Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-11-1971 Planning Commission Minutes (2) - CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION M_______INUTES TIME: Monday, 11 January 197t, 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 Chair~n Norton at 7:30 P.M. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Kraus, Lively, Martin, Metca.lf.,~.Ndrton, and Smith. Absent: None. B. MINUTES Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Lively, that the reading of the minutes of the 28 December 19.70 meeting be waived and they be approved as distributed to the Commission; motion carried unanimously. ELECTIONS ~ Chairman Norton noted that the Planning Commission meeting of 25 January F 1971 will be the appropriate time for election of officers and appg.i. ntmen."t ! of new committee members .fc~ the COming year ! ...... J ..................... .. ~ ......................... : · II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. C-137 - Alfred F. Dumas, Inc., Prospect Road - Request for Change of Zoning from "R-1-10,000" (Singl. e-F.amily Residential) to "R-1-10,000" "P-C" (Single-Family Residential Planned Community) - Continued from 28 December 1970 '. Commissioner Smith reconmended that. C-137 be continued to the next regular meeting to await the submittal of fhrther information and allow additional time for review of the proposed plans. i No one wished to comment re'i~'tive ~o this matter; therefore, the hearing was~' ,/not opened. . ..... .; . " Chairman Norton directed that C-137, be-continued to the meeting of 25 January 1971 and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for additional review. B. C-139 - Malachy J. Moran, Saratoga ',Avenue - Request for Change of Zoning from "R-1-20,000" (Single-Famil~ Residential) to "R-1-10,000" (Single-Family Residential) - Continued from 28 December 1970 Commissioner Smith stated that at the last meeting of the Planning Commission C-139 was continued to the meetingI of 25 January 197,1; therefore, the hearing need not be opened at this time. Chairman Norton, in view of the fo.regoing, did not open the hearing and directed the matter continued to the meeting of 25 January 1971.. C. C-140 - Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, Saratoga Avenue and Cox Avenue - ' Request for Change of Zoning from "A" '(Agricultural) to "C-N" (Ne ighb orhood -Comer c ia 1 Chairman Norton opened the hearing at 7:33 P.M. The Assistant Planner stated that the Notice of Hearing was mailed and published and explained that the application involves 1.28 acres o~ Cox Avenue east of Saratoga Avenue. He then read a Statement of Reason submitted by the applicant in connection with the subject request for change of zoning. -1- PlanninM Commission Minutes - 11 January 1971 - Continued II. C. C-140 - Continued A representative from the church ~was present and stated that 1) the property has been up for sale, but when prospective buyers find out the property' is zoned for institutional use and not for cormnercial use they ! · losei interest and 2) the church .cannot keep paying the high taxes plus interest on the property and afford to have the property lie dormant as it has in the past and will contiZnue.f, to do under the present zoning. Commissioner Smith stated that the Use Permit approved for the church ,.'~Flhave to be amended in order ito grant the proposed change of zoning. The representativ~ "from the church stated that the portion of the church property under consideration for .change of zoning has never been intended for church-affiliated use and was' not included in the master plan considered in connection' with approval of the Use Per~ait. No one else present wished to comment on this application. Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening at 7:40 P.M., directed C-140 continued to the next regular meeting, and referred same to the Sub- division Committee for study of C2-140 and review of the Use Permit granted for the church use. D. UP-186 - Laxozrence E. Fordyce, Saratoga Avenue - Request for Use Permit to -'--. Allow a Convalescent Hospital -. Continued [rom 28 December 1970 The=.~ hearing was re-opened at 7:44 P.M. The Assistant Planner stated nothing new had been added to the file. He then read the Staff Report dated 11 January 1971 recommending that the request for Use Permit be'denied. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Xraus, to close the hearing at 7:47 P.M.; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner ]Craus, that the Staff Report dated 11 ~January 197,I be adopted and the requested Use Permit (UP-186) be denied on the basis the findingsz're. qUired under ~ection 16.6 of Ordinance NS-3 cannot be made for the reason, s stated in said report; motion carried unan imou sly. III. BUILDING~rSITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SD-870 - Peter PayloS, Chester Avenue - Subdivision Approval - 9 Lots Continued from 28 December 1970 The Assistant Planner=' stated that 'the applicant had reviewed the proposed conditions of approval and had expressed satisfaction of same. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner ~aus, that the Subdivision Committee Report 'dated 11 January ]'i~TI'~'r~fi, ve to S.D-870 be adopted and that the tentative map" (E~ibit"~A_2,,~"'~'i~d'-~'l--'D~cember 1970) be approved subject to the conditions set. forth in sai;d report; motion carried unanimously. B. SDR-873 - George .Stathakis, Michae'ls Drive - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 28 December 1970 COmmissioner Smith explained that !1) this matter ~as continued to this meeting because the engineers in the Department of Public Wo:~ks were not satisfied with the presentation made' on the plans" submitted 2) if this building site were approved it would mean an automati~ variance for this property 3) the plans should be prepared by'a registeredi engineer since th.? cuts and fill on the property appear to be' extensive an~ 4) a better lay-out for the buildings on the property is recommended. Plannin~ Connission Minutes - 11 January 1971 - Continued III. B. SDR-873 - Continued Mr. Jerry Jordans present to represent t~iapplicants stated that 1) no fill will be necessary for the property and all the cuts that are planned are for the retaining walls 2) the reason for the build- ing lay-out as shown on the proposed plans is to provide privacy for the owner of the property and the adjacent neighbors 3) Understanding that the City is opposed to cutting, but did not object to retaining w~lls and that it was not necessary to hire an engineer to prepare plans to develop your own property and 4) it was felt that the current plan is a good compromise from what was originally proposed. Chairman Norton requested the applicant to submit a letter of extension to allow time for further study of the matter; otherwise, the matter will. be denied at this time. Mr. Jordan stated that he would submit the requested letter of extension and any necessary changes in.the plan will be made after discussing the matter with the City Engineer and the Subdivision Committee. Co~m~issioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, to deny the building site approval for SDR-873 unless a letter of extension is submitted by the applicant prior to the current expiration date for SDR-873 and if the extension is received the matter is recommended continued to the next regular meeting; motion carried unanimously. C. SD-875 - Joseph P. Battagliai Chester Avenue - Subdivision Approval - 13 Lots - Continued:from 28 December 1970 Mr. Bob Oldham, engineer, was present to represent the applicant, and stated that the final locati0n of the equestrian trails could be a detriment to some of the lots in the p~oposed subdivision. Commissioner Smith advised that the trails will be located~ .... / along the creek. "" Mr. Oldham explained that in~the creek areas the trails could end up right in the creek. : Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Kraus, that the Subdivision Committee Report:dated 11 January 1971 relative to SD-875 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit '~-2",.]filed 6 January 1971) be approved subject to 'the conditions set.forth in said report;~ mo'~ion carried unanimously. D. SDR-878 - Saratoga Foothills~Development Corp., Saratoga Avenue - Buildins Si~e Approval - I Lot Commissioner Smith recommended that SDR-878 be continued to the next regular meeting. Chairman Norton'so directed. Commissioner Metcalf pointed 'out that the Design Review Committee will meet with the Architectural Advisory Counttree on 12 January 1971 to discuss this application sin~e it is located in the Village area. -3- Plannin~ Commission Minutes - 11 January 1971 - Continued 1V. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-360 - Grace United Methodist Churchs Prospect Road - Final Design Review - Fellowhsip Hall Commissioner Metcalf recommended that A-360 be continued to the next regular meeting to await submittal of further plans relative to the subject request. : Chairman Norton so directed and referred the matter to the Design Review Committee for further Study. B. A-349 - Cal-West Communitiess Inc.s Saratoga Avenue - Final Design Review - Landscape Plans - 1st Phase Commissioner Metc~lf stated that 1) the applicant ~,ill be planting a great number of trees in addition to the ones they have already planted and 2) originally the air-conditioning units were to be placed behind the chimneyi'.bn top'of the b~ildi~gs_,_but nO[_~h~__a.~p. licantlproposes to locate some'~n~e~"6n the ground and screen them with ~.~Xtensiveflandscaping. Commissioner Metcalf moveds seconded by Commissioner Martin, that the Staff Report dated 11January:1971 be adopted and that the Final Landscape Plan for landscaping the first phase of construction be approved as shown on Exhibits "H" and "O" subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT Commissioner Kraus gave a summary;of items reviewed and action taken at the City Council meeting of 6 Januaryi1971 with emphasis on items of particular interst to the Commission. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. UP-151 - James R. Davis Sousa.Lane - Request for Extension - Continued from 28 December 1970 Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee did meet with Mr. Davi and he introduced a letter received from the State that stated that in the very near future the applicant should be able to obtain word as to certification of the need for additional convalescent hospitals in this area; therefores this matter should be continued to the next regular meeting. Chairman Norton so directed a~d referred the matter to the Subdivision Committee for further study. B. PROPOSAL for Establishing a ROofing Material Ordinance and Fire Retardant Ro6fin~ Material Zone The Assistant Planner stated that no further progress has been made rela- tive to this proposals but there will be a meeting with the Subdivision Committees County Fire Marshals and the Saratoga Fire Chief to discuss the matter. Chairman Norton, in view of the foregoing, directed the matter continued to the meeting of.'ZS~January 1971 and referred the proposal to the Sub- division Committee. PlanninM Con~nission Minutes - 11 January 1971 - Continued VIIo NEW BUSINESS Chairman Norton made note of a memo received from the City Manager relative to the City Council ResOlution 554 indicating intent to abandon a storm sewer easement on a parcel on Old Tree Way. After a brief review of the memo, Chairm~,n Norton directed the matter continued ...... t...?_.~h~....m._e. et'.i. ng of 25 J~nua.r9 1971 and referred the matter to the Sub.- division Committee for study and ]a report. VIII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN None B. ORAL Commissioner Lively moved, seconded by Commissioner Metcalf, for adoption of the following Resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 117 WHEREAS, Dr. Theodore. M. Norton has outstandia~y served the City since 1963 as a member of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, Ted Norton has ~guided the Commission as Chairman during the past six (6) years during which time many far-reaching decisions were made for the Qrderly development of the City; and WHEREAS, Ted Norton's l~adership has made a substantial contribution to the gracious ]character of our City, therefore, be RESOLVED that the members of the Saratoga Planning Commission do formally thank and commend Ted Norton for his loyal service to the City and his organization and administration of the Planning Commission. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this llth day of January 1971, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Kraus, Lively, Martin, Metcalf, and Smith. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINED: Chairman Nor ton. Planning Commission Minutes - 11 January 1971 - Continued VIII. B. ORAL - Continued Chairman Norton stated that one of the rewards of serving on the Planning Commission has been the association with 'his colleagues and the Planning Staff especially Stan Walker, Planning Director, with whomhe has had a long and worthwhile association. GUESTS Chairman Norton acknowledged, with. pleasure, the presence of Councilman Sanders, Mrs. Ottenberg of the League of Women Voters, and Mrs. Belanger and Mr. Frampton of the Good Government Group. He, also, thanked Mrs. Belanger for the coffee to be served after the meeting. IX. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Norton adjourned the meeting at 8:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~lker, Secretary Saratoga Planning Commission j CITY OF ~.aATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA T~: Monday~ 1i Jan~ry 1970 - 7:30 P.M. P~CE~ City Council Chambers, 1377~ Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, ~lifornia 95070 ~PE ~ Regular ~e=ing x. A. ROLL. ~. B. II. PUBLIC A. C~137 -Alfred F. Du~ss Inc.~ Prospect Road - Request f~ Change of Zonin~ from "R-I-IO~000" (Single-Family Resident~l) to "R-l-10s000" "P-C" (Single-Family Residential Planned C~unity) - Continued fr~ 28 December 1970 B. C-139 - ~lachy J. Moran, Saratoga Avenue ~ Re~est f~ Change of Zoning from "R-1-20,000" (Single-Family Residential) to "R-l-10,000" .(Single-Famil~ Residential) 7 Con.~inued from 28 December. 1970 . C. ~-140 -'Prince of Peace .Lutheran Church~ Saratoga Avenue and Cox Avenue - Request for Change of. Zoning from _(Nei~hborhood-eo~.cia~) D. UP-186 - ~ence E. Fordyces Saratoga Avenue - Request for Use Permit A~.I~ a C~valescent.. Hospital - Continued from 28 De.camper 1970 A. 8D-870~ - Peter Pavlos~ Chester Avenue - Subdivision Approval - 9 Lots Continued fr~ 28 December ~ 1970 B. ~DR-8~. - George Stathakis, Michaels ~ive - Building Site Approval - I Lot - Continued fr~ 28 December 1970 ............. ;.. .... C. SD-87~- Joseph P. Bat=agl~, Chester Avenue ~3 Lots - Co~.~nued from 2~ DRce~be~ 1970 D* ~DR-878- Saratoga FoOthills DeVelopment Corp~ Saratoga Avenue - Building Site Agprova,1 .~ ~ ~t . . lVl DESEN R~I~ A. A'360 - Grace United Methodist Ch~ch, Prospect Road - Fill Design Review Fellowship Hall B. ~-349 - ~l-~est Co~unities~ Inc.~ Saratoga Avenue - Final Design Review ~ndscape Plans - 1st P~ase V. CX~ CO~C~ REPORT O~ BUSINESS A. ~P7151 - James R. ~vi~ Sousa ~ne - Request for Extension - Continued fr~ 28 December 1970 B. PROPO~L for Establishing a Roofing Material Ordi~nce and Fire Retardant Roofing. ~erial Zone VII. ~g BUS~ESS VIII. CO~ICATIONS A. ~ ITT~ B. IX. ADJO~~ January 8, 1959 OFFICE OF THE }~YOR ". The I~onorab.le Richard Bennett Chairman, Planning Com=.nission Re: Variances, definitions and City of Saratoga Powers of Commission Saratoga, California Dear l.[r. Chairman: At the suggestion of the City Attorney' and several members of the .. City Council, I am taking this means of drawing to your attention " infornmtion wh~ich will be of value to the Commission in performing its functions. Included herein are points of law derived from the City· Attorney' s opinions, and points of policy derived from the views of the City Council. Together, they should ~ake easier and clearer your task in dealing ~th requests for variances~ 1, "Variance" or "zOning variance" is defined in the general law of ~lifornia, not in City ~dinances. 2, A "Variance" is a decision not to enforce certain provisions of the zoning law a~ainst a particular piece of property_. The reason ~or such a decision in the existence of circumstances of hardsh~l peculiar to that particular Dro~r~y. 3, Variances may be granted PP~t when the following conditions exist: a,~e variance ~.jll 'not be a special. privilege inconsistent .~th the zo=ing limitations imposed on other property in the zone, rne special circtnmstances of the property are such that strict enforcement of the zoning law will deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, 4, Judicial interpretation of the law indicates that the extent and peculiarity of the hardship on the property is the controlling principle in the granting of variances. ~creased profit to the property o~.mer is not of itself a proper standard for decision, 5, The power of the Planning Commission to ~ant a variance is limited to those cases in ~J~ich enforcement of the zoning law would pro- duce undue hardship on an o~.mer .because of conditions peculiar to his property only, Chairma~n of Planning C! ~ssion Page 2 January 8, 1959 Re: Variances~ definitions & Powers of Con',~nission 6. Citations: a. Sec. 65853, Government Code of California b. Subsections 1,2,3. of Sec. 3Z+o5, Exhibit A, Ordinance 3-A, City of Saratoga. (Additional standards for decision) c. Eathkoph, Law of Zoni_nZ_~_and Planning_, Vol. 2, Ch.63. THE POLICY 1.· It is the desire of the City Council that the' granting of variances be based on strict construction of the law and on a strictly logical and realistic construction of the facts· constituting undue hardship or' peculiar circumstances. " · 2. It is the desire of the City council that variances shonld not be granted· which would: ~ - a. have the effect of changing the zoning, or b. serve only to perpetuate a condition inconsistent ~,rith the zoning, or · c. serve only to give equitable relief to a property o~,,~er from a situation which affects prot~erties other than his 3. It is the desire of the City Council [hat applications for variances be accepted as a matter of right and that decisions on such appli- cations be based solidly on the facts of each case. The principles on which the decision is based should' be explained .carefully to the applicant, and should be included in the text of the decision. Should conditions arise ~j~ich indicate that applications for vari- ances are attrib~:table to defects in the zoning regulations,· it is the desire of ·the City· Council that such defects be brought to it.s attention'for ·such corrective legislation as r~y seem warranted. The foregoing considerations of law an·J policy should be provided to each Commissioner for his reference, and should be made available to applicants for variances so that they may know the rules for decision. Very tx~ly yours, BUrton R. Brazil }~yor BRB :mdr TO: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL FROM: JEROME SMITH RE: APPOINTMENTS TO PLANNING COF~4ISSION I have abstained in the vote on the two new Planning Commissioners, not because I feel these men to be unqualified, because they are qualified... rather I think these appoint- ments again fail to fulfill this City's "promise of community". A "sense of community" is essential to us all... each of us must be invited to participate fully in the affairs of government in Saratoga. This invitation must go out to both men and women. ONE OF THESE APPOINTmeNTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILLED BY A QUALIFIED WO~N. Saratoga is 15 years old and during that time it has had 16 City CoUncilmen, and 25 Planning Commissioners. Not one. of these 41 members of City government has been a woman. Of the 16 Councilmen, 5 were appointed, and, of course, all 25 Planning Commissioners were appointed. And not a woman was selected. At the present time of Saratoga's ten neighboring communi- ties, five have one or more women serving on the Planning Commission. Six of these cities have female Councilwomen. The town of Los Gatos presently has two women Planning Com- missioners; and one woman Town Councilwoman who formerly served on the Los Gatos Town Planning Commission. When considering these appointments, it was my suggest- ion to my fellow Councilmen that one of them be delayed until a qualified female appointment could be found in this City of 27,000 people. This suggested delay was rejected. A delay between appointments is not without precedent since the average between appointment delay over the last 15 years has been seven (7) weeks. Also in recent years three Planning Commissioners have taken extended leaves of absence. The Planning Commission'was able to properly function during these periods of reduced membership. Another reason I felt it important to delay one of these appointments so that a qualified woman could be found, was that the average tenure of a Planning Commissioner in this City is over 4 years. Such an extended further wait to add a woman to our Planning Commission is without justification. Why name a woman? Women are an essential part of Saratoga... they spend long hours in devotion to this com- munity while their husbands are away making a living... they work on the school parent-teacher groups... with Church act- ivities... with charity drives~.. and with our children. The suburban'housewife, as much as anyone else, knows what. she likes and what. is proper for her town. I refuse to accept the excuse that she is unable to read blueprints or -2-. wouldn't fit in. This sort of attitude has no place in our community. Although appointments by political subdivisions are immune from the federal and state anti-discrimination dictums, still the spirit of these laws is recognized throughout this community. By way of information, Calif- ornia's Constitution and the United States Federal Code specifically prohibit disqualification from a vocation because of sex ( see California Constitution Art 20, Sec. 18; and United States Code;Ann., 42, Sec. 2000e-2). This City led the way in the adoption of an affirmative action ordinance insuring the hiring of racial minorities in Clty contracts ( see Saratoga Ordinance No. 38, adding Chapter 15 to the Code). Certainly this spirit of equal opportunity is applicable to appointments to the Planning Commission. The arguments have been made... the conclusion is ob- vious... we not only should have a woman on the Saratoga Planning Commission, we need a woman on this planning body. We need her open, fresh and femine viewpoint... we need her because she is essential to our "sense of community". I hope these thoughts are remembered when the next vacancy occurs. -3- BackgroUnd Information: Gerald S., (Stan) Marshall Born in Los Angeles, Calif.; lived in San Francisco Bay Area since 1929. Resident of Santa Clara County since 1954 residin~ in Santa Clara,.Monte Serene and Saratoga; resident of Saratoga since 1961. Age= 45. ' Married (wife-Barbara) ~ith three teen a~e children: Linda, attendin~ West Valley College; Ted and Richard, both attending Saratoga High School. ' ~mOloyed .by GTE-SYlvania's'Western Division in Mt. ~iew as a Programs Manager; started at that facility in 1954, shortly after it was first organized. Member of the Good Government Group; oresently a Director (2rid Vice President). Past and Dresent"member of the West Valley College Citizen's Advisory Board; reaooointed during the Committee reorganization late last year, and elected to the position of Vice-Chairman at the first meeting of this year ( 14 January,1971). Address: 19610 Three Oaks Way, Saratoga, Calif. Telephone': 867-9473 BackgroUnd Information: Gerald S. (Stan) Marshall Born in Los Angeles, Calif.; lived in San Francisco Bay Area since 1929. Resident of Santa Clara COunty since 1954, residin~ in Santa Clara, Monte Sereno and Saratoga.; resident of Saratoga since 1961. Age= 45. " Married (~vife-B~rbara) with three teen age children: Linda, attending West Valley College; Ted, and Richard, both attending Saratoga High School. - .~nDloyed .by GTE-Sylvania's Western Division in Mr. ~iew as a" Programs Manager; started at that facility in 1954, shortly after it was first organized. " · .-Member of the Good Government Group; oresently a Director (2nd Vice President). Past and oresent member of the West Valley College Citizen's Advisory Board; reaOoointed during the Committee reorganization late last year, and elected to the position of Vice-Chairman at the first meeting of this year ( 14 January,1971). Address: 19610 Three Oaks Way, Saratoga, Calif. Telephone: 867-9473