Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-13-1971 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLA~NNING COMiMISSION MINUTES TI~: Monday, 13 December 1971 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: City Council Chambers - 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, 'Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION. The meeting was called to order. by Chairman Lively at 7:30 P.M. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bacon, Bela~ger, Lively/Marshall, Martin, Metcalf, and Smith. B. 'MINUTES Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the reading of the minutes of 22 November 1971'meeting be waived and that they be approved as distributed to the Commission; motion carried unanimously. C. FORMER CO~MISSIONER RODERICK V. FAGAN Chairman Lively suggested that the Planning Commission authorize a letter of acknowledgement. to former Commissioner Roderick V. Fagan for his service to the Planning Con~nission. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Metcalf, that a letter be drafted by the Secretary and signed by the Chairman of the Commission thanking former Commissioner Fagan for his contri- butions and services to the Saratoga Planning Commission;_motiOn carried unanimously. D. JOINT STUDY SESSION The Secretarystated that at the last meeting a date was suggested for a Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning Commission but that date does not seem to be suitable for everyone concerned and a time later in January? 1972 might be more appropriate. Chairman Lively stated that'the Planning Commission is agreeable to any date decided upon by the City Council. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. C-129 - James F. Wilson, Pierce Road - Request for'Change of Zoning from "R-I-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) to "R-I-20,000" · ~ (Single-Fa>nily Residential) Chairman Lively opened the hearing relative to C-129 at 7:36 P.M. The Secretary stated that the Notice of Hearing was mailed and published. He further stated that no communications were received but that the residents of the area that submitted a petition when' this application was previously under consideration wish to have that petition reinstated. -1- Planning Conmission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued II. A. C-129 ~ Continued Mrs. Wilson, the applicant, was present and stated that the change of zoning would provide only one additional building site and would allow utilization of proparty which is a problem and a nuisance at this point. Chairman Lively stated that the most recent General Plan sh'owed this parcel of property as a buffer area between the "R-i-40,000" (Single-Family Residential) and the "R-t-12,500" (Single-Family Residential) zoning and this subject request for change of zoning is in conformance 'with what is sho~ on th'e General Plan. Mr. Seymour Bross, 12849 Ashley Court, stated that he lived directly behind this parcel and requested, on behalflof the residents in the area, that the petition previously submitted in opposition to this change of zoning be reinstated to apply to the present request. Chairman Lively inquired if the Commission is to assume that the people whose names appear on this petition. still feel that their complaint is valid since the change of zoning request has been altered from the request originally submitted. Chairman Lively advised that he would be hesitant to accept a petition that was signed a year ago especially since the proposal is now different. Mr. Bross stated that he had not contacted all the residents whose names appear on the petition, but he could do so and submit a new petition. He then read and submitted a letter stating his ox~m views and objections to the proposed change of zoning. Chairman Lively, in answer to an inquiry from Mr. Bross, stated that 1) the General Plan has been amended and shows this parcel as a buffer zone 2) the General Plan Map is a land use map and not a zoning map 3) this particular parcel is a problem piece of property'and 4) because of the size of this building site it will be close to a 40,000 square foot lot on a parcel that is zoned "R-l~20,000". Mr. Frank Patton of 12842 Carniel Court was present and Stated he would like to'be better informed on this proposal. Chairman Lively explained that Mr. Patton could arrange for an appointment with the Subdivision Committee since they will be doing further study on the matter and will prepare the report relative to the subject request. Mrs. Wilson, in answer to an inquiry from Mr. Bross, stated that the home proposed for the subject site will not be as close tc the neighbors rear property line as their (the neighbors) home is to the rear property line of her property. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 7:59 P.M., referred the change of zoning request (C-129) to the Subdivision Committee, and continued the matter to the next regular meeting. B. C-140 - Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, Saratoga and Cox Avenues - Request for Change of Zoning from "A" (Agricultural) to "P-A" (Professional- Administrative) . Chairman Lively opehed the hearing at' 8:00 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notices of Hearing were mailed and published. Reverend Anderson, present to represent the applicant, stated that no one in the area has voiced any objection to the proposed change of zoning. No one else present wished to comment. Plannin8 Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued II. B. C-140 - Continued Uhairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 8:02 P.M., directed C-140 continued to the next regular meeting, and referred same to the Sub- division Committee for study. III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SD-904 - George W. Day, Fruitvale Avenue and Douglass Lane - Subdivision Approval -.15 Lots - COntinued from 22 November 1971 The Secretary explained that 1) this.request for subdivision approval will eventually be fon~arded to the City Council as part of the "P-C" development currently being considered by the Planning Commission for this property 2) the developer is ready to submit a revised tentative map for review by the Planning Commission and 3) the City Council will again review the "P-C" zoning in connection with this application on 15 December 1971. Chairman. Lively advised that the City Council cannot make a recommendation on the change of zoning request until a tentative map is approved by the Planning Commission and fon~arded to the City Council. Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee did meet with the applicant and the revised tentative map consist Of two (2) proposals: 1) Lot sizes of 35,000 to 37,500 square feet. 2) Lot sizes of 35,000 square feet or a little less. Commissioner Smith further stated tha~ 1) these size lots seem to be the most desirable; however, there has been mention made of 30,000 square foot lots but the Subdivision Committee feels lots of this size would be too small 2) the present tentative map shows a common"g~een area along Fruitvale Avenue and Douglass Lane with n8 internal common. green area for the development 3) the road w0~ld tie-.in with possible street development planned for the some eighty (80) acres as sho~m in the General Plan and 4) the maps are available for review. Mr. Lou Leto, General Manager for George Day Company, was present and sub- mitted the revised maps and explained each in detail. chairma_n__Lively stated he is in favor zof the plan with a range of building site sizes from 35,000 to 47,000 square foot lots or an average of approximately 38,000 square ft. Commissioner Smith, in answer to an inquiry from Commissioner Belanger, stated that the remaining undeveloped property in this area will eventually be developed and the property currently under consideration must be laid out with this future development in mind. Commissioner Marshall stated that x~ith the applicant's current proposal a substantial house can be built on a large lot an~ a common green area can still 'be provided. Commissioner Smith, in answer to an inquiry from Comnissioner Belanger, stated that there would be deed restrictions and City Ordinances to control fencing in this development. Commissioner Belanger stated that she is really sorry that the City did not arrange for a more extensive study by an outside firm for the subject "P-C" development. Commissioner Martin stated that'l) he is in favor of the 35,000 to 37,500 square foot size lots 2). he would like to see more than 30-foot setbacks on Fruitvale. Avenue 3) 50-feet would be aesthetically more pleasing and 4) he would like to see the 50-foot area .become part of the cornmon green area. -3- Planning Comnission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued~ III. A. SD-904 - CDntinued Commissioner Belanger stated she is .really not in favor of either plan as submitted by the applicant at this time. Chairman Lively stated that the sentiment of the residents of this area is that they will accept a proposal that has lot sizes similar to their It is his opinion that either one of the applican~'s plans are acceptable° The Secretary, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Lively, stated that the applicant will be required to submit a Maintenance Agreement for the cormnon- green area along with the tentative map. Commissioner Smith recommended that SD-904 be continued to the next regular meeting in order to allow time for p.reparati0n of the Building Site Committee Report and submittal of the tentative map. Chairman Lively so directed. B. SDR-918 - Monty R. Boyd, Arroyo de Arguello - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 22 November 1971 The Secretary stated that the applicant did review the proposed conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with smne. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Building Site Committee Report dated 13 December 1971 relative to SDR-918 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 12 August 1'971) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. C. SDR-931 - Jordan M." Penno~ Via Regina - Building Si~e'Approval - 2 Lots The Secretary requested that this matter be continued .since there is a topographic situation there ~,~ich entails grading and a retaining. wall; therefore, 'additional time is required to review the matter. Commissioner Smith stated that the Subdivision Committee concurs with the request for continuance since they would need additi~aal time for review of this property and an on-site inspection of the building site. Chairman Lively directed SDR-931 continued to the ne~t regular meeting° D. SDR-932 George Akers, E1 Camino Senda - BUilding Si.t,e Approval - 2 Lots ~e Secretary recommended that SDR-932 be continued t~ the next regular meeting in order to allow time to resolve 1). the Health Depar.tment refusal to approve septic tank facilities for this building site and 2) '~he Fire Department require- ment for a wider driveway into this property. Chai~nan Lively so directed. E. SDR-933 - John L. Hernandez, Avon Lane - Building Sit'e Approval - 1 Lot The Secretary explained that this application is for a lot that was previously approved. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Conmissioner Ba~on, that the Building Site Conm~ittee Report dated 13 December 1971 relative '~to SDR-933 be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 3 December 1971) be approved .subject to the conditions set forth in said report; msition carried unanimously~ F. SDR-934 - James F. Wilson~ Pierce Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Commissioner Smith advised t~at this'matter will have ~to be continued to the. next regular meeting in order to resolve the change ~f zoning'(C-129) request. -4-' Planning Cormnission Minutes - 13 December 1971 -' Continued III. F. SDR-934 - Continued Mrs. Wilson, applicant, stated that 1) she has now discussed and explained this proposal with the two gentlemen who voiced some opposition to the'subject building site earlier in the meeting and 2) they no longer have any objections to either the change of zoning or SDR-934. Chairman Lively directed SDR-934 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the SUbdivision Committee. IV. DESIGN REVI~ A. A-383 - Corinthian Studios, Big Basin Way - Final Design Review - Facade Remodeling and Warehouse Addition - Continued from 22 November 197] Conmissioner Metcalf explained that this applicant has a permanent arrangement with the Chevron Station for seven (7) off-street parking spaces at the Chevron Station. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 13 December 1971 reconnnending that Final Design Approval be granted for the front exterior and warehouse addition. Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the Staff Report dated 13 December 1971 be adopted and that .Final Design Approval be granted for the fron exterior and warehouse addition as sho~n on Exhibits "A", "B", and "C" in file A-383 and subject to the conditions set forth in the subject Staff Report; motion carried unanimously. B. A~300 - Bro~.m and Kauffmann, Cox Avenu~ - Final Design Review - Decorative Fence and Landscaping Along Cox Avenue %]~e Assistant Planner read the Staff Re~ort dated 13 December 1971 recommend- ing that Final Design Approval be granted for the decorative fencing and landscaping for. Prides Crossing South Subdivision - Units 3 and 4. Commissioner Martin stated that 1) he.objects to the planting of pyracantha shrubs so close to the sidewalk since it is difficult to control and especially dangerous to anyone walking by and it has sharp thorns and 2) he did not feel it was an appropriate shrub to plant in the subject area. Commissioner Metcalf stated that this landscape treatment is exactly the same as the landscaping along Cox Aven~e in the Greenbrier tract; therefore, the plan must be continuous and arrangements will have to be made to keep the sh~bbery well-trin~ed. Commissioner Martin stated that there does not seem to be any provision for watering these plants. Mr. Rene Gumusio, architect for the applicant, stated that Bro~,~ and Kauffmann will be happy to install another meter; however, an effort has been made to provide planting material that will require very little upkeep. Comnissioner Martin recommended that instead of a meter some hose bibs be provided in the shrubbery area. Chairman Lively recor~nended that ~e subject Staff Report be amended as follows: Condition (b) be amended, to read as follows: (b) Alternate variety.of plant materials (bushes espaliered against fence) in each fence planting~area including area from Darie~ Way to Miller Avenue. and Conditions (c) and (d) be added as follows: -5- Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 ~ Continued IV. B. A-300 - Continued (c) Provide two (2) hose-bibs in the area from Miller Avenue to Homes Drive and one (1) hose-bib from Homes Drive to the easterly edge of Lot 109. (d) Provideadequate site distance at Cox Avenue and Homes Drive. ~ Commissioner Martin raised the question as to whether the pi!~r~_a~e .............. correctly' plac~'"'in li'~"with the other' fence pillars along Cox Avenue. Commissioner Metcalf stated that 1) it is true.that the second set of pillars are four (4) inches closer to the sidewalk than the first set, - both sets are within the property of Bro~,m and Kauffmann 2) it has been stipulated in the Staff Report that fencing for the new area be set · back in line with the new pillars so there will be precisely the same planting space from the edge of the fence to the sidewalk. Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Conmissioner Bacon, that' Staff Report-dated 13 December 1971 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be granted for the decorative fencing and landscaping for Prides Crossing South as sho~,n~ on E~ibit "X" and subject to the conditions set forth in the subject report; motion carried unanimously. STOP SIGN AT BROOKGLEN AND MILLER Comnissioner Metcalf stated that there is a stop sign at Brookglen and Miller Avenue, but it is still a hazard to get.out of Miller onto Cox and it is possible to do one of two (2) things: 1) Move the white stop-line further out so that the driver can see what is coming from the left. 2) Alter the fence and the colurm~s around the area of the Cox Garage. Commissioner Belanger stated she concurs with the opinion of Commissioner 'Martin relative to the subject sight-problem. Commissioner Bacon agreed that a problem existed at this intersection and something should be done to correct the .situation; however, he wondered if theeline were moved if the cars may not encroach too far into the intersection and cause a further trafficshazard. Chairman Lively referred the matter to the Staff'for study and a report at the next regular meeting. C. SS-69 - Highland Development Co., Prospect Road 'Final Design Review - Temporary Subdivision Identification Sign The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 13 December 1971 recommending that Final Design Approval be granted for SS-69 for a temporary subdivision_ sign as sho~.m on Exhibits "A" and "B". Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff Report dated 13 December 1971 be adopted.and that Final Design Approval be granted for a temporary subdivisionssign.as shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. RECESS z~ND RECOmbiNE -6- Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - ContinUed V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT The Secretary gave a sunmm-ry of items reviewed and action taken at the City Council meeting of 1 December 1971, 'with emphasis the following item: Reappointment of Comanissioners Belanger and Metcalf to the P~anning Commission for another term. PL~\~rING POLICY CO~D~TTEE Chairman Lively sta~nd that on 1~ursday evening, 16 December 1971 the Planning Policy Committee will be considering the final ordinance for a Hillside Zoning District and some proposals include 1) one home per five acre lot 2) another is for homes on as much as twenty acres p'er building site. Chairman Lively continued that 1) he would like the Staff and Design Review Committee to review these proposals 2) most of the building heights are limited to 25-feet and the landscaping is very well handled 3) there is'one thing that he was concerned. with and that involves Section A.8 4) this could allow the developer a 25% bonus when developing hillside lots and 5) it is his opinion that the bonus should not be offered so freely. Councilman Jerry Smith was present and stated 1) that the land the ordinance is talking to is very steep land and the 25% bonus will be administered accord- ing to that ordinance 2) in order to understand the bonus the entire ordinance must be taken into consideration and 3) a developer will not automatically get a 25% bonus - that will be the optimum. 'Chairman Lively stated that 1) his concern is that the bonus is clearly outlined in the ordinance and the minute a subdivider gets started on a development he will demand his bonus and 2) he feels 25% is too g~eat a percentage. Councilman Smith stated that 1) he did not feel the bonus should be eliminated but should be left in the ordinance and administered proparly by City and County governments and 2) the hillsides cannot be developed properly if the rules are too restrictive. Chairman Lively stated that he is not confident that the County government can be relied upon to do what is best for the City. Cormnissioner ~rtin stated that the ordinance should be written so the hillside development can be controlled - why mention any bonus at all? Chairman Lively stated that if no mention of a bonus were included in the ordinance then Section Ao8 would have to be deleted. Commissioner Smith stated that if that is necessary then that'Section A.8 will have to be left out of the subject ordinance. VI. OLD BUSI~tSS A.Possible. Revisions for Desig-n Review of Single-Fmm. ily Residences - Continued from 22 November 1971 ' Chairman Lively, after a brief discussion, referred this matter to the Design Review Conmittee, Subdivision Co~nittee~ and Staff and asked that they study the matter and prepar~ a final ReSolution for adoption by the Planning Commission. B. Hillside Zonin~ Ordinance Chairman Lively stated that he felt that either the bonus offer should not be included in the ordinance or the ~nount of the bonus should be reduced. -7- Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued VI. B. Hillside-Continued Commissioner Smith stated that the.City encourages hillside development by allowing the cluster type developments and he did not 'feel it was necessary to go any further. Commissioner Martin stated that he felt some bonus should be offered but Section A.8 could be left out of the ordinance and the bonus be ~dministered · on an individual basis.· Councilman Smith stated that 1) thle Planning Commission has had two (2) Commissioners regularly attending planning Policy Committee meetings x,here the Hillside Zoning District was discussed and formulated and now all of a sudden for the first time ~en the ordinance is ready for adoption there is opposition 2) the bonus proposal has be~n in the ·ordinance guidelines for months. Chairman Lively stated that he just recently received a copy of the proposed ordinance and before that he had not had an opportunity to review it. The Secretary explained that the subject proposal has been revie~.zed by the two (2) re resentatives of the Plannin~ Commission.and the Planning Director as members of F~e Hillside Committee. Chairman Lively answered that the Planning Conmission as a ~ole has never had a chance to review the proposed ordinance. Councilman Smith stated that the meetings were purposely moved over into the west side of the County so that the meetings could be attended by all of the Planning Comnissioners in this area; therefore, the discussion of this ordinance has hardly been kept a secret and the subject material has been available for months. Chairman Lively stated he felt the objections of the Planning Co~m~ission 'relative to the bonus should be noted. Councilman '·Smith stated there is not a single 100-acre parc·e! in the hillsides ~ere acre zoning can be applied. %~e Secretary suggested that maybe the ordinance should be presented ·to the Planning Commission by the City 'or County Staff to clarify particular items. VII. ~W BUSINESS None VIII. COmmUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN SDR~9il - Willard Thompson, Oak Street and St. Charles - Request for Building Site Approval The Secretary read a communication dated 13 December 1971 received from Willard ~ompson r~questing that his request for building site be·granted at this time instead of waiting since ·he finds he cannot build on the lot or sell it in its present form. He further stated that the adjacent lot is now for sale and the two (2) lots together might make a more attractive development. It is almost impossible to put up a five (5) unit apartment and obtain proper financing. Chairman Lively stated .that there is a study of the area being done and until that is completed any further construction in the area has been discouraged. -8~ Planning Commission Minutes - 13 December 1971 - Continued VIII. A. SDR-911 - Continued The Secretary explained that the General Plan includes a comment ~nich prohibits all development On properties bounded by Oak Street, St.. Charles Street and Big Basin Way ur~til the Traffic Survey is completed. · Chairman Lively explained to Mr. Willard that the Planning Commission realizes that he has= problems with this lot, but the City has been looking for other ways to ease traffic on Big Basin Way. The Secreta~y, in answer to an inquiry from Con~nission Bacon, stated that the subject traffic study i~ underway and the information will be given careful consideration. tt will probably be a matter of months before the entire study and review is completed. ~ Chai~nan Lively requested Mr. ~]~ompson tO wait just a·little while longer and suggested that, perhaps, Mr. Thompson could request the City Council to act on the matter as expeditiously as possible. B. Telephone Facilities - Cox Avenue Between Darien Way and Miller Avenue Letter from Pacific Telephone The Secretary read a letter received from Pacific Telephone in answer to an inquiry sent to them from the Planning Department. ~e letter stated that the present unformulated plans will provide for the undergrounding of the telephone facilities ( along a po'.ction of Cox Avenue between Darien Way and Miller Avenue ) in conjunction with the development of the West Valley Freeway by the State of California. Chairman Lively requested the Secretary to contact the local manager of Pacific ~elephone to obtain information relative to this matter. C. Memo from Code Enforcement OffiCer The Secretary read a memo from the Code Enforcement Officer explaining that the Amling-Gilmore Florist .has a Court date for a jury trial scheduled for 21 December 1971. D. Trees - Status Report The Assistant Planner stated that at the request Of· Commissioner Martin a status report pertaining to street tree.requirements for recent sub- divisions has been prepared for the information of the Planning Commission. B. ORAL "P-C" - Planned Community Development for Fruitvale Avenue and Douglass· Lane Commissioner Belanger stated that it is her feeling that the City should sponsor a special study for this area to dete~nine what amount of clustering would be appropriate and to come up with a creative use of green space. Chairman Lively stated that the people in the neighborhood do not want "P-C" and the only way to satisfy them is to put something in there that is very close. to what they have now. Commissioner Belanger stated that, perhaps, the neighborhood has a disproportionarm voice in determining what is to happen to this property. Con~nissioner Belanger further stated she would like someone outside of the developer to do a study. Conm~issioner Metcalf stated that this matter has been under study for about six (6) months already and it is at a point at which further delay becomes unreasonable from the point of view of the developer. Maybe, a good architectural and landscape plan should be required. -9- Planning Cormnission Minutes - 13 December 197.1 Continued VIII. B. "P-C" - Continued Con~nissioner Belanger stated that the City should hold out for a better plan. Connnissioner Smith pointed out that 1) a lot of people have worked very hard to come up with the plans submitted 2) Joint Study-Sessions with the City Council have been held to study the 80-acres in this area and matter has been discussed many times and in great. depth and 3) a new study by an outside fir~ would have to be authorized by the City Council..~ Commissioner Bacon stated that maybe the question should be asked what is wrong with the current plan and then have the actual criticisms broken do~.~n.' 'Commissioner Belanger stated that there must be one developer in the united states that has had some success with a "P-C" development° Chairman Lively stated that the proposed development is in reality not a true "P-C", but only has "P-C" controls. Connnissioner Metcalf stated that a street pattern for the 8C'acres could be made a part of the General Plan in a way that the City could maintain some control over the entire 80-acreso Guests Chairman Lively acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Councilmen Bridges, I~yer, and Smith, and Mrs. Stark of the Good Goverzmnent Group. He, also, thanked Mrs. Stark for the coffee served at recess. IX. ADJOUR!\r~ZNT Chairman Lively adjourr~d the me.2ting at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, %,.=?~-~"" .'_..::',..,..!_.'i!:'."-:,'.':-:'f."~,~. ' t C.., ',..,. .-', -'- ,. :'s-!.'_~',~, Stanley M. ~;T~lker, Secretary Saratoga Planning Commission j -10-