HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-14-1970 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING CO~MISS'ION
MINUTES
TIME: Monday, 14 September 1970, 7:30 P.M~.
PLACE: City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070
TYPE: Regular Meeting
I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Norton.
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Crisp, Ktaus, Lively, Martin, Metcalf, Norton, and
Smith.
Absent: None.
B. MINUTES
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded. by Commissioner Lively, that the reading
of the minutes of the 24 August 1970 meeting be waived and they be approved
as distributed to the Commission; motion carried unanimously.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Amendment to Ordinance NS-3 Relating to Time Extensions
Under Conditional Zoning Classification - Continued from
24 August 1970
Chairman Norton re-opened the hearing at 7:36 P.M. The Secretary stated
nothing new had been added to the file.
'~'~a'irma'~' '~t'on ~plained'that="'the p~0posed "am'en~m'en~" '~Uld "(aft'er'th~' ~'i'a~n'~ng
· Commission.._.r.e._C~m?_n_ds a...time limit on wh_i_.Ch_.._~..o..n_.s_.t.~..u.~.t,~gp..o_n a .conditi. ona:.!..~y .... ...=- ..........
"~:~'d pi'~e of property must' commence) subsequently allow the City Council
'fe.'0~ .'.~_ha.n_'gj~ ."i~he' 't._im.e -limit '-if' they "fee 1 it "i~' "Whr~ante"d ,~ W~t'h0ut' C0mm'i'~'S ion consent.
The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 14 September 1970 recommending
that the .subject ordinance amendment be approved and forwarded to the City
Council for its consideration.
Chairman Norton, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Metcalf, stated
.... that the amendment has been proposed as a result of the' request ~or exte'nsion
relative to the conditional zoning on the former Abrams property where the City
Council felt a longer extension was warranted than was granted by the Planl~ing
Commission.
Commissioner Metcalf emphasized that since he is a member 'of a body which is
about to vote on an amendment to recommend reduction to its own powers he
wished to go on record as opposing same and intends to vote against adoption
of said amendment.
Commissioner Lively commented that 1) the amendment as proposed indicates that
it would make no difference what recommendation the Planning Commission would
make since it could automatically be changed by the City Council under th~
proposed ordinance amendment 2) he felt an affirmative reconLmendation from the
Planning Commission would be a good thing rather than having a reversal or
change in Planning Contmission decisions 3) the Planning Commission spends a
great deal of time hearing applicants requests and the thoughts of the Planning
Commission on such matters should be respected and 4) the affirmative recommend-
ation should b~ retained in the ordinance as it now stands.
-1.-
Planning Commission Minutes 14 September 1970 - Continued
II. A. ORDINANCE AbZNDMENT - Continued
Chairman Norton explained thatll) the ordinance does require the Planning
Commission to make a recommendation relative to the subject time limits and
2) the City Council can alter'any decision of the Planning Commission
"except the conditional zoning time limit extension and the proposed
'~di'nance would '~nable them to do this.
Commissioner Smith. moved, seconded by Commissioner Metcalf, to close the
hearing at 7:43 P.M.; motion .carried unanimously.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the
Staff Report dated 14 September 1970 be adopted and the ordinance amendment
to Ordinance NS-3 relating to time extensions under conditional zoning
classification be approved and forwarded to the City Council as the recommend-
ation of the Planning Commission; motion carried with Commissioners Lively and
Metcalf voting no.
B. UP-186 - Lawrence E. Fordyce, Saratoga Avenue-Fruitvale Avenue - Request for
Use Permit to Allow a Convalescent Hospital - Continued from
ll.May 1970
The hearing relative to UP-186 was re-opened at 7:45 PoM. The Secretary
stated that a new Notice of Hearing was mailed.
Commissioner Smith stated that this matter had been continued until after
the General Plan Review since the Master Plan Map shows the property as a
park site and because of other pending apRl~cations for convalescent hospitals;
which, have since been acted upon by._the. Planning CommissiOn.
Mr. Stan Elliott, applicant's archite.~t?. stated that a full presentation of
the subject proposal was made in May 197~ a.~d the m~.~'~wa.s ~o~tpon~d .until ......
"'af[~r' .the"Gen'eral Pl'an' Review.
Chairman Norton stated that 1) the General Plan has now been resolved by
the Planning Commission and the City Council will act on it ~fter they hold
public hearings and as far as the Planning Commission recommendation is
concerned the property is still a park site and 2) he would suppose the
City Council would'not be inclined to change the designated park site.
Mr. Elliott stated that 1) the subject property is a nice sized piece of
property for the proposed use 2) the building Wo'~i~ occupy 30% of the site
3) it is felt that the subject hospital use for'the property would allow
maintenance of open-space with landscaping and provide a buffer between the
Civic Center Complex and the subject property.
Chairman Norton inquired if the traffic at the intersection of Fruitvale
Avenue and Saratoga Avenue would affect the ingress and egress to this
development, create excessive noise, etc.
Mr. Elliott explained that he did not feel that the ingress and egress
would be affected by this intersection since the entrance to the develop-
ment would be situated at another location.
}~s. Amy Jean Jorgenson, present to represent Mrs. Jean Currier,(owner-
of the property across the street from the proposed development for many
years) stated that Mrs. Currier would be happy to see the proposed develop,
ment in this location and prefers same rather than a park site and 2) Mrs.
Currier feels that a facility,.such as the one proposed, is needed for
the Senior Citizens of the City of Saratoga.
Planning Co~nission Minutes - 14 September 1970 - Continued
II. B. UP-186 - Continued
Mr. Kerwin, 13616 Fruitvale Avenue, stated that he would like to go~'· on
record as approving the subject proposal in preference to a park site.
Commissioner Smith, in answer .to an inquiry from Chairman Norton,
recommended that this matter be continued until after the City Council
completes its public hearing for 1970 General Plan.
Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 7:54 P.M., referred
UP-186 to the Subdivision Committee, directed same continued off the agenda
until after the City Council completes its study of the General Plan for
1970 and requested the Secretary to publish a new notice at the appropriate
time.
C. UP-191 - Brown and Kauffmann,·Brockton Lane - Request for Use Permit to
Allow a Model Home Sales Office - Continued from 24 August 1970
Chairman Norton re-opened the.hearing at 7:55 P.M. The Secretary stated
nothing new had been added to the file.
Mr. Sam Kauffman, president of Brown and Kauffman, was present and stated
1) the sales office was closed the morning after the last Planning Commission
meeting and they have been operating in the old model home sales office and·
2) he met with the Subdivision Committee and has prepared, at their reques. t,
some drawings for a parking lot and have arranged for bond to cover conVer-
sion '0f'~he .~UbjeC[ S~'ies
~he subdivision.
Chairman Norton thanked ~. Kauffmann for his cooperation in connection
with this matter.
Mr.. Jim Naugle, i2072 Ingrid Court, stated he would like to discuss with
Mr. Kauffmann the execution of the agreement made with Bro~ and Kauffmann
and the Prides Crossing Homeo~mers Association relative to the entrance
way at Cox and Miller Avenue.
}~. Kauffmann stated that the l·~·~aPe ..... plans for the subject entry way ·
were ready for submittal and the electrical and plumbing work has been
completed.
Commissioner Martin pointed out that Mr. Kauffmann, under UP-165 approval,
was required to obtain a letter from the Prides Crossing Homeowners Association
and furnish the City with a letter stating that a legall'y permanent sign
has been completed at the entrance to Prides Crossing.
Chairman Norton informed that'the requirements of the Prides Crossing
Homeowners Association are legally unenforceable by the Planning Conmission;
however, it would be courteous if the Prides Crossing Homeo~ers Association
and Brown and Kauffmann could come to some agreement.
Commissioner Martin pointed out that 1) problems did arise because the
meter box at the entrance to Prides Crossing was not installed properly
by the applicant and 2) the lights on one side of the entrance are on one
'meter and the lights on the other side are on another meter and this could
involve quite an expense'over a period of time.
Chairman Norton stated that the requirements of UP-165 are not involved
with the subject application UP-191'and he felt that it was satisfactory
that the applicant did make some progress to clear up ·the misunderstandings
that have occurred.
~. Kauffmann stated that 1) the Planning Commission can count on the
cooperation of Brown and Kauffmann in clearing up the misunderstandings
and 2) the work and material. on the entrance was a_voluntary ·contribution
on the part of the applicant.
-3-
Planning Con~nission Minutes - 14 September 1970 - Continued
II. C. UP-191 - Continued
Commissioner Martin stated 1) he is not opposed to granting approval
for UP-191, but he does believe that the requirements of UP-165 should
be met by the applicant prior to approval of UP-191 2) the landscaping
has not been completed at the entrance and Brown and Kauffmann enjoyed
the use of the model home sales office approved under UP-165 and if that
Use Permit terminates then the requirements will, also, terminate if
the applicant is not made to complete them.
The Secretary explained that the landscape requirement is covered under
the applicant~s subdivision approval and can be enforced under that appli-
cation.
Chairman Norton explained that enforcement of these matters is primaril7
a matter for the Planning Director and not up to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Naugle stated that 1) he was speaking as an interested private citizen
2) a requirement of UP-165 was that the lighting for the entrance sign
was to include two bulbs not to exceed 100-watts and he felt the applicant
should be made to comply with =same 2) the people in .the Prides Crossing
area are proud of their homes and like to use the subject entrance. sign
to direct visitors and 3) the sign should be of a more permanent nature
where the letters do not fall out and lie on the ground.
The Secretary explained that the applicant is responsible to maintain
the sign in good order and if 'he does not then the City can take steps
to have the applicant do so or have it done for him.
Chairman Norton stated that there have been many subdivision signs but
none of them are really permanent indefinitely.
The Secretary explained that tlhe applicant did obtain Fina.1 Design Approval
for the entrance sign at Prides Crossing and he is r~aSonably sure that there
was nothing specific as to the number of' bulbs.
~. Kauffmann explained that 1) on the landscape plans there are some
permaneB~.- light fixtures sho~,~n for the subject entry-way 2) the light
fixture and bulbs are frequently stolen and there has been considerable
vandalism in connection with the lettering on the signs and 3) the
applicant intends to adjust the lighting and is trying to come up with
some fixtures that will discourage future thefts.
~[r. Kauffmann, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Martin, stated.
that 1) the fencing in the perimeter of the Cox Garage has been completed
where legally permitted; however, Brown and Kauffmann is still working on
acquisition of the remaining unfenced property and 2) the landscaping will,'
also, be completed when the le. gal details are worked out .
The Assistant Planner read the. Staff Report dated 14 September 1970 recommend-
ing that LrP-191 be approved.
Commissioner Metcalf recommended that a time limit be included in Item 7
· in the subject Staff Report regulating the time of installation of the
off-street parking spaces.
The Secretary stated that line 1.. .of Item 7. . .could be changed to
read as follows:
"Provi'd~"'(wit~in"[hirt~"(30)'~a'y'~')"~'~'~"'('iO) 0ffistreet' p~r~'ng spaces, etc."
CommiSsioner" Smith moved, sec6nded' by C6mmiSsioner' Li~el~'~' t'o CloSe
hearing at 8:17 P.M.; motion carried unanimously.
Con~-nissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the Staff
Report dated 14 September 1970 be adopted, as amended, and a Use Permit to
allow a model home sales office be granted for a period of one (1) year
shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" and subject to the Conditions stated in said
report; motion carried unanimously.
Plannin~ Con~.ission Minutes - 14 September 1970 - Contint, ed
II. D. UP-192 - St. Patrick Fathers 'Missionary Society, Eric Drive - Request
for Use Permit to Allow a Priest Parish House - Continued
from 24 August 1970
The hearing relative to UP-192 was re-opened at 8:19 P.M. The Secretary
read a corm~aunication filed in support of the subject application by Mary
and-Charles Darcy.
~. John Richter, 12127 cand~ ~ne, stated that 1) he represented the
applicant 2) the Planning Commission has all the information relative
to this matter an~ requested that some decision be made at th'~ earliest
possible time and 3) he and other interested' CitiZens woul~ like to keep
the Fathers as residents of [he area.
Co~issioner Smith rea~ the Subdivision Committee Report dated 14 Sep.tember
recommending that the subject Use Permit (UP-192) be denied.
Co~issioner ~rtin stated he did visit the subject residence and found
the business conducted by the Fathers to be only incidental to the residence.
-Chairman Norton stated that _if..the applicant did not employ a Secretary
in their residence t~n the..us~ coul~ qualify as a Home Occupation.
Commissioner Martin stated that 1) under a Use Permit restrictions could
be enforced 2) he felt that 'a Use Permit might be grante~ for this request
with the condition that no classes be conducted in the residence an~ the
garage not be altered.
Chairman Norton state~ he must agree with the Subdivision Co~ittee that
any expansion of church operation beyond the large site already approved
under an existing Use Permit would be undesirable.
Chairman Norton, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner [~rtin, state~'
that the applicant's Secretary could perform her duties in the farm house
..... ~"i~a'~d"' on the Church of Ascension property since that would be consistent
with the church Use Permit.
Commissioner Smith stated that the entire operation could be moved to the
farm house on the church property and a Use Permit would not be necessary.
Commissioner Metcalf stated that it is his feeling that if the subject
Use Permit were granted the Planning Commission would have no future
basis for refusing any application for any similar Use Permit for any
non-profit organization in the City; therefore, h~.agrees_with the Sub-
division Committee reco~enc~ation for denial of UP-I92.
Father Dillon stated that the house-keeper-secretary does not live at
the residence with the priests.
~. C. K. McAlister,12313 Mabel Court, inquired whether the Planning
Co~ission is, in effect, saying that if the secretary no longer worked
in the house there is no reason for a Use Permit?
Chairman Norton answered that 1) if '.the actual business ~.~ere conducted on
· the Church of Ascension property the use would be legal under the church
Use Permit and 2) the Commission feels that enough area is already committed
to church use in this one residential area.
~. John Richter stated that 1) whatever the Fathers do or wherever they
are they are doing their work because it is as much a part of their lives
as anything else they do 2) he did feel the Planning Commission did not
fully understand this and 3) . after a request for a show of hands it was
determined that quite a number of people were present in favor of granting
the subject Use Permit.
}~. John W. Power, 12150 ~isty ~ne, stated that 1) a man doing some of
his business in his home and his wife doing some of his secretarial duties
would not be considered unlawful and 2) there are probably home offices
in at least nine (9) out of ten (10) homes in Saratoga.
-5'-
Planning Commis s - 14 September 1970 inued
II'. D. UP-192 - Continued
Chai. nnan Norton read fr0m...Art.,ic_l_e .12 of Ordinance NS-3 (Zoning Ordinance)
and....S.aid that a resident could be employed in a home office ..... He further
..expl_ai~ed_..that.' .t_h_..~._Planning COmmission must make a.._decision relative to
UP-192 on the basis of the Zoning Ordinance requirements.
~s. John Richter .wondered if. a volunteer group did the work for .the
Fathers would it be considered illegal without a Use Permit?
Chairman Norton explained that 1) a specific ruling relative to
volunteer help should be obtained from the City Attorney and 2). the
applicants might consider obtaining an opinion from their o~ attorney
as to whether volunteer workers are considered employees.
Commissioner Lively stated that the Commission is faced with a residential
use of the property on one hand and a business type use in a residential
area on the other hand and after careful consideration he must agree w{th the
Subdivision Committee recommendation that the requested USe Permit be denied.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Metcalf, to close the
hearing at 8:45 P.M.; motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Smith moved, secbnded by Commissioner Metcalf, that the
Subdivision Committee Report dated~l-4--~September 1970 be adopted and the
requested Use Permit (UP-192) be/denied since the findings of Section 16.6
of Ordinance NS-3 cannot be made~;--mot'ion carried with Commissione~ Martin
voting no.
E. UP-194 - Noorudin Billawala, Sousa lane - Request for Use Permit to Allow
a Convalescent Hospital
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:47 P.Mo The Secretary stated the
Notices of Hearing were mailed and then briefly reviewed the subject appli-
cation.
Mr. Sanford Berliner, applicant's attorney, stated that 1) he would like
to request a three (3) weeks continuance for UP-194 since all the material
relative to this .application is not ready at this time.
Chairman Norton inquired if the plan in the file UP-194 is the same map
as originally submitted?
Mr. Berliner stated that it was and it is outdated since it still reflects
the medical offices which are no longer proposed as ~art of the subject
development; therefore, a continuance to 13 October 1970 is requested in
order to allow time to prepare new plans.
Chairman Norton, in answer to a member of the audience, stated that"when
the new plans are completed they will be available in the City Offices
for review.
Mr. Berliner advised that he would be happy to supply any interested
neighbor with a set of plans if they left him their names and addresses.
Mr. John Hampton, 13402 'Sousa. lane, stated that 1) their street is now
called Sousa lane, but if any more hospitals are proposed for location on
the street it may be better to change the name to Hospital Row and 2) he
is wondering if something will be done to protect the interests of the
residents of Sousa lane.
-6-
.l'lannin~i Commission ~ inutes - i4 September 1970 -
II. E. UP-194 - Continued
Chairman Norton recommended that, since public hearings are held to
dicusss such matters, the interested residents of the area should attend
the public hearings to keep themselves informed of what developments are
taking place. He further stated that the Subdivision Conm~ittee will meet
to review this application and anyone .intereste~ in meeting with the
Committee should contact the Secretary to arrange an appointment.
Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 8:55 P.M., directed
UP-194 continued to the ne:~t regular meeting and referred same to the
Subdivision Committee for study.
F. UP-195 - C & I Development, Paramount ~ive and Highway 85 - Request for
Use Permit to Allow a Model Home Sales Office
The hearing was opened at 8:5'6 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notices of
Hearing were ~iled and briefly reviewed this application and added that
this is a very standard type Of application for a model home. sales office.
No one in the audience wished. to comment relative to this matter.
The applicant was not present.
Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 8:58 P.M., directed
UP-195 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the
Subidivision Committee for study.
G. UP-196 - Cal-West, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Use Permit to Allow a
Model Home Sales Office
Chairman Norton opened the hearing at 8:59 P.M. The Secretary stated the
Notices of Hearing ~ere ~iled and explained that this model home sales
office ~.~ill be located in the comasunity center of this development.
~. Warnick, president of Cal-West, was present and stated that he had no
further comments, but would be happy to answer any questions members of the
Commission might want to ask.
No one in the audience x~ished to comment relative to b~-196.
Chair~n Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 9:01 P.M., referred
UP-196 to the Subdivision Committee for study and directed same continued
to the next regular meeting.
V-351 - St. Patrick Fathers Missionary Society, Eric Drive - Request for
Variance to Allo~.~ Conversion of the Existing Garages for a Study -
Continued from 24 August 1970
The Chairman re-opened the hearing at 9:03 P.M.
Mr. John Richter, 12127 Candy Lane, stated that this request is
separate from UP-192 and since the use of a study in a home is normal
he would request that the subject Variance be granted. Mr. Richter,
in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, further stated that the
Planning Commission is in possession of all the facts relative to V-351
and he did not care to rehash them again; furthermore, he cannot completely
describe the remodeling of the subject garage.
Mr. Wheeler, treasurer for St. Patrick Fathers, explained that 1) two-thirds
of the garage is proposed for the study area 2) the doors of the garage
are left as is 3) the residence does have a three car garage and 4) the
appearance of the exterior of the house will not be altered by the requested
Variance.
Mr. Madhu Desai, of .19499 Eric Drive, stated that 1) he would like to
make it clear that the petition submitted at the meeting of 24 August 1970
and signed by seven residents of the area should not have been read in
connection with UP-192 2) said petition was intended to voice opposition to
-7-
Pla~i'~i~8 CoL'i~issio~ I, lin~ 14 ScpLual{jc~: 1UTO - C~
II. H. °V-351 - Continued
"' ~2351'and3) the residents of the area would like to see the Fathers remain
in their homes; however, if they must employ a Secretary then they should
transfer the activity to the Church of Ascension property.
Chairman Norton closed the hea~ing for the evening at 9:10 P.M., directed '
V-351 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Variance
COmmittee for study.
Commissioner Kraus, on behalf of the' Variance Committee, made arrangements with
Mr. Richter for an on-site inspection of the property.
I. V-352 - R. M. Klepinger, Lanark DriVe - Request for Variance to Allow Installa-
' tion of a Utility Pole - Continued from 24 August 1970
The Chairman re-opened the hearing at 9:11 P.M. The Secretary stated nothing
new had been added to the file.
The AssiStant Planner read the Staff Report dated 14 September 1970 recommending
that V-352 be denied..
No one in the audience wished to comment relative to this matter.
The applicant was not present.
~ommissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the public hearing
be closed at 9:14 P.M.; motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Kraus moved, seconded ~y~.Commissioner Crisp to adopt the Staff
Report dated 14 September 1970 and d~By/the Variance to allow installation of
a utility pole on the basis the findings required under Section 17.6 of the
City of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance cannot be made for the reasons stated in said
report; motion carried unanimously.
J. V2353 - William Greathead, ~'~rie Lane - Request for Variance to Allow a Reduction in Side Yard Setback Requirements
Chairman Norton opened the hearing relative to V-353 at 9:16 P.M. The Secretary
stated the Notices of Hearing were ~ailed and explained that the primary reason
for the Variance is due to the topography of the property.
Mr. Ed Meyers, applicant's architect, stated that 1) the flat area of the property
is not of sufficient size, without USinz the required side yard,.to allow for a
pool and 2) when the" property is d~veloped the building site will be on the
flattened area ava~i~ble leaving a steep drop-off at the end of the property
with a 4-foot retaining wall.
Chairman Norton rgcommended that, perhaps, the applicant should consider
re-designing the plans for his house since Variances are not readily granted
by the Planning Commission.
Mr. David Tidder, representing an adjacent property owner, stated that 1) it
is their opinion that the City of Saratoga has been fair in their previous
requirement for a 20-foot side. yard setback in the subject area and 2) he wished
to eipress opposition to the proposed Variance.
Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 9:20 P.M., referred V-353
to the Variance Committee for study', and directed same continued to the next
regular meeting.
Commissioner Kraus, on behalf of th'e Variance Co~nittee, arranged for an on-site
inspection of the property at 9:00 A.M. on Saturday, 26 September 1970.
Planning Commission Minutes - 14 September 1970 Continued
III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS
A. SDR-849 Thomas L. Dashiell, Bohlman Road - Building Site
Approval - Revised Tentative Map 3 Lots Continued from
24 August 1970
Commissioner Smith recommended that SDR-849 be continued to the next
regular meeting to await submittal of a revised map.
Chairman Norton so directed.
B. SDR-862 John A. Zabielski, Mt. Eden Road Building Site Approval
- 1 Lot - Continued from 24 August 1970
Commissioner Smith .stated that the applicant has requested withdrawal
for SDR-862.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissione~ Cr~.sp, that the
request for withdrawal in c~ection with SDR~862.~be._approved; motion
carried unanimously.
C. SD-864'- Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Fruitvale Avenue -
Subdivision Approval - 39 Lots
Commissioner Smith recommended that SD-864 be continued to the next
regular meeting to allow lime for further study.
Chairman Norton so directed.
D. SDR-865 - Jones and David~on, Quito Road Building Site Approval - 1 Lot
Commissioner Smith advised that SDR-865 is a refile on a building site
that was previously approved.
The applicant was present'and stated he did review the proposed condi-
tions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the
Building Site Committee Report dated 14 September 1970 relative to
SDR-865 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed
4 September 1970) be approved subject to the conditions set forth
in said report; motion carried unanimously.
E. SDR-866 - Donn R. Campion, Bohlman Road Building Site Approval - 1 Lot
The Secretary explained that 1) the applicant did review the proposed
conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same and 2) this
building site application is for the remodeling of an existing residence.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the
Building Site Committee Report dated 14 September 1970 relative to
SDR-866 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed
4 September 1970) be approved subject to the conditions set forth
in said report; motion carried unanimously.
F. SDR-867 - Dr. Herbert Kau~man, Vaquero Court Building Site Approval -
1 Lot
The Secretary explained that the applicant has reviewed the proposed
conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same. He further
stated that this is a site that was originally approved as two seperate
lots and the applicant is'treating it as one and 2) the one-lot treatment
is better because of the road problems that exist is this area.
-9-'
Planning Commission Minutes - 14 September 1970 Con ~eo
III. F. SDR-867 - Continued
Commissioner Smith recommended:that in Condition II-L. .line 2.
of the Building Site Committee.Report dated 14 September 1970 the
word"proposed" be eliminated.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the
Building Site Committee Report dated 14 September 1970 relative to
SDR-867 be adopted, as amended, and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A",
filed 4 September 1970) be approved subject to the conditions set forth
in said report; motion carried unanimously.
IV. DESIGN REVIEW
A. A-353 - Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Saratoga Avenue -
Final Design Review - Identification Sign for Apartment Complex
The Assistant Planner explained that the applicant could apply for a
temporary construction sign until the Zoning Ordinance is amended to allow
more sign area for the type of complex constructed by the applicant.
Commissioner Metcalf, in view of the foregoing, recommended that A-353
be continued. He further stated that 1) four-square feet is the sign
area allowed for apartments; however, this appears to be inequitable
for the identification of the applicant's apartment complex and 2) there
is a condominium development adjacent to the aeplicant's property that
does have a larger identification sign.
Chairman Norton directed A-353 continued off the agenda until such time as
the Planning Commission takes some action relative to a Zoning Ordinance
amendment in connection with sign limitations for apartments.
B. A-354 - saratoga' Parent Nursery School, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and
Williams Avenue - Final Design Review - Identification Sign
for Existing Nurse'ry School
Commissioner Metcalf explained that the sign has already been put up on
the basis of tentative approval by the Design Review Committee.
The Assistant Planner explained that the size of the sign is based on
the Zoning Ordinance requirements for public or private institutions~'
He~'then read the Staff Report dated 14 September 1970 recommending that
Final Design Approval be granted for A-354.
Commissioner Kraus stated he objected to the size of'the subject sign
and the lettering used on same.
Commissioner Smith agreed that the sign did seem too large.
Commissioner Crisp pointed out that the sign is located in a residential
area .
The Assistant Planner stated'that the applicant did have a small free-standing
sign which was vandalized; thereafter, the applicant decided to put the
sign on the building so it would not be so easily avaiable for future
vandal s.
Commissioner Lively explained that the Zoning Ordinance does allow a
sign even larger than... the one proposed by the applicant.
-10-
Flanning Comm~.ssion Minutes - 14 September 1970 - Continued
IV. B. A-354 Continued
Commissioner Smith stated that.the Planning Commission could restrict the
applicant to a smaller sign than that allowed by the ordinance.
Th'e Assistant Planner stated that t~e sign is'Set back..apPrg.~i~a~ely 50' or
60-feet from Highway 85 with parking in the front of the building and the sign
"n0t"really'~isible from 'the'highway.' .....
Commissioner Metcalf explained that th~ Design Review Committee did see
the actual sign and on the basis of that they felt the sign was acceptable.
Commissioner Kraus stated that if the Design Review Committee did see the
sign and find it acceptable th~n he is willing to vote for its approval.
Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, to_a~p.pt
the Staff Report dated 14 September 1970 relative to A-354 a~d grant
Final Design Approval for the new identiffcation sign for the Saratoga
Parent Nursery School as shown'on Exhibit "A" and subject to the conditions
stated in said report; motion carried unanimously.
C. A-355 - Tire Service, Pro.sl'z-ect Road - Final Design Review - Commercial Building
Commissioner Metcalf explained that the construction block to be used for
the subjec[ building will be yellowish in color.
The Assistant Planner stated that the actual retail store area will be
very mm.ll since most of the building is reserved for tire installation.
He then read the Staff Report 'dated 14 September 1970.recommending that
A-355 be granted Final Design Approval.
Chairman Norton pointed out that the Design Review Committee has recommended
that the blue trim shown on the exhibits be changed to brown.
Mr. Stieber, architect, explained that the applicant does.prefer.the blue
trim since it has proved most ~satisfactory in the past~.
The Assistant Planner recommended that Condition (g)' of' the Staff Report
be changed to read as follows:
(g) Color of service bay doors and side entrance door~to be same
as color of wood trim (dark brown).
Commissioner Metcalf stated he did.look at the applicant's stores in
Campbell and Los Gatos and found that the brown trim .throughout is much
more attractive.
Commissioner. Martin stated that he looked at the store in Los Gatos and he
did not find the blue trim objectionable.
Mr. Stieber, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Kraus, stated that
the refuse area will be screened.
Mr. Eaugle, speaking for the West Valley Beautification Coranittee in the
.absence of Oskar Thurnher, stated that 1) they had occasion to review
the plans for this development 2) it appears that the front glass will
be 14-feet high and serve an another living sign 3) the glass should be
cut down to a height of 8-feel and 4) the Final Design Approval should
be held up until after the landscape plans are approved.
Commissioner Metcalf explained that it is not the procedure to detain
Final Design Approval until after the landscape plans are approved.
-11 -
Planning Commission Minutes - 14 September 1970 - Continued
IV. C. A-355 - Continued
Mr. Jim Naugle stated that 1) the West elevation exposure of the subject
building is a blank wall very much like the one on the Grand Auto building
and it could be improved by planting or using some material other than
concrete 2) the front setback of the building ..'is inadequate and the
roof!line is not very eloquent 3). the blue doors, as proposed, will be
garish 4) San Jose has allowed this type of building in their areas
adjoining Saratoga 5) the Beautification Committee has had some success
in up-grading the area and the Safeway Store has been very cooperative
in the effort 6) a citizens Architectural Advisory Committee was formed
to look into design of commercial buildings 7) it would be a good opportunity
at this time to make use of their services 8) it is about time the developers
are asked to pay the cost of polluting the visual and aesthetics of this
area and 9) in summary'this building could be improved by permitting less
glass, a different roof treatment and a little larger area for landscaping.
Mr, Stieber, architect, stated'that 1) a fine job landscaping and screening
will be done with 15-ga!lon trees'and 2) the glass on the Tire Service
building will be.about one-~hird of the area allowed for the Grand Au'to Store.
Mr. Naugle stated that he is not saying the Beautification Committee is
opposed to the Tire Service Store but they are opposed to yards of glass
to show the merchandise through with hanging spotlights and signs.
Commissioner Martin suggested that Mr. Naugle take a look at the applicant's
store in Los Gatos since that is not garish, even though, it has the blue
trim.
Commissioner Lively explained Zthat in deliberation 0f the Design Reivew
Committee it was brought out that this will be a business entirely different
from Grand Auto and will be closed by 5:00 or 6:00 P.M. each day.
Mr. Naugle stated that it would be desirable for the Planning Commission
to obtain. the ideas of t~e Architectural Advisory Committee on this particular
building and especially to try and get some ideas on how to change the tide
of the appearance of the commercial buildings in this area. .
Commissioner Metcalf, in .answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated
that 1) the Design Review Committee felt that this building as shown on
the exhibits .'(with the exception of the blue trim) would be a definite
improvement over the adjacent Gr~nd Auto store 2) as far as using the
Architectural Advisory Committee for this particular proposal is concerned -
the Design Review Committee did not feel that was necessary or desirable
3) the Architectural Committee will be called upon When it involves some-
thing in the Village area or when it has a..fairly large visual or aesthetic
impact 5) the Design. Review Committee is co.ncern~d .>?it~_keeping up
standards in this area r~gardless of what happens in anpth~r
the street
Mr. Naugle pointed out that 1) the subject area is one of the main
entrances to the City and 2) it is a critical area to start correcting
past mistakes and invoke aesthetic qualities and protecting this corner
from future development of the type under discussion.
Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, to adopt, as
amended the Staff Report dated 14 September 1970 relative t~ A-355 and
'grant Final Design Approval for the commercial building for the Tire
Service Company as shown on Exhibits "A", "B" and "D" and subject to the
cohditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Norton explained that if Mr. Naugle and the Beautification
Committee are concerned about this building they can appeal the matter to
the City Council.
-12-
Planning Commission Minutes - 14 September 1970 - Continued
V. Clrl% COUNCIL REPORT
Commissioner Smith gave a summary of items reviewed and action taken at the City
Council meeting of 2 September 1970 with emphasis on items of particular interest
to the Commission.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. SDR-832 David L. Mendenhall, Mt. Eden Road - Request for Reconsideration -
Continued from 24 August 1970
Commissioner Smith recommended thatz this matter be removed from the agenda
until such time as PG&E provides'the needed information in c~nnection with
this request.
C'hairman Norton directed the'matter continued off the agenda until such time
as the appropriate information is r.eceived.
B. V-349 John Wallace, Lumbertown Lane - Request 6f CitX Council for Reconsideration
Commissioner Kraus read the report of the Variance Committee dated 14 September
1970 recommending denial for the request for appeal in connection with V-349.
......... Chairman No~'~o'd recommended that in paragraph 4. .line 3. .the words (Map Act) be deleted from the subject report.
Commissioner'Kraus, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Metcalf, stated
that a Variance is not necessary in the case of Mr. Wallace since the same
objective can be obtained by granting of an easement or an exchange of property.
Chairman Norton explained that without a Variance approval the applicant would
'be out the cost of a Record of Survey; however, other applicants have managed
without a Variance in 'similar circumstances.
Commissioner Kraus moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Variance
Committee Report dated 14 ~e.p.~ember 1970 be adopted, as amended, and the
said report recommending d~l for the request for appeal for C-349 be
approved and forwarded to the City Council ss the recommendation of the Planning
Commission; motion carried unanimously.
C. REVISION OF SLOPE DENSITY STANDARDS - Continued from 24 August 1970
The entire Commission read the memorandumssubmitted by the Planning Director
r'elative to hillside development and slope density.
Chairman Norton explained that 1) the question is whethe~ the Planning Commission
agrees unanimously with Items 1, 2, and 3 as listed on page 1. .of the
memo addressed to the City Council '2) his feeling on Item 2 is that an applicant
proposing a building site on an hillside lot (even if it is a perfect building
site) Should be required to have two acres 3) he did not favor a lot of construc-
tion in the hillside area 4) he does realize there is a safety element involved
in development of hillside lots and 5) it is a matter of preserving a major
community asset.
Commissioner Smith, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Lively, stated
that i) the Subdivision Committee checked ~ith other cities and they have a
slope density formulaL very similar to Saratoga's and it is just as difficult
to work with and 2) nothing will be gained by simply increasing the area for
hillside building sites.
Commissioner Metcalf explained that' if a developer has thirty (30) acres zoned
R-1-40,O00 and he submits a map showing twenty-seven (27) or twenty-eight (28)
building sites of slightly more tha'n one acre in size and the slope density
standards are applied the developer may end up with only eighteen lots.
Commissioner Smith stated that if the slope density formula were used as
described by Commissioner Metcalf everyone would end up with the same size
lot and that is where the entire theory falls apart.
-13-
Planning Commission Minutes - 14 September 1970 - Continued
VI. C. Slope Density Standards - Continued
Chairman Norton stated that it may be just as simple to re-zone the
properties in the hillside areas to require two and three acre lots per
building site.
Commissioner Martin advised thatl he just recently returned from Oregon
and there have been some beautiful split-level homes built on sites
with slopes greater than 10% and~ he feels the same opportunity exists
in the Saratoga hillsides; there'fore, Item 2 of the Planning Director's
memo could very well be applied. He further stated that a hillside
building-site can be made attractive by proper landscaping.
Commissioner Lively stated that a greatdeal of time was spent in
coordinating the present 'slope density formula and it should not be
put aside without some very serious consideration.
The .Secretary explained that the reason for proposing a change in the
slope density ordinance is that .when a consistent slope exists nothing
is really achieved' by adding more land to a site.
'Ch~i'r'man Norton explained that 1) a hillside lot should not be allowed
"~g"be 'developed just because it .is developable and 2) perhaps
b0t'h . a provision for excess cut and fill plus a slope density o~dinance
'i~ '~'~e'de'~ and 'they should be enforced separately.
Commissioner Crisp explained that the representative for Saratega Foothills
Development Corporation is present and would like to discuss the slope density
resolution as it applies to the property his company has proposed for develop-
ment on. Fruitvale Avenue.
Chairman Norton stated that the Saratoga Foothills development will be
held up until the slope density standards are resolved.
Commissioner Lively stated that. 1) he walked over the Saratoga FoOthills
.property on Fruitvale Avenue 2) he feels the development of this property
would set a precedent in the area and it should be made to adhere to the
slope density standards and 3) the cuts and fills on the property should be
rain imi ze d.
Commissioner Metcalf stated that he agreed with CoEissioner Lively.
Commissioner Smith stated that if Saratoga Foothills had been allowed to
develop the Fruitval'e Avenue property as "P-C" many of the objectives
expressed would have been achieved.
Commissioner Metcalf stated that he was disappointed that the Saratoga
Foothills application for a "P-C" development has been scheduled for
withdrawal and that a more imaginative plan was not submitted.
Mr. Lohr, representative for Saratoga Foothills, stated that 1) he has
worked with Mrs. Harvey (owner of the subject property) and her attorney
for two years to determine a suitable development for this property
.2) he discussed purchasing the property from Mrs. Harvey but she did
not want to accept a loss. even though a good price was offered 3) in
November '1969 it was agreed that the a P-C plan would be submitted to
the City for review 4) a number of studies have been done in the area
5) Mrs. Harvey's attorney obtained some newspaper clippings relative
t6 the "P-C" development while it was being considered .by the City and
the attorney felt Mrs. Harvey would be getting involved in too many
responsibilities if the property were developed as proposed ~) he
invited the attorney to a City Council meeting at which time Saratoga
citizens indicated that they did not understand the proposal for the.
property :7) the citizens became emotional about the development and it
appeared the "P-C". development would be a major crisis for the City 10) Mrs.
Harvey has owned the property for several years and is now ready to sell it
-14-
Planning Commission Minutes 14 Septeb~er 1970 - C~ eed
VI. C. Slope Density Standards Continued
9) the attorney has stated that since the "P-C" idea has not been
accepted he will allow Saratoga Foothills to submit another, different~
proposal and if that is not accepted he will sell the property to someone
else; therefore, it is important that some deCi'sion is made relative to
the slope density resoltuion s~ that a new approach can be worked out
for the subject property.
Chairman Norton stated that the majority of the Commission feels that the
slope-density formula should.be applied to the subject property.
Mr. Lohr~ Saratoga Foothills .representative, stated that he wou~d like
the'Commission to take another close look at the property before reaching
any decision.
Chairman Norton requested the 'Secretary to sched61e a'Study Session
for the purpose of discussing .the revision of slope density standards for
Monday, 21 September 1970 at 7.:30 P.M. in the Conference Room.
D. UP-173 Franklin Homes, Sevilla Lane - Request for Extension Continued
from 24 August 1970
The Secretary explained that the applicant has requested that this matter
be continued to the next regular meeting since he still has several homes to
sell in'the subdivision. He further stated that the Staff Report dated
14 September 1970 recommends that the request for extension be denied on
the basis the requirements of Subdivision Approval and Design Review Approval
have not been met.
Commissioner Smith recommended that the applicant be informed that if he
does not comply with the stubject conditions then his request for continuance
will be denied.
Chairman Norton directed the matter continued to the next regular meeting.
E. SDR-796 - A. L. Hanson, Dolphin Drive Request for Extension - Continued
from 24 August 1970
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp tg~ggrant a one
(1) year extension for SDR-796 as. requested; motion carried unanimously.
F. SDR-806 Ed Williams, Ten Acres Road - Request for Extension - Continued
from 24 August 1970
Commissioner Smith moved, sec6nded by Commissioner Crisp, to~grant a one
(1) year extension for SDR-806 as requested; motion carried unanimously.
VIII. COb~UNICATIONS
A. WRITTEN
1. Letter"S~bmitted by Commissioner Martin
Chairman Norton noted that Commissioner Martin submitted a letter
relative to scheduling attendance and accomodations for Sub-Committee
meetings. Chairman Norton directed the matter continued to the next
regular meeting and requested each Commissioner to be prepared to
discuss the matter at that time.
2. SDR-807 John D. Johnson, Three Oaks Way= - Request for Extension
The Secretary stated that a request for a cont'inuance for. SDR-807
was received.
Chairman Norton directed the matter continued to the next regular
meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for study.
i-ianning Commission ~Les - 1'4 SepCumb~ iV/0 ~e..d
VIII. A. 3. Commissioner Lively.
Commissioner Lively noted that he would not be able to attend
the next meeting of the Planning Commission on 28 September 1970.
B. ORAL
Chairman Norton acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Councilman
Sanders, FIrs .Oe'tenberg of the League of Women Voters, and Firs. Owen
and Mrs. Bolleger of the Good Governme~t Group. tle, also, thanked
Mrs. Ox~en for the coffee served at recess, with cooperation of the
Planning Department Staff.
IX. ADJOURDENT
Chairman Norton adjourned tt~e meeting at 11:50 P.M.
Respectfully submitted, ':
Stanley M. WMlker, Secretary
Saratoga Planning Commission
.j
-16-