HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-23-1970 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SAi~'~TC!C~A PL.-?.~i'~NI~"~:G CO%,2'[iSSIOi'i
;.
TIME: Monday, 23 I.farch 1970 7:30
PLaiCE: City Ccunci! Cha:nb~rs, Fruitvale A~.;e:'~ue, Saratoga. California 95070
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ROUT!~E ORGA.~iIZATiON
The meeting ~.,'as called to order by Chair-."!'~a'..~ .~iorton.
A', ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Crisp, Kraus. Lively, Metcalf. i';orton. and S~.nith.
kbsent: Co-'.nmissionc~r Baco~. · ·
B. t. II?iUTES
/
Com!aissioner Sn~ith rnoved. sa, condec'.. by Co~::raissioner Kraus. that the
reading of the minutes of the 9 l-i:a.rch 1970 meet{n~= be ~.7~.ived and they
be approved as distributed to the Cc,::;z~issior'~; motion carried unanimously.
" C. ME?.iO ~' DiSCLOSUilE CF A~SESTS :
Chairman l. Iorton made reference to a memo reouir~n~ tha~ the disclosure
of assets of each Con~znissioner be subn~itt~.d to the County Clerk.
Com~nissionc. r Smith stated that ~e Ci~-y 1.1ana?er racon-~x.?nclc, d a ~=~a. in
the return of subject disclosure ~.:as advisable since new l~,gislation
re o ~ matter is ux]c~r coi~s;ideratio~!.
Chairn~an Norton state~ th~.t he ha~ h~.ard that a postponement for return
hag be~n a~vise.~ since modificatiOp. in the !ax.~ has been initiate~.
Chairman :'~erton requested the Secretary to see that all the pertinent
information is m~e available to Ccmn~issioner Bacon.
II. PUBLIC
A. C-1~6 - Roger W. Ross Saratoga Hills loa~ Request fo~ ~;~ ..... of Zoning
from ':R-I-40 .... "'~ (Sing~-Fa~-~!v Resident~.~) ~ ':R_I_~
~in.z!e-Yami!v Eesi~r:ci~!)
The hearing relativ~ ~o ~-~6 ~-as e~n~ at 7:36 ~ ~,' ~h~ Secretary briefly
revie~..'e~ th~ sub]-~ct aFplicatic. cz aid stats~ that the :,lotices of Hearing ;.~re .
pub!-isi~d a:'~ ~ai!sd. Hs th~n rea~ t!.7o con:'~unications receive~ in cor. n~c-
~ion with this r~q,~est:
!) A !.otter fii~.d V~y ~.~-. Frank C. ~.7-~!sc:n (o~a~sr
property cpp.z. sit.~ that o'~..~:~ ~Z,' t~e ='~ic.zn:) in
favor of th~ subj.~.:~ Ci~a:;~e cf Zoning.
A iett~r rsceiv.e~ fr::,rn :-~ an~ :its joseph
=~ ~ ~ - ~ ....~ le~
14038 ezra ..... ~ fi iY~ oo~osit~cr ~O ~"~ said
requ.~st. .
~. Rc, ss. the applicant, state~ that !) this rec:.:est is to r~.z.r~n.e
one-b~ ~e on the c~.~ ~.~aion .~ the pr,~--~-v ~ =-'~] invo'--~ ~--
on~ buildinn site an~ n:z.t t~,:.~ as slm~...n on ~-~ za~ ar.~ 2) he ~e~ a b"~J~-~
P].ann'in.'.~ Cer~:~:~i-~;sion T-iinutes - 23 i..ras:ch 1970 -. Contir~uec]
II. A. C-!26 -' Contir'-u~d
Mr'. Tho~nas B Fr or, lZ'-0-'!~i Sara t!ills'Road stated that 1) he
tb.e propel:t): located to the south of the app!icant's property 2) he
ot..~ns t~.yo l:~gal non-confor!:~ing lots, but treats thong. as one and has only
on~. bui].ding site on the tvzo lots in order to provide a !o~:.yer density
and open space in the area 3) he ~:zou!d like to see tha. applicant use
· his property to provide just the one building site leaving the remain-
ing area vacant rather than a~-~n~re for t~.~o sites on the ~ninin~un~ amount
of square footage required by the Zoning Ordinance.
The applicant e:<p!a~lnec] that 1) ox~].), one building site ~.~il! be accot'nplishe~l
E-.:ib~t ':~f" in file C-126) t~at
on his property 2) the tx.,,o lots on the n~ap ( .... ~ ,
are crosshat.abed in red indicate the area ~,yhere the building site ~.j. 11 be
located; h0~.2ever, the t~-x~ lots ~.~ill be treated a.s one and 3) if the subject
Change 0f Zoning is granted the red crosshatched area along ~,yith the e>:isting
R-1-12,500 zoning (out].ir~ec] in red on the Ea,p) will all be zoned R-1-!2,500
in conformance ~,~ith th? Gs, neral Plan.
Chairman Norton requested the Secretary to obtain, for the sake of clarification,
a revised m~.p showing only th-P area that is to be rezoned.
At 7:46 P.M. Chairman Norton close<] the hearing for the evening, referred
C.-1'26 to the Subdivision Cor:~ittee.and directed sa~e continued to the next
regular meeting.
B. C-127 - Catherin Niven, Madrone lii].]. Road - Requa, st for Change of Zoning
fronx "R-I-40,000" (Single-Fav~ily Residential) to "R-1-.40,000'~ P-C
~jIl].e-Family Resid?ntial Planned Con~:~.unitV i)istrict)
The hearing in connection ~.yith C-l~7 ~.Yas op'ened at 7:47 P.I.[. The Secretary
· stated that 1) the Notices of Hearing ~.;zre mailed at~.d pt.%'.. l. is:l-~ed and 2) the
applicant will, also, request the City to Anne>: an adjcit'~.[::.j sixteen acres
now lying across the City line in the County.
~-~'~d that ~ .=,~ with
Chairm~-n i'dorion exp ...... ~ the ]ann{p~ Com~ission cannot d
the aforementioned annexration at this time and he ~.:as uncertain of the
, re.
effect t~ie pre-zoning of the oro;}ertv D~iOr tO coen:~!etion Of the' p- p-
annexa t ion.
The Secretary advised that 1) the applicant will apply for a Change
Zoning for the adjoining acres uo.sn appr.~va! of the annez<ation by th~ City
and 2) the subject Change of Zoning ~-127 (7.467 acres) could be aDorove,j
to be effective s:I~ject to the a~o.'e:<ation of the error si:,:teen acres noz.;
locatecY in tht~ County and proposed for anne:catiou b)' the applicant.
further stated that three co,:~7.,.m,zaltiot~s ,~,sre receiv.sd relative to the
subject a~ol. ication:
1) A petition siZn'ed by si:ctyLsev~-n (67) reside. nts
of l. ien.felsohn. T.=~-~, 'Peach H{I~ l, fadrcne H~I
and Pied~:.Dnt Reads r'ecuestin3 the
CoE~!nission to feZeat the prspose~ rec:~est for
Change of Zonin,3.
=-'~ fre:~ ~-2-. and !,2-s. ::arEin A
2) A letter :ece~..:~ ·
Wood~yzrd of 20:376 i,%c-nfe~sohn in'as sta-~:~
opposition to th~ s'.:bj~ct app!icatic. n.
3) A !e~ter recei','e-S fr'c:_ rE-. and :.~s. 7rank Giansiracusa
of !~166 Pi~nt %eat{ re~ist~ their sb~:ecticc-s co
said app!icat!an ~ ....
-2-
Minutes - 23 March 1.970 -Continued
II. Bo C-].27 - Continued ..
-~~ "~,nt' architect stated:thaic 1) his Client
Mr Ed,.?und Wads~....'orth, a pl~c s
Mrs. Niven, engaged hi~n because she ha~ long felt that this property has
something special that should not be cut up in the ttst~al fashion 2) he
and his client both feel that the park--like character of the area is
~.~orthx.J~ile preserving for more than just a fex.; resiclents 3) they are
aware of the problooms relative to traffic circulation and safety that will
be caused by additional roads .in the area 4)they feel that the subject
prop~'rty is particularly suitable for '.'R-l--40,000" P-C an~l that it is
"{d'eal].y the only ~cay to develop saxne 5) the General Plan .and Zoning l. iap both indicate '~iI-1-40,000:' P-C for the.most beneficial 'use to the area
6) there are n~merous iteins on tlne p!aa that need to be x.~orked out 7) the
building si~es shox.in on the plan have been planned around the location
every tree '8) he has been involved ~.~ith slope dens~_ty properties in the
· past and that is the reason the applicant chose hin~ as the architect for
her property 9) he and his client ~.~i].'l endeavor to insure that as much as
possible of the natural topography' of the area is maintained and 10) obviously
thdre x.:as no reason to delve into 'cletai].s of how the proposed plan can be
adapted to the site until there. is so~ne general. agreement betx.yeen the Plan-
ning'Con~'nission and his client.
Chairman Norton explained that it has been the practice in the past to
ha+e a fairly definite plan before any com~niUten~.?nts can be made by the
planning COn~n~ission and 2) he felt the proposed plan should be firreed
.tip' to meet' City Standards.
Com~aissioner Crisp stated that 1) he and several other peopl. e inspected
this property 2) he would like to see an eng~.neered plan shox.~ing a
two-x.ray road into this property and 3) b. ecause of the topography of this
property he feels a two-~.~ay road is iH~possib]-e.
Chairman Norton stated that apparently a great deal. of this property is
inaccessibl'e and the planning Co~n::~ission cannot n~ke a recor~mendation by
simply revie~.;Sr~g the concepts of the plan for subject n.-o. e~tv there
the applicant is requested to submit a ~,ze!! defined plan for consideration-
Com~tissiorter Smith pointed out that 1) the "R-l-40.000" P-C Zoning
not allo~.~ more houses to be ccnstrcted on less acreage. but does allow the
houses to be clustered into a central' area leaving the ren~ainder o[ the.
property as opln s~ace 2) the submitted n,.ap propos-~s t~.~enty-si:~ her.:,~s for
tvyenty-three acres and 3) this exceeds the nur~:ber permitted under the
Planned Corn. r, unit.y Zoning and with enforcement of the S!.~pc- Density
Ordinance the nur::ber of sites permitt'ed :~,i!l be even further reduce.~.
Chair~-n Norton advised that !) the planned Co~:nunity District ,~oes a!!o;.:
rearrangemerit of building sites but do~s not allow an increase of saz~e and
2) judging from the r:.ap' submitted by >~. 'Wads~.:orth the nun~ber of building
sites permitted for .the su:Dject property have be~n ov~r-estinated.
~. -!.7ads~:orth e:ip!a. in:5~ that 1) these sites ~:ere indicated on the map in
order to shc;.2 th?.t 'they x-:z. re avai!abl~; ho::ever. in r~a!ity the nu~.:ber
act.aal sites will be reduced ,and 2) a detziled engineers =.ap :.ill.! cost
appro:<in~te!y $5,000.
Chair:nan Nob'ton stated that in the past the p!ar. ning Co~_nission has not
had occasion to azt on a Change of Zoning prior to anr. e:cation of the
property invo!vz-d and it ~,~i!l be necesszry io c~asu!t ~.:ith th,~ City
Council in order to 8eter~iine :,:i~t their action ~.~i!! ~.~ re!ativ.~ to the
proposed anne:.:ati,=n pectin?mr to this application.
-3-
pianr~iuc' Co:nmission Minutes - 23 I'[arch 1970 - Contir:t':ed
II. B. C- 127 Con t inued
The Secretary explainedi that 1) t~,~ applicant's.':architect has
submitted a request to the City Council. for anneyation of the adjoin-
ing sixteen acres and 2) the matter will be referred to the Local
Agency Formation Conm~ission for review.
.
Mr. Wads~orth stated that he and ..his client will c. nc~eavor to retain ·
the parkslike feature so pro:airieSt: in this area.
--".Fifty people ~!~.the audience ind{cated by raising their ha~'~dS..th~_t' ~hey ....
......
~,mre opposed to the sub; ·
......... ~ect appl{cation. -
Mr. William A. geggatt. 15461 I. iadrone Hill P~oad~ stated that 1) the
entire ar'ea surrounding this propc. rty is parks. like; so, the applicant
is not preserving any uniqu,~ feature 2) he d'id'not feel that clustering a
group of homes in one small area ,(as indicatec] by the 'applicant)'suits the
best ~st of the residents in the area 3) if the type of "R-I-40,000~'
PLC Zoning proposed for the subject property is fermally established it
could set a bad precedent because it ~.muld enccura,:~e property ownc. rs that
have undeveloped property. such as the app!ican~ to develop it in a
similar manner 4) he ~.~ou!d recomn~end that a Planned Ccnr.mnity District
, !o. ed
deve]_opnu, nt be al]Dx,Ted in a completeiv undeve p area where no homes
presently exist and 5) since the proposed application ~.mula destroy
the neighborhood as it now exists he would urge the Planning Commission to
deny the' subject application for Change of Zoning
.
~.~. Herbert Berquist, 15340 Piedmont Road, stated that he c.~.med the
property across the street from the aoo!icant and built his .... a
portion of the six acres he owns and he feels that building a group of
_
homes on t'h~ bare minimun~ square fco'tege (as proposc. d for the subject
property) requireC would not be right.
Mr ThomP-s j ~asbos 15041 Pi[~dmont Road recmested the ?!annin5 Co~=m~issicn
to reject the subject request since the plans were not complete ~-' "R-~ ~.~'
(Single Family P, esideutial) reqUirern?nts are not p!anued for this propz-rty in
confor[hence ~..~u~. the Dre ~ ~ - r .... ~ ·
Chairman Norton advise~ that !) the PlanninS Con::nissicn ~vil! net m~ke a
decision at this time since the matter must be studied by the SuSdivision
Corp. mittee, Planning Con::~issien.ana City Council and 2) the applicant can
make an appointn~ent to m.~et with the Subdivision Cecnmitte? to ~iscuss the
mat ter.
~.~s. Lynn C. 3e!anger. 15363 Peach Hill Road. (neiihI~orhood Chairn~an in
charge of o3taining si.~nztures for the oe~{~-~c.~ suT~rnitted {n
to C-127) inouired if she could attencl the me?tinS :..,ith the Subdivision
Committee and the applicant?
Chairman i[orton exp!ain~d that thee Cc.r~:nittee meetfags are net Benera!ly
open to the puS!iG; h,~;.~;' ..... r the =is :~-~]c
........... , ...... o .... to att-sn.S as an observer if
tl{e Chairman of t-he SuSdivisien C~uzrnittec. has no c,3jections.
There bein3 no furth?r c.?~n~nts Chair:'::zn Norton c!zse~ the hsarin3 for thP
evening at S:20 o.X., directed the n:atte'c continu~'C to th~ ~'.':-
meeting and referre~ C-!27 to th3 Sub,~ivisi.m~ Cc::=:~ittee for sttk~y.
C C-!28 - Z!Ein Co. oita~ C;~=~eraticn Zig Dzsln Way am.~ Sixth Streez
_ ' ..... ~ °~"':: (2-lu!ti-?anzily
Request for Cho. nS=~ o= Zoo. inI fro{-:~ ..~-..?~,~.__ .
Resid.zut ia!) ta ='C-7=' (7i's i t..r,'c -Ccmn'..~.r'z ial}
Chairman Nor ten opened time h.?ar/n:% at 8:2Z'P.i.[. T~-.e SacretEry stated
ths subject a~atic~.
Plann~:'.,=, Cc..'.'..~nlission I.~'-.':~'~[:c,s - 23 i.r.='~-ch ]970. Co~t in
.... ' ...... -- -. - ' !~ i u..ed
IT. C. C-120, - Coritit!ue~
Chair~?.an Norton exp].aitwd that the 'subject Change of Zoning application
inc!udc, s the old Catholic Chu'~rch prope, rty.
The Secretary read a staten~ent of reaso:.'~ submitted by the applicant
lis~in~ sor:~e of tb~ uses proposec~ for the property unda. r consideration.
Mr. Tom l.ioore, present to re re. sen ~ i-,~'~"
p t the rated that 1) if the
requested Change of Zcning for the rear portion of the app].icant's propc-try
is approved the entire propc. rty ~.;il]. conform to onc~ and the same zoning
classification and in that ~.~ay a continuity of beautification along Big
Basin Way can be established. "
Chaivm~.n. Norton stated that the app].icant is requesting the Change of
Zoning in order to get the identical zoning for both pieces of the
property he o,?~ns.
'Commissioner Metcalf pointed out that the General Plan cuts the applicant's
property in half; thereby, establishing two different zoning districts.
Dis. Harold P. Blair, 20761 Pamela Way, stated that l) her property
a,djoi.hs that of the applicant's and'2) she ~.~ould like to know what the
plan~ include as far as deve, lopn~ent of the park¢;~ a?'ea is concerned
Chairsan Norton e:gplained that 1) the present proposal indicates that the
shops and restaurant will be loce. te~ on the West side cf the property away
from Sixth Street 2) the parking will be beto~.x the ~%].alv p:'operty and ~-yill
be landscaped and 3) there will be 'a service road betw:-en the Blair 5roperty
and the parking area.
Mr.-Sam }i~'rnand.z~z, local busina, S~man, stated that 1) he is interested in
studying the plan submitted by the applicant 2) he x.yas not opposed to
the applicant~s proposal; ho~;~ver, St. Charles Street is'involved with
this application and is a very narrow road and 3) the surrounding ar?a
and the existing shops in the Village should be taken into consideration befors-
the uses stated in the applicant's statement of reason are approved un.~sr
the Change of Zoning application.
Chairman 1,7orton e~;p!ained that the Planning Co~ffssion will not now coaside~
the uses that ~.~ill be put on d~is prop,~rty since the only thing under
consideration at this ti~n.a is the Change of Zoning.
~s. ~.-~v Zoss, 29777 Pa~-=la Way tated
.... ~ ...... , s that !) the residents of the
area use Sixth Street and use the subject. property as a turn-~round 2) with
the additieP. a! traffic tha~ will belcaused.by the nev shoFs ·there will be
further congestio~ and she is yentiering if the applicant will be required
to imptoys. the traffic pattern in this area and 3) drainage is. also, a
problem here and should be studied.
Cbiair:=nan }lotion advised that the dsvele~er w!!~ be required to provide
necessary public i'reprove~n~ats in order to bring ~he subject preoertv up
At $:gfr- ~ '..~ c~-.~irz~an }Torton closed the hearing for the .evsnin? dir~-cted
C-!2S continued to th~ n?xt r~.~-,~'~
~ ..... m~-eting ancj referred sarte to the Sub-
division Cc~n~;i~tee.
A 1 !o~ a DaV Car e Ho,ze
Chairthan }.for ton o~ene.~ ~b~ ~.~a~n.y at. ~- The Secretary stated that
............... a
-5-
II. D. UP--iS!'- Continuec]
The Secretary read a letter 02 '~,zithc]rawal submlttc. d by the applicant
.... ~t{r,~, that he does not need a Arse Pc, rn~it since his intenticn has alx-zays
been 'to operate a day care h'o:ns. ;for f ,,r childr
o_. or less c,n and not a
nurs~!,ry school for five or more children which we,aid require a Use Pertnit
in accordance ~,zith Zoning Ordinance NS-3.
The Secretary advis~,d that it ,.~a:s b'r~ und~-~s~-a,'~'~{:',,, that ~be applicant
intented to opt'rate a nursery school since he hat] ~nac:e a-,D].ication to
the County for sa~'~2.
Comcnissiont, r Srnith movcc], seconded by Conu:,issioner Kraus, 'to close the
h5aylng at 8:37 I' '~
.,.=.; motion carriot] unanin~c~us!y.
Com~nissio:~er Smith moved, se'conc]ed by Co;nn~issionsr Kraus, to approve the
request for withdrawal in connection with UP--18!; motion carried unanimously.
E V-343 - Ce. lifornia C~b].e q'xz Boh!man Rocd Rs, quest for Variance to Allow
Overhead Ut'ilities for an Overhea.J Cable
Chairman No}:ton opet~ed the heari~S re!at:ire to V--343 at 8:39 P.H. The
Secretary stareel the Notic{,s of H~ar{n¢, ~.7o, re n,,,~!ed -,"" the '
..... {, . ..... , t the app!~cant
did submit a statenent e:.:plaininS the subject reqttest:.
}~c. E. Day Cam:on, ap~?licant's a~torney, stated that l) approxi:nnte!,y
a~o the City of Saratoga granted the California Cable 3I.V. a
one year
f~ench~s~ to install ~ Ltr~clerGrot!nd CJ~TV syst~,~1 (n ire p4~v 2) if the
requested Varianc:~ is granteel the systcra would be totnl!v under~rotlnJ
~_ ~ the exception of the =~oin head-end portion on Bob!nan Ro~.c] car:.:yin':.S
the principle s{-,:-.-~ to the City of' Sa,~f'o~-~ 3) a'- that OOi,~t and con-
tinuing appro:cinm~,~,. another t~,zo n~i],-s to the vicinitv of the cer.~etarv
" permission is }equested to continue with the overh.'~ad. cable 4) the cable
itself ~.zou!d be !oca~ed on .... i~*-{r~S tele'obo~,~-, po'~- in th2 vicinity of
existing telephone lines and 5) the n%ain reason for the request to a].i9~.,,
the overhead cable as opposed to construction cf the underground facility
is the geological uncsrtainty in.the hillside area'.
Chairr2an Norton' inforn~.3,~ :{,r. Carmen that a s,~i!~ report will be necessary
to document the stat.-~m.'.ats ~-do re.~ardin-, the ~c, clq and g:-oloSical con.iition
of the area unda. r discussion.
}f- Carr~en stated that l.h- !eu.?hton ~resident of CP;TV a:~ .... ,f{lco
Engineer fur C%TV ~.z.?re beth present and ~-~ou!d :-~ :-a~Dv to ans~.;er
~uestions the D]ana{~.~ Cor:n!issioa n~x, have
}~. Kelly statz, d that the Znginearf. ng-Consu!tin5 Fir~ en5aged by the
applicant indicates that geological problems will result if an under:Sround
facility is atte=,o~,'.~
Chairn:an :'.:or~o{~ stated that the City has hac~ r~Dortej re~~{', .......
with the soil and reck slides in'this area; ~,~.,~v~f if a Vat;= ..... is to be
considered there must b~ ~ ~r~:,=l rex>oft D2 the · robl~m tie,/
2 ..... 5 Sui~i ~-v
applicant.
);~ i_au'zht,~:~ ~hat~-I that :~-~ ~ w.ll l~-.- to coo~=-~-~ coT. p~ .... lv ~/ith tl-~{- City
and if a slide'did occur m.znv poop!c. wou!cl 5s withcut puSlic facilit.Les for
somsti:n-~ if the underground construction is
P2. Kelly, in answer to so. inquiry fro~ Co,:~missi,v. ner l.[etc;_If, stat.'E,d that
there will be three caSIPs, one for control, one for T.V., and one for
but 'they ~.yill be s.mapped together to appear as o~e".
ZiG. E. V-343 -Continuc, d
Mr. L~.ughton explained that: his coz~pany has aBreaSt. under contract.. to
start service by I July and are. therefore. x,e~' anxious for a decision
by the Planning Conmtission.
Chairman I, iortoa explained that the matter cannot be decided at this meet-
ing and closed the hear in? fo~' the evening at °:03 p ~.r directed V--3~+3
continued to the nex[= regular meeting amj referred sa:{~e to the Variance
Conduittee.
Commissioner Draus C].;,i~,,,z~n of the Variance Committee. arranged for an
appointment with the applicant for an on-site inspection for Saturday, ......
.4 April 1970 at 9:00 A.I-i. "'
F. V-344 - Thomas W. Fuelling. BobliD. an Road - Request for Variance to Alio~.y
Overh~,ad Utilities
Chairman ~jorton opened the hearing at 9:04 P.I.I. The Secretary stated that
th~ Notice of 51earing ~.~ere mai].ed and then briefly revie~./~d the subject
application. tie then read a statement 6f reason filed by the applicant and
a letter sub~nitted by Reynolds and Associates Euginec-rs explaining the harn~ful
e~.ecc the attempt to install undergro0nd utility lines w{l] have in this area
/ / .....
t /
Con~j~is'sioner i'.ietca_~ reco:~xn~end that the Planning Cecnission obtain an
1= ed
.. opinion from the G~Cy of Saratoga Soils EnS~neer relative ~o this
Mr. Fuell~ng, the app!ican% x~as presenk and stated that he did no~ feel
that installation of overhead t.tk~!~ties for his property x.~ouId detrac~ from
the appe,4rance of the area s~nce three pox.~e~ poles and cverhead l~nes .....
e~ist and in fact PG&E~s present plan for undergro,~.nd utilities call for the
p!acem,~-nt of an additional po:-:~r oole on his property from which
the lines x.:ould go underground; therefore, one a~ditiona! pole ~.:il! be
necessary in any case.
~. Ted Hinckley, 15515 Bohlman Road. stated that he constructed his home
in the area ten years ago and is not opposed to the proposed Variance as long
as the additional po~,yer pole does not interfere with his vie'~j. He further
stated that the City had helped him solve a drainage problem by lining a
-trench such as I,~, Fuelling sho~.~s on his revised plan with good-sized rock,
Chairman Norton closed the hear~n~ for the evening at 9:15 P.M. directed V
continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Variance Committee.
Con~xissioner ~aus, on behalf of the Variance Con~mittee. arranged for an
on-site inspection for Saturday, 4 April 1970 at 9:30 A.M.
O. V-345 - John Williams, Paseo Cerro - Request for variance to Allow - ~xpansion of Acce'ssorv Structure
The Chairn~n opened the hearing for V~345 at 9:16 P.[[. The Secretary
stated the Notices of t!earing were mailed and briefly reviewed the
subject request. He then read a statement of reason filed by the appli-
cant j
No one was present to represent the applicant.
The Secretary explained that 1) the existing structure did meet the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and 2) the applicant requests-a
Variance to allow additional square footage for expansioa of an accessory
structure.
)~. John Brookman. neighbor of the applicant, stated that he did not
object to the proposed Variance but would object if the structure were
altered to provide a rental unit ou~ the subject property.
Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 9:'22 P.M., directed
V-345 continued to the next regular m~etin% and referred same to the Variance
Comr~ittee for study.
Plannin~ Com'-..~:issio:~ .,'.f-~.nutes - 23 ~.:rarch 19701- Co'..~tinu-~,c!
III. BUILDING SITES A~U) SUBD!V!SIOZqS
None
IV. DESIGN REVIEW
A. A-122 - Saratoga Country Club, Prospect Road - Final Design Review -
Permanent Recreational Fadi].itic. s and Parl~i_!ng~__.
Commissioner .Metcalf explained that the applicant proposed to construct
new recreation and parking facili~ies.
Chairman Norton referred to the St'fail Report dated 23 March 1970 containing
a. st~ggestion by the Design Review ;Committee that the applicant study an
alternate or secondary access (ingress and egress) to the new parkin.g area
to be used for emergency reasons. ~
'The Assistant Planner e>tp].ained that' the applicant's architect indicated "
he ~.:ould investigate the aforement%ioned proposal.
,
Mr"'. Warren Heid, applicant's arcbi:.tect, stated that 1) there is a fire
trail that could provide a seconda;:ry access at the ~,~orthwest corner of the
-' property; however, the topography is fairly steep in the area and 2) if
the Fire ~Larshal demands a second main access road then every attempt will
be made to provide same ;
Commissioner Metcalf requested the', Secretary. to provide the Fire Marshal
with a copy of the Staff Report dated 23 ~%nrch 1970 containing the
suggestion of the Design Review Co~nittee and recom. mending that Final Design
Approval be granted for A-122.
Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Comaiissioner K~.~-'.=. :.. that the Staff
Report dated 23 l,Larch 1970 be adopted and that Final Des:'.~.:=. Approval be
· granted for A-122 as showii on Exhibits "B" "C" "D" and "E" subject to
the condition stated in said report; motion carried ~-nanimously.
B. A-345 - ~;~est Valley Junior College~ Fruitvale and Allendale Avenues
Final Design Review - Campus Center Bui].ding
Mr. Arnold, present to represent tl~.e applicant; stated that 1) the
subject campus center building will have a capacity of approxin~tely
four hundred and 2) the library will consist of 3,000 square feet.
Mr. Arnold further stated, in answer to an inqui.ry from Chairman Norton,
that the existing portable building will serve as am instructional building.
Co~z~issioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner .~'~'~'s']""~'h~t' 'the ....
Staff Report dated 23 ~..~.rch 1970 relative to A-345 be adopted and Final
Design Approval be granted for a campus center build,,i..ng for West Valley
Junior College as sho~..n~. on Exhibits "A" and "B" and subject to the condi-.
tion stated in said report; motion carried unanimously.
-8-
p].a~-.t~.in.~< ,Co:,:ai.:;sion t.iinul:es - 23 i-:~arcl: ].970 - Continued
IV. C. A.-346 - Saratoga Antiq~:c~, Saratoga-S~:nnyvale Road and Sea Gull Way -
Final Desig. n Review - Identification Sign
Con'nnissioner I.letcalf stated l) there' was a difference of opinion between
the applicant and the Design Review ~on-~nittee 2) when the first sign
ca~e up for Final Design Approval it 'was stip~lated that all future signs
wonld be similar in appearance and 3) the Design Review Committee does
not feel that the proposed sign is s{milar to the two signs already in
the shopping center.
Mr. George Rainey, applicant, was present and stated l) the two existing
signs face the road 2) his shop will be more or less in the interior of
the mall 'and 3) he feels the sig~ proposed is more compatible with .the
mall.
Mr. Bnd Beaudoin, manager and leasing agent for the shopping center, stated
that he realized that there is an agreement for similar signs in the center
but he did agree ~-~ith Mr. Rainey that' his shop will be lo'cated in an
~.nterior position in the shopping cen'ter where a non-conforming sign will
not really be noticeable.
Cha~irmaa Norton stated that the lctte'ring is perhaps a minor point; however,
th~ size of the sign and the color should be the same on all signs in the
center.
- !
Commissioner Metcalf stated that he did not feel too stromgly about
requiring conformonce of the subject sign.
Commissioner Kraus stated that 1) when this shopping center was first
started it was ma'de clear to the applkcant and agreed upon that all the
signs wou]_d conform 2) the type of s~gn desired for the center was
.presented to the Design Review Con~nittee and approved 3) now it is
-requested that: a different type of sign be allo;.~ed and 4) his feeling
is that the signs should all conform.~
Chairman Norton stated that he felt the co].oring of the sign is important
but did not feel the lettering would particularly make a difference and
he. would recon~nend that the Staff RepOrt dated 23 [~rch 1970 relative to
A-346 be amended as follows:
paragraph 2. .line 3. .delete "(excluding styl~ of lettering)" and
delete Condition (a).
Commissioner ~[etcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, that the Staff
Report dated 23 March 1970 be adopted; as amended, and Final Design Approval
be. granted for A-346 for an identification' sig~x as shown on Exhibit "A" and
su.bject to the condition stated in sa{d report~ moCion carried with Commissioner
Kraus diss~.ntin~.
V CITY COU~C!L D:'OO~q'
Co~n:issioner Livel7 gave a sun:::ary of iterns'revie:.~ad and action taken at the
City Council m.f, etin~ on 18 ~.%arch 1970 with ~-::phns~s cn ~atters of [,ar~icu!ar
interest to the Co=~nission.
He ruff.her stated that. a large number of resid?nts fro~ Sevir!a lane w2re
pres?nt at th? City Council :'..eetin5 to voice their opposition. to the installation
of the radio Co~.:er in the rear yar.-j of the Garraha~'s r'esid~-n,ae on Sevi!!a lane.
The Secretary explained that the Assistant Piann.~r is ~.mrkin.$ '{~ith other Cities
..... .~ ...... re.Eulat{cns are concerning ra~io towe..rs. He further stated
that the City Attorney ha= rule~ that to~.7ers, such as '.~ Gaff'at=an's, could be
co~si~ere,:f as an accessory structur.~.
.p_l__aj:~J.:.;:.r!2i CoP:',,:Lssio;-'~ Fiinut,:..,s - 23 T.,%arch 1970 -- Cont:Lnuecl
The Assistant Planner stated that son,.e y.~:ars ago the City of ~.ienlo Park 'went
to court over. a similar. incident and the [:St), lost the court case.
Coumnissioner Lively stated titat apparent ly '. the FCC ·controls these radio
towers and 'deterfairies how much interferer,-ce they cause.
Chairman Norton stated. he felt, sousething' should be done to regulate
these radio towers and the construction of second stories on homes that are
located in developed residential areas.
OLD BUSINESS
A. UP-165 - Brox.m and Kauffn'~ann, Inc., Miller Avenue - Request for Extension
- Continued from 9 l. farch' 1970.·
The' Setretary stated there have not bebn any problems in connection with
this Use Permit. -.
· Mr. Norman !.~.artin, President of the Prides Crossing Honteowners Association.
sta~(~d that 1) he is not opposed to the approval of an e:.:tension for the
subject model home sales office 2) he is interested in adding to the Staff
Report dated 23 l.larch ].970 relative to UP-165 a condition as stated in Condi-
tion (e) of the adopted Staff Report dated 23 June 1969 relative to A-3!6 as
follows:
"Yhat the applicant is to furnish a letter to the City
with a copy to Prides Crossing }.louteo;.aers Association
specifying that signs will ~be. made legally permanent
and that they ~.zill be light'ed in a manner specified
by the Planning Director affd ~.;ater service to be pro-
vided by the applicant."
l.[r. Martin further stated that 1) the subject ].~tter is u'::-t .f.n .:-:-:istence
and has not been received by the Prides Crossing Hoe~teoxvner':,
or the City and 2) the lighting referred to ih the above condition has
been prpvided but a complete hook-up has not been acco~.xplished.
Comraissioner Smith stated that he felt the matter of-the addition?.!
condition should be handled by the Staff since it is not really relative
to the subject request.
The Secretary stated that the Planning Staff will check into the matter
and contact the applicant to obtain the subject letter.
Commissioner Smith moved. seconc:ea by'Co:r:,ffssioner Crisp, that the Staff
Report da~ed 23 l.farch 1970 be a~opted and t-hat the subject request for
a one (1) year extension be granted for UP-i65 sub jeSt to the conditions
stated in said report; motion carried'unanimously.
B. S9R-832 David L. Hsn'denhall. :.it Eden Road - Re~ .... ~t for ~econsideration
of Under~zround Uti!!tv %ecuirement - Continued from 9 ~.larch 1970
The Secretary explained that the Staff is still ~.~orking with FGQE to
'deterntine the cost and e:.:tent of facilities involved in connection with
this request; therefore, he would reconz:uend that the matter be continued.
Chairn:an :.forton so directed.
-10-
P].c:r'minr-.,. Corr,.uission ,.'.finutc, s - 23 i.f-arch ].970 - Con.tirv,_:ed
Commissione~: ].k~tca].f stated b.e iS:. concerned x. Tith 'the il-tcreasing number
of illegal signs in the City° '.
'-.The Assi'stant Pi~:nner stated that the, people in violatier', of the Sign
Ordinance have been put on notice: and informed that they are required
to remove their illegal signs. :
VII. NEW BUSii,iESS
Commissioner Crisp'stated that a thirty-foot (30) height for a building
is too high a~c] sorae control should be instigated over same.
.Commissioner 1.Ietca].f advised that he x.:as not particularly bothered by
~,thirty-foot (30) height for an apartment building.'
Commissioner Crisp stated that a th~.rty-foot (30) building x.~ould involve
three stories x,yith a flat'.roof and that in itself is unattractive.
B ~ FENCES
.. Commissioner Lively stated that on Cox Avenue there are a series of rear
fences that are in-a dilapat~.d condition.
Chairman Norton stated that 1) t!~ere ~.;ere some fences on Cox near Fredricksburg
Drive in a si~ni!ar condition 2) it seems some control. cc<~b-.i ha, enforced
via the Zoning Ordinance and 3) perpaps the City could improve the fences
:.and bill the o~.~ner.
A. WRITTEN
1. Request for launderette
The Secretary read a communication received from ~-~. J. M. Kane
requesting that t~underette be added to the list of conditional
C (Visi~or-Cczmercial) Zoning District
or permitted uses in the "-V" .
Chairnzan Norton requested the S?cretary to publish a Notice of
Informal Hearing relative to the subject request for the meeting of
13~
:~p_ il 1970.
B ~ OI~L
~-~. Sam Hernandez stated that he ~:as very happy to see that so~.e
consideration ~-:as being given .to the_.i!legai signs and he ~cou!d, also.
like to bring up ~he matter of the Ar.zenaut Shopping Center which is
beginning to look like a used cv.r
The SeCretary stated tha~ he x,zi!l confer with the City Attorney
see x.lat the City can do about the cars sho~.~ for sale at Argonaut.
~-~s. Ottenbe~ of tb=~ !~a~,,~ of %.icn~.?n Voters sugS~sted that ~h~ ar~a
be rep]a:~t-~d iz~-order to ~ake {t n~ore attractive since the
~:as re~oved ~.:hen the high~.,'ay ~.,~s ~.~idened.
VIII c B. ORAL
2. Chairlnan Hort~n ac]~.no~:,zledged., ~..,ith pleasure, the presence of
Councilman }lobbins, ~irs. Ottc-~berg of the League of Wor','~en Votc, rs~'
~,~. Frampton and ~,lrs. I,icGuire of the Good Government Group, ~,ir.
Norman ~.!artin of the Prides Crossing Hon~eowners Association, anc~
~. Sam tlernan~ez, local merchant anti resident.. He, also, thanke~
~.~'s. McGuire for the coffee serve~.
ADJOUR~i,ENT
Chairman. Norton adjourned the meeting at 10:34 P.M.
tlespectful].y submitted,
.. ~, . .... y
Saratoga Planning Co~mnissiou
j
-12-