parcel (a),'triangular piece, be designated on the General Plan as a park site. AREA 2 - The General Plan Committee tentatively agrees"that parcel~ (a) and (b) together withl a part of Lot 37 should be designated as park sites; however, .some access must be acquired. AREA 3 - The Committee feels this will be one of the most important parks in the City and all agree it is an ideal site for a park. AREA 4 - The residents of this area are- in opposition to any parks proposed in Area 4 with the exception of the Gardiner Park. The other areas might present some problems relative to policing of the areas. The old nursery property (located in this area) might be considered as a park possibility. The Park Consultant undoubtedly looked at the proposed sites with an eye for preservation of the natural beauty, but, perhaps some other area could' be designed to have a natural appearance. AREA 5 - The General Plan Committee recommends that no park be proposed for this area. AREA '6 - The Committee concurs with the parcel designated for a park site in this area. PlanninZ~ Commission Minutes - 8 September ;1969 - Continued II. A. Parks and Recreation - Continued. · AREA 7 - This area includes the proposed Central Park (parcel a) and the Committee feels 'that the proposed park area should include all of the area ifrom Herriman to Douglas and from the .shown property line all the ~.my to Fruitvale Avenue. The Committee feels that:. parcel (b) should not be as wide as shown on the proposed. park plan. The question of whether Saratoga really needed a'. Central Park ~s raised; therefore, the Committee does not make a firm recommendation relative to Area 7 at this time. AREA 8 - The Committee con.siders both parcel (a) and (b) of Area 8 as proper park sites. AREA 9 - The current thinking relative to parcels (a) and (b) is that both of these areas should be sho~.rn on the General Plan for park sites especially sihce a portion of this property has already been acquired. Commissioner Lively stated that the Con~nittee still has a good deal more work to do and are scheduled to meet with some property owners from Area 4. He, also, stated that the Committee will put their report together after a complete review of the park proposal and it will include provisions rela- tive to the General Plan. Commissioner Lively, in answer to'an inquiry from Mr. James Naugle (Vice-President of the Prides Crossing Homeo~.mer's Association), stated that the meetings scheduled by the General Plan Committee will not be public hearings, but that the Committee is interested in getting the feeling of residents; therefor. e, an appointment should be made with the Secretary. ., Mr. Naugle stated that at the last Park and Recreation meeting, prior to submittal of the proposed park plan, the subject of investigating the possibility of locating parks .closer to the population centers of the City ~.mS. diScussed_and the_ pe0. ple in._his' area would like to see 'this 'realized. Mr. Wade explained that the work of the Park and Recreation Commission has been to forward their objectives to the Planning Commission some of which are agreeable to both CommiSsions and some are not. He further stated that 1) the park proposal 'involves a plan for immediate acquisition of .property that will be submittedl to the City Council for consideration and approval of the necessary financidg for the purchase of the park properties and 2) the Park and Recreation Commission would like the thoughts of the Planning Commission on these matters. Chairman Norton stated that his own feelings are that the Planning Commission is not the proper body to make an~ recommendations relative to the financial possibilites of the proposed parkS, but are rather a body concerned with ~.~at is in accordance with the General :.Plan. He further stated that the Planning Commission is not interested in ta.king over the park program. Commissioner Lively, in answer to .an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated 'that he would appreciate the opportunity to have this matter discussed again at the next meeting on 22 September 1969 prior to preparation of the continued to the next regular mee~ and referred same to 'the General Plan Committee for further study. ~3- Plannin~ Con~nission Minutes - 8 September 1969 - Continued IIo '~'B. UP-170 - Saratoga Tennis Club, Komina Avenue - Request for Use Permit to Allow Expansion of Tennis ClUb - Continued from 25 August 1969 The hearing relative to UP-170 ~s re-opened at 7:58 P.M. The AsSistant Planner stated t~at the applicant met with the Subdivision Committee and presented a new plan and during the d~iscussion it was mutually decided that the matter should be continued to allow time for further study of the new plan. · Chairman Norton closed a n · 0 P.M., directed UP-170 continued to the next regular meeting and referredi same to the Subdivision Committee for further study. C. UP-171 - C & I Development Company, Kirkbrook Drive ~ Request for Use Permit to Allow a Model Home Sales Office - Continued from 25 August 1969 Chairman Norton re-opened the hearingat 8:01 P.M. The Assistant Planner stated that nothing new had been adde~ to the file. Mr.' Rod 'Os~erlund, present to 'represe~t'the""a~piiCant', s~a~'ed'he h~d"n~ Commissioner Smith stated that a Staff Report relative to UP-171 had been prepared and that a visit to the site had been made by the Subdivision Committee. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 recommending that the subject Use Permit to allow a model home sales office be granted subject to conditions (a) through (g) as stated in said report. Chairman Norton suggested that it might be a worthwile idea to set up a standard clause to include all the conditions listed in the aforementioned Staff Report since most of them have come about by experience. No one in the audience wished to comment relative to this matter. At 8:04 P.M. Commissioner Smith movedi seconded by Commissioner Lively, to close the hearing in connection with UP-171i motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by'Commissioner Crisp, that the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 be adppted__~nd the subject Use Permit (UP-171) to allow a model home sales office b~anted ~s shown on Exhibit "A" and subject to the conditions stated in said repor't';' motion carried unanimously. D. UP-172 - Utah Homes, Inc., DeHavilland Drive - Request for Use Permit to Allow a Model Home Sales Office The publiC.hearing relative to UP-172.was opened at 8:05 P.M. The Assistant Planner stated the Notices of Hearing'had been mailed and then briefly reviewed this application. Commissioner Smith stated that a Staff Report had been written relative to this matter and that the Subdivision Committee did make an on~site inspection of the subject property. He further stated that this request is quite similar to a situation that was before the Planning Commission just a few weeks ago where another sales office (handling sales for the applicant) is available nearby. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 recomraending that the subject Use Permit (UP-172) ~e denied on the basis the findings required by Ordinance NS-3 cannot be made. The Assistant Planner, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that Direct Realty (existing sales office)'handled the sale of the sixteen lots built and purchased by the applicant in the Eichler tract and the lots subdivided in the Arroyo tract. -4- Plannin$ Co..?a~ission Minutes - 8 September 1969 - Continued IIo Do UP-172 - Continued Chairman Norton stated that he already made his feelings kno~a in matters of this nature and he assumed that the Planning Commission has established the policy of not granting additional sales offices when one is already in existence. ~. Walter Muir, present to represent the applicant, stated that 1) the sale of the lots in the subject subdivision will not be handled by Direct Realty and 2) these are different homes in another area that will be sold to another type of.clientele. Chairman Norton asked ~r. Muir if he was suggesting that the location of the Direct Realty near Azule ~s 'not relevent to the present subdivision. Mr. Muir stated that as Of 20 September 1969 Utah Homes will be severing their relationship with Direct Rqalty. Commissioner Smith, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that the Subdivision Comnittee should study this matter further since they were not aware of the fact that ehe applicant would no longer be using the services of Direct Realty. Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 8:10 P.M., directed the matter continued to the next ;regular meeting and referred UP-172 to the Subdivision Committee for further study. E. UP-173 - David Franklin Development Corporation, Sevilla I~ne - Request for Use Permit to Allow a Model Home Sales Office The hearing relative to UP-173 ~.~s opened at 8:11 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notices of Hearing were mailed and then briefly reviewed this application. ~ir. Sam Viviano, general n,~nager ..for the applicant, ~ms present to answer any questions. Mr. Carl Inserra, Jr. of 20607 Russell Lane stated that prior to approving the applicants request he should 'be required to put a 6-foot fence around the pool located .on one of the model home lots since the pool (as it presently exists) is quite a hazard for children. I,~. Viviano stated that this pool x.;ill most definitely be fenced and the' onl~ reason it is not already fenced is that they are trying to hold off until all the landscaping is completed. ~,Ir. Inserra stated that if it starts raining the landscaping will not be put in for quite some time and th'e pool could be left open all ~,Tinter. }~. Viviano stated that if the landscaping is not in before the rains start the fence will be constructed prior to completion of the landscaping. The Assistant Planner read the St~ff Report dated 8 September 1969 reconune~d- ing that the subject Use Permit b.e granted. Mr. Viviano stated that line 2.. .paragraph 1. . .should be amended to read Lots 37 and 38 rather than Lots 47 and 48. Com2nissioner Lively reco:mmended that condition (g) be added to the subject Staff Report as follows: (g) Pool! shall be fencec',.. -5-' plannin~%~Com~Jnission Minutes - 8 September 1969 - Continued' IIo E. UP-173 - Continued Commissioner Crisp stated that the' City of Saratoga does not have an ordinance requiring pools to be fenced, but that a condition could added to the report especially in 'view of the fact that this pool is located on an unoccupied lot. At 8:19 PoM. Conn-nissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, to close the public hearing relative to UP-173; motion carried unani- mous ly. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 be a~opted, as amended, and the subject Use Permit (UP-173) be granted as sho~ on Exhibit "A" and subject to the condi- tions stated in said report; motioh carried unanimously. F. UP-174 - Valley ChriStian ·School, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Use Permit to Allow Classroom Facilities at Westhope Presbyterian Church Chairman Norton opened the hearingiat 8:21 P.Mo The Assistant Planner stated the Notices of Hearing were.mailed and briefly reviewed this file. -The Assistant Planner read a statement of reasons submitted by F~o George R. Callisch, business manager for the applicant, emphasizing the fact that their classes were scheduled to commence on 10 September. The Assistant Planner, also, reviewed a letter received from A."B. Carson, Clerk of Session, (for the Westhope Presbyterian Church) stating that· the Session had approved the use of certain facilities in their church for classrooms for the Valley Christian School. Mr. Richard R. Lather, present to represent the applicant, stated that the proposed location would provide the needed adequate playground' and classroom space and requested the Planning Commission to act on the matter at this meeting in order to accomodate the children who will be ready for class on 10 September. Chairman Norton explained that the application represents a rather large project and he ~¢ould hesitate to ask the Planning Commission to make a · reco~mnendation at this time. Commissioner Crisp' stated that the.Subdivision Committee is not prepared to take action at this time and redommend=' that the matter be continued. Co~n~issioner Smith stated that th'e Subdivision Committee did meet with the applicant ant~ informed him that this matter would have to be referred to the Fire Marshal for consideration and a written report. Chairman Norton .~'.·adviSed that, perhaps, Verbal approval could be granted the applicant subject to written approyal ·at a later date providing all the require- ments were met. Commissioner Metcalf inquired as to what the relationship is between the applicant and the' Westhope Presbyterian Church. }~. lather explained that no tie'exists between the two other than the christian school movement within r~ligions 2) the Valley Christian School accepts students regardless of their religious denomination and 3) the length of the program will depend On the relationship with the Westhope Church and the continued student enrollment. He further continued that the Valley Christian School will provide the desks, personnel and other necessary classroom equipment and will reimburse the Westhope Church for operating costs involved. -6- Pla~ning~Co~ission Minutes - 8 September 1969 - Continue'd IIo 'F..'. UP-174 ~ Continued The Assistant Planner then read the complete letter dated 28 August. 1969 submitted by A. B. Carson of the Westhope United Presbyterian Church and giving the details of the agreement between the two parties involved. Mr. Lather, in answer to an inquiry from Conm~issioner .Metcalf, .stated that the Valley Christian School will be starting its tenth year of operation dn 10 September 1969. Mr. iather.~ in answer'to an ;inquiry from Commissioner Lively, stated that arrangements have been made with the Calvary ChUrch to accomodate the. children until approval of the subject application can be obtained. No one else present wished to comment. At 8:32 P.M. Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening, directed UP-174 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for further ~tudy. G. UP-175 - Field~s Ambulance, Inc., Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Request for Use Permit to Allow Ambulance Service The hearing relative to UP-175 ~s opened at 8:33 P.M. The Assistant Planner stated the Notices of Hearing were mailed and briefly reviewed this file. .. Mr. Bob Durham, present to represen. t the applicant, stated he had no-f'urther continents. ~r. Frank Ziegel, 20254 Kirkmont D~ive, x~s present and inquired' if a report had been prepared relative to this matter. Chairman Norton explained that a report had not been written since this request will be continued to the meeting of 22 SOptenDer 1969. No one else present had any comments or questions. Chairman Norton (8:35 P.M~) closed the hearing for the evening, directed UP-157 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Connnittee for study. H. UP-176 - Ditz-Crane, Yuba Court - Request for Use Permit to Allow Model Home Sales Office Chairman Norton Opened the hearing at 8:36 PoM. The Assistant Planner stated the Notices of Hearing were mailed 'and brlefly reviewed this request. Mr. Dick Potts was present to represent the applicant. Chairman Norton, _after studying th~ exhibit, stated that this appeared to be several model homes linked together by a pavillion type sales office. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 reco~"m. ending that the subject Use Permit be granted. He .then explained that the Use Permit, if granted, will be valid for one (1) year and the applicant can request an extension at the end of that time.. ~r. Naugle of the Prides Crossing Homeo~,.faers Association stated that after attending several Planning Commission meetings and listening to requests for extension of Use Permits it seemed to him that a subdivider with a large number of homes to sell (such as the applicants 160 lots) should be granted a Use Permit for two (2) years in order to save time for everyone concerned. -7- Planni~g-..Conmission MinUtes - 8 September 1969 - Continued II. H. UP-176 - Continued ~ Chairm~n Norton e:~plained that it does no harm to review a Use Permit at the end of a years time especially if some complaints have ~een received by the City. Commissioner Lively stated the li. ghting sho~.fa on Exhibit "B" does not appear to comply with Condition (e) as stated in the Staff Report in connection with illumination of :.the premises. Commissioner Metcalf stated that" on the basis of Exhibit "C" it appeared that the applicant intended to illuminate 'a sign and it will be necessary'for the Design. Review Committee to consider said sign prior to approval of same. Chairman Norton stated that some. illumination of signs is allowed, but not with a string of lights o! Mr. Ports explained that the lights will be between the lots and low on the ground and will not be direc'ted to~.mrd the houses. Chairman Norton explained that i'llumination of the premises shall be limited to that w~ich is reasonable for private residence and this does ncnot appear to be the case as shown on Exhibits "B" and "C". Commissioner Lively ,stated that these homes will not be lived in during the time they are shown as model homes and asked Mr. Potts what the applicant planned to do about policing the'. area. Mr. Potts explained that a ~,~tch~an is on duty at night and the ~omes -are quipped with a built-in burglar alarm system. Chairman Norton directed that the Staff Report be amended to exclude reference to Exhibits "B" and "C!'. Commissioner Lively stated that 1) the Planning Commission has heard so much from residents complaining about model home sales offices 2) approval of this Use Permit would really be expanding the concept of model homes sales offices and 3) he recommends that the Planning Con~nission reject the subject plan as submitted. Chairman Norton explained that ti~ese model homes will not annoy any neighbors since all the homes in' the immediate area are unoccupied. Commissioner Crisp advised that i) this is a Use Permit for one model home sales office only while the other models will be for display and 2) the subject Use Permit, if a~proved, can be recalled at any time if the applicant does not comply with t~e conditions stated in.the Staff Report. Commissioner Liveiy stated that the contractor goes to considerable expense to establish all these model homes and it does not seem necessary for one subdivision to have so many model homes. Chairman Norton stated that Corfnnissioner Lively was suggesting that the number of model homes be cut do~, but not totally eliminated. The Assistant Planner advised that the Planning Co~ission recently approved five (5) model homes for one subdivision and another for four (4) model homes'. Commissioner Lively stated that, ~he felt, the Planning Commission is leaving itself in a bad position by approving so many model homes for one subdivision at one location. p~anninS-.Commission Minutes _-_ 8 Septe_mber'1969 - Continue~ II. Ho UP-176 - Continued Mr. Potts stated that 1) the subject model homes are on a dead-end street and in this way parking spaces are provided without causing annoyance to anyone 2) a play area for children is, also, provided 3) the six model homes requested l for a subdivision of this size is not unusual and 4) a diversified number of homes must be sho~ in order to give the buyer an'idea of what is available. Mr. Ports, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton stated that the subdivider will employ two salesmen 2) there are fourteen different plans for a buyer to choose from and 3)' they would like to show six" (6) of the,plans in the model homes., Con~missioner Smith .asked if it would make any difference if the models were scattered throughout the tract rather than having them all located in one area. Chairman Norton stated that consideration should be given to the fact that these model homes have been. carefully arranged at the end of a dead-end street. Commissioner Metcalf stated that' the sheer bulk of the model home complex will present problems of. one type or another. The Assistant. Planner stated that Brown and Kauffman.have their model homes adjacent to older homes and no problems have come up and the' applicants model homes are completely isolated; therefore, no serious problems should occur. Chairman Norton suggested that, perhaps, a policy should 'be developed in connection with model home applications. At 8:51 PoMo Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith, to close the hearing relative to UP-176; motion carried unanimously. Con~missioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Staff Report dated 8 Septe~nber 1969 be adopted, as amended, (delete reference to Exhibits "B" and ._"_.C~). and the Use Permit (UP-176) to allow a model home to Condition (e)~'~f~ed in said .report; motion carried with ~ s dissenting. I.' "~-337' 2' PaC'ifiC Gas 'and Electric, Cox Avenue - Request for Variance to Allow Overhead Utilities Across, the State Highway Right-of-Way - Continued from 25 August 1969 The hearing relative to V-337 wa~ resumed at 8:55 P.M. The Assistant Planner stated that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this application be withdraw~ since it was found that installing the overhead utilities at the proposed location would present complications. Commissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith~ to close the · hearing (8:57 P°M.); motion carried unanimously. Conm~issioner Crisp moved, seconded by Com~nissioner Smith, that the request for withdra~l be approved and the hearing relative to V-337 be terminated; motion carried unanimously. RECESS AND RECONVENE -9- ..Planni'ng Commission Minutes - 8 September 1969 - Continued III o BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SDR-8.2.4' - John B. waist, Herriman Avenue - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Commissioner Smith recommended .that this matter be continued to allow time for Flood Control and the Fire Department to submit their reports relative to a· bridge required in connection with this application. Chairman Norton so directed. .~B. SDR-825 - Z. Clyde Standard, Monte Vista Drive and Via Colina - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Conn-nissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Con~nittee did meet with the applicant and reviewed the proposed conditions of approval and he found some of the proposed conditions objectionable; therefore, the matter is recon~nended for continuance to .allow time for further study. Chairman Norton so directed. C. SDR-826 - Elgin Capital, Big. Basin Way - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Commissioner Smith stated that :the proposed conditions of approval have ' been prepared. The Assistant Planner, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, explained that the applicant proposed to re-model an existing residence into an architect~ office. 'Commissioner Metcalf stated that he is ready to vote for approval of the subject application, but would 'specifically except the sign sho~.m on Exhibit "A" from approval at this time. Chairman Norton directed that t'he subject map (Exhibit "A") be marked to show that the sign is excepted :frcm approval at this time. Th~ Assistant Planner advised [hat the applicant will develop the front portion of the property and the. rear portion will be left in its natural state and the subject re-modeling will be subject to Design Review Approval. Commissioner Smith reco~m. ended .that the following conditions be added to the proposed conditions of approval stated in the Building Site Committee Report dated 8 September 1969: M. Design Review Approval required. N. Reference to sign on Exhibit "A" is excepted. 'Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Building Site Committee .Report of 8 September 1969 relative to SDR-826 be adopted, as amended and that the tent~atile' map (Exhibit "A" (with exception of sign) filed 2~ August ].969) b~_pro%ed subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. SS-62 - Osterlund Enterprises, ·Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Paramount Drive - Final Design Review - Temporary Subdivision ·Sign - Continued from 25 August 1969 Chairman Norton stated that this sign ~s previously reviewed by the Conunission and it did not meet with approval. Commissioner Metcalf stated that the Design Review Com~ittee did meet with the applicant and there seems to have been a failure in communcation because the applicant has submitted a second design almost identical to the first and the Design Review Con~mittee objects to the type of sign being proposed. ~lannin~ Commission Minutes - 8 September 1969 - Continued IV. A.. SS-62 - Continued Mr. Jim Thiessen of the Diamond Sign Co. was present to represent the applicant and stated that he would like to point out that the posts have been removed and the bottom of the proposed sign has been redesigned in order.to cut do~.m zon the size. He further stated that the applicant likes the original design of the sign and an effort has been made to maintain a similar design. He went on to say that he would like to point out to the Con~nission that a similar sign with similar dimensions to those proposed by 'the applicant have been permitted by the City for instance Saratoga Creek East has a 48-square foot sign; Greenbrier has a 42-square foot .sign; Oak Knoll a 24-square foot sign; Oak Knoll a 24-square foot sign; MontMeadow a 24-s.quare foot sign; Colony Heights a 24-square foot .sign; and Arroyo Saratoga a 24-square foot sign; therefore, he feels a precedent has been set and he is being persecuted.' M~. Thiessen submitted exhibits illustrating the aforementioned signs. Comanissioner Metcalf recommended that SS-62 be continued in order to allow time to study the exhibits submitted and to meet with the applicants representative. The Assistant Pl'anner stated that two of the signs shown on the exhibits submitted have not received '~ .approval of the City. . Chairman Norton the Assistant Planner to illegal signs as soon a further stated tha~ this matter will be given further study and directed .SS-62 continued to the meeting of 22 September 1969. B. A-325 - United Presbyterian Church, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Herriman Avenue '- Final Design Review - Multi-Purpose Building - Continued from 25 Au~.ust 1969 Commissioner Metcalf read the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 recommending that Final Design Approval be granted for A-325 s-~bject to the conditions stated in said report. The Assistant Planner read a let. ter received from Higgins and Root (applicant~s architects) requesting that the appli. cant be allowed to defer the added parking and the need for the subject parking be re-evaluated. Commissioner Smith advised that in the Staff Repo~-t dated 8 April 1968 it is stated that the applicant must install an a~ditional fifty-two (52) parking spaces either within two (2) years from 8 April 1968 or prior to completion of the new parish hall; therefore, if that requirement is 'changed the City Council will have to do so. Connnissioner Metcalf,~. in'ransWer'n.tO an inquiry~from Chairman Norton, stated that the proposed multi-u'se building will mot be in use at all on Sunday and will not be used at the same time the sanctuary utilized. He further stated that the church did submit an attemdance record and it seems that except on one or two Sundays the figures indicate that additional parking is not needed. Chairman Norton stated that as 10ng as the church has posted a bond for the.subject parking (as stated in the letter received from Higgins and Root) they have time to meet the' condition relative to meeting the parking requirements. He further stated' that he understood that all churches are short of money but fifty-two (52) parking spaces are not usually a major pr ob lem o Plannin% Commission Minutes - 8 Septe~,nber 1969 - Continued IV. B. A-325 - Continued Mr. David Vickers, present to r&present the applicant, stated that 1) the cost for the additional parking is estimated to be abot:t $2,000 2) the church does not have much money and they are on a tight budget and 3) the.church.will have a fund raising campaign and they 'hope to have the necessary funds by April, 1970. Chairman Norton stated that $2,000 does not seem like a lot of money to allocate for the required parking, but on a tight budget it is' difficult. He then directed that Condition (b) of the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 Be deleted and '.that the condition relative to parking stated in the 8 April 1968 report and the bond posted for the parking both re~in in effect. Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, that the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be granted for a multi-use building as sho~ on · Exhibit "A" and subject to the 'conditions stated in said ~ _ ~ ' ~ , .-~ ~ ~{ 'g that. the provisions for bonding C. A-326 - C & I Development Corporation, Kirkbrook ~ive - Final Design ~proval - Subdivision Approval Commissioner Metcalf stated that the applicant has requested that this matter be continued. ~. Louie Tracini, present to represent the applicant, stated that the decorator is still. working on the materials to be used. The Assistant Planner stated that the applicant ~,ms to submit new exhibits but.he has not done so; therefore, a continuance to the next regular meeting is recommended. Chairman l,!orton so directed. D. A-327 - Utah Homes, Inc., DeHavilland ~ive - Final Design Approval - Subdivision Approval The Assistant Planner stated that 1) almost all the homes in this . subdivision are completed and then went on to explain that the Zoning Ordinance requires Design Review Approval for any three homes built in one block in one year by the same builder 2) if the homes are individaully built they do not require Design Approval and 3) the subject subdivision is part of the old Eichler and Arroyo tracts and these subdividers had 'submitted plans with names of individuals as purchasers and builders; consequently, the City issued building permits f~r individual lots, but not all of the lots were built on and these are the ones ~onstructed or under construction by the applicant at present. He further stated that the only major requirement (for Design Review Approval) that has not been enforced is the one that concerns the window and architectural treatment and this is a new policy. Chairman Norton stated that the only thing to do is to make the best of the situation since he ~,ms sure the Staff acted in good faith in issuing the building permits and approving the individuals plans. ~ Walter Muir present to represent, the applicant stated that the houses are basically stucco with Spanish type architecture. CommissiOner Metcalf recommended that the matter be continued to allow time for further study and a meeting'with the applicant's representative and architect. Chairman Norton so directed. -12- ~lanni~g Commission Minutes - 8 September ]_969 - Continued IV. E. A-328 - Abel Carreia, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Fipa 1 Design Review - Identification Sign Commissioner Metcalf read' the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 reconmending that Final Design Approval be granted for A-328. The Assistant Planner stated that this is basically the same sign as approved at the meeting of 25 August 1969 (A-320) but the sign company obtaining approval did not have a contract with ~. Carreia; therefore, this new application has been filed Chairman Norton directed that Cqndition (c) in the subject Staff Report. line 1. . .the word "lettering" be changed to "letter". Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, that the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 be adopted, as amended, and that n Final Design Approval be granted. for A-328 on the basis of Exhibits "A" and "B" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. Fo A-329 - William ~,~ant, Big Basin Way - Preliminary Design Review - Cormnercial Building Commissioner Metcalf stated that the applicant has submitted a complete set of plans and has done a very good job in re-designing this building. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 recommending that A-329 be granted Preliminary Design Approval. Chairman Norton recomnended that in paragraph 1. . .line 5o . .the word "whereby" be changed to "and". Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, that the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 be adopted, as amended, and that Preliminary Design Approval be granted for A-329 as shoxm on Exhibit "A" and subject to the conditions stated in said report;..motion carried unani- mously. G. A-330 - Elgin Capital, Big Basin 'Way - Final Design Review - Conversion to Office Buildinl Commissioner Metcalf stated that'this is ~he same. building approved under SDR-826 earlier on the agenda. Chairman Norton stated that the people interested in Victorian architecture for Big Basin Way will be disappointed with this proposal. The Assistant Planner stated that there is located, on either side of the subject property, old residences and the entire area along here is heavily landscaped. ~ ~. ~ , present to'represent the applicant, stated that the propos&d fence is approximately 8-feet high. The Assistant Planner stated that= the fence will qualify as a structure. Chairman Norton stated that he ~s not aware that an 8-foot fence along here would be permissable and since the sign discussed under SDR-826 will represent problems perhaps the Commission should reconsider this entire matter. · Commissioner Metcalf stated that Ann Valk Interiors on Big Basin Way has 'high fence in front. -13- Pla'~.ning Commission Minutes i 8 September 1969 - Continued IV. G. A-330 - Continued Chairman Norton stated that the Ann Valk fence did not appear to be 8-f et high and is an ornamental fence. Mr. ~ ated that .the front of their building will be designed and decorated to appe.ar as a residence. Chairman Norton stated that the Commission is distressed by the 8-foot fence in the middle of tb.e block and directed the matter continued to the next regular meeting with .the hope that either an adequate justification for the fence can be submitted or a modification of same can be realized. V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT ' None VI.PLANNING POLICY CO~4ITTEE REPORT None VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Stoneson Construction Corpora.tion, Big Basin Way - Request for Credit Toward the Park and Recreation Fee In Connec- tion with Tract 4477 .. Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Co~r~nittee did discuss this briefly and they feel that the applicant should get credit for areas that will be open to the general public but no credit should be allowed for any other areas. The Assistant Planner 'stated that the applicant did submit some statistics relative to this matter, .but the Subdivision Committee has not had an opportunity to review same. Chairman Norton, after reviewing the policy relative to park and recreation fees, agreed that l~he applicant should receive credit fo~ areas open to the general. pub_lic such as pathx..~s. Commissioner Smith requested that the Assistant Planner contact the applicant and make an appointment for him to meet with the Subdivision Committee to discuss this matter. B.' C-43 - Dr. Isaac N. Abrams, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Extension Referred to the Planning Commission by the City Council Commissioner Smith introduced' the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 'reconm~ending that a one (1) year extension for C-117 be granted subject to the conditions stated in said report. Chairman Norton recon~nended that the subject Staff Report.. . be amended as follows:. paragraph 1.. . line 5.. .the word "a lied" . pp be changed to "applicant" and in paragraph 2. . line 1. . .the word "L-~st"' be' changed to "In" and "1968" be changed to "1969"; condition (a). . .under paragraph 3. . ."18" lots be changed to "16". Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Staff Report dated 8 September 1969 be adopted, as amended, and that the report be forwarded to th~ City Council with the recommendation that C-117 be granted a one (].) year extension subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. -14- Planninf.~ Com~nission Minutes -- 8 Septe:~oer 1969 - Continued VIII. NEW BUSINESS z _A!aen~]nents' t. oZ?ning Ordinance NS-3 an{] Subidivision Ordinance NS-5 Commissioner Smith stated that ~here have been a lot of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision Ordinance in the last three years that have not been incorporated .into" the ordinance books and he ~ould suggest that the Planning Commission recormnend to the City Council that the ordinances be reprinted to include the subject amendments. Chairman Norton directed that the Secretary notify the City Council of the aforementioned recommendation that the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance be re-edited and reprinted. IX. COI,~.~ICATIONS A.I~ITTEN None B. O~L Chairman Norton acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Councilman Sanders, Miss Moss and Mr. Binkley of the Good Government Group and Dr. Newcomer of t~c League of Women yoters and Mr. Naugle of the Prides ~ossing Homeo~,~ners Association. He, also, thanked Miss Moss for the coffee served at recess. X. ADJOURNbZi'IT Chairman Norton declared the meeting adjourned at 10:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, j -15 -