Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-27-1972 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SAt{!ITOGA PLANnNING CO~DIISSION MINUTES TIME: Monday, 27 March 1972 - 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 Live'ly at 7:30 P.M. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bacon, Lively, Marshall, Martin, Metcalf, and Smith. Absent; Commissioner Belanger. B. ~'R~TES Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the reading of the minutes of the 13 ~rch 1972 meeting be waived and that they be approved as distributed subject to the following change: page 11o .under IV. A, A-384. .paragraph 2. .line 4. .change "motion carried unanimously" to read "motion carried with Conmissioner Marshall abstaining"; motion carried unanimously. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ao UP-207 - Brookside Club of Saratoga, Cox Avenue - Request for Use Permit to Allow two (2) Additional Tennis Courts - Continued from 13 March 1972 ~e Secretary stated that the applicant has requested that this matter be continued since he is in the process of engaging a landscape architect for the club and additional time is required to complete these negotiations. Chairman Lively did not open the public hearing and directed UP-207 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee. B. UP-208 - Clarence Neale, Saratoga-SUnnyvale Road - Request for Use Permit to Allow a Restaurant - Continued from 13 March 1972 Chairman Lively reopened the hearing ~t 7:39 P.Mo The Secretary stated that this matter had been continued for the purpose of reviewing the existing parking and the parking requirements for the requested use. Neale's Ilollow presently provides thirty-eight (38) parking spaces that are now required for the.uses that presently exist. With the restaurant use added six (6) parkin~ spaces would have to be added and the applicant proposes to add eight (8)·parking spaces to the rear of this property. Some'of the thirty-eight (38) spaces that now exist are located on City property, State right-of-way, and/or County land. The applicant does now have an Encroach- ment Permit to use these areas for parking; however, a question arises (if this Use Permit is granted) and the Encroachment Permit is revoked how will the appli- cant provide sufficient parking? The Subdivision Committee and Staff feel this matter should be very carefully reviewed. Mr. Sullivan, would be owner of the proposed restaurant, requests that the subject request for Use Permit be continued. The Secretary then read a petition signed by twenty-three (23) residents of the The Saratogan (an adjacent condominium complex) and filed in opposition to the proposed use. -1- Planning. Commission Minutes - 27 March 1972 - Continued II. B.. UP-208 - ContinUed Mr. Koche, President of Saratoga Inn Place Homeo~.~ers Association, stated that 1) it is his request that some decision be made relative to UP-208 at this time 2) if the applicant is.·granted the Use Permit and on that basis receives a liquor license there is no telling what the applicant's next request will be 3) he did visit the site and counted only twenty-five (25) parking spaces 4) the existing parking is·jnot sufficient for the shops now located in this center 5) the shops presently located in the center conduct their business during· the day-time and do not invade any- one's privacy; however, the proposed use would be open until all hours of the day and night and would definitely constitute a nuisance to the resi- dents in this area and 6) he would ~ecommend. that the members of the Planning Con~nission make a visit to this site to get a "first hand" view of this situation. Commissioner Smith stated that the time allowed for the Encroachment~· Permits for the applicant's parking spaces located on State and City right-of-way is indefinite; however, if the Encroachment Permit were cancelled the applicant would have no other area (except at the rear of the property) to add any additional parking. q_]~e Subdivision Con~nittee did visit this site and clearly understands the situation. Mr. Harry Shaw, resident of Saratoga·Inn Place, stated that 1) the condominium in which he lives is approximately 250-to-300-feet from the proposed bar and restaurant 2) he and the other residents of this area feel that approval of the r. equested Use Permit would be a definite infringement on their privacy 3) the "canyon"-like topography in this area poses a particular problem because sounds and noise at the _lower end of the "canyon" echo up to where many of the residents of the area now live.· Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 7:56 P.Mo, directed UP-208 continued to the next regular 'meeting and referred same to the Sub- division Committee for study and a report at the next meeting. Co V-373 - Charla Ann Brown, Canyon View Drive - Request for Variance to Allow Decrease in Front Yard Setback .Requirements - ContinUed from 13 March 1972 Chairman Lively reopened the hearing at 7:57 P.M. The Secretary stated that new exhibit.s were available for review. Mr. Jim D. Morelan, architect for the applicant, stated that 1) l~e did meet with the Variance Committee at the site 2) he engaged two (2) surveyors and they staked out the front corner of the house and established floor elevations 3) after doing so it was decided that it would be impractical to move the house back 20-feet since this Would involve a 5-foot vertical drop in grade 4) the proposed house should be made parellel to the slope so it would fit the topography and 5,) he did discover that there have been other 'variances granted to some residents of this are~ - at least two (2) variances for front yard setbacks. Mrs. B~o~.zn, applicant, stated that 1) she has tried very hard to move this house back on the lot as far as. possible 2) she did visit sev. eral neighbors and they seemed to think that the proposed variance woul~l be acceptable to them and 3) she has a friend living in the area that has written a letter expressing her approval of the proposed variance. Mro Jack Stone, 21060 Canyon View Drive, stateo that 1) his ·coxr~nents, also, represent another neighbor, Mr. Moore of 21040 Canyon View Drive, who could · not be prasent at this time 2) it is his .... opinion that if the house were placed differently on the lot a variance would not be necessary and the contours could still be followed 3) when he purchased his property several years ago he knew the setbacks that were required in this area and he understood that they would remain unchanged 4) if the proposed variance is approved the view from his home will be affected and this will be detri- mental to the value of the property.and 5) the prior owner of this property did have a nice design for a house on this property that did not require a var i an c e o -2- Planning Cormnission Minutes - 27 ~'~rch 1972 - Continued II. C. V-373 - Continued Mr. Morelan explained that if the house were moved further back on the lot it would be placed more in the direct view of Mr. Stone. Mr. Morelan further stated, in answer to an inquiry from Comanissioner Metcalf, that some consideration had been given to putting the garage on the second floor; however, it was decided~that this would not be a safe thing to do because then it would be necessary for cars to back onto a busy street. The Secretary read the following cormnunications received in connection with this Variance: 1) A letter filed by J. H. Moore of 21040 Canyon View Drive in opposition to the proposed variance. 2) A letter filed by Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd T. White of 21011 Canyon View Drive in favor of the subject variance proposal. Conunissioner Marshall stated that 1) the Variance Committee did visit this site with the applicant and her architect 2) the Variance Cormmittee, also, met with Mr. Stone and viewed the Brown lot from the Stone property 3) the Variance Committee reviewed the potential view from the Stone's house 4) the applicant was re~luested to submit a new map showing the reduced front yard Setback and'an updated cross-section of the proposed residence 5) the applicant's property line with respect to the paved portion of Canyon View Drive is 20-feet from the curb line; therefore, the residence would be a total of 40-feet from the curb. The Secretary explained that the streets in this immediate area were developed before the City was incorporated - normally now there would be only a 10-foot parkway. Commissioner Marshall-explained that 1) it might be noted that the Variance Committee did look at-.a number of homes in this area where a variance was granted and in some cases the lots are similar to the applicant's 2) this seems to be a logical compromise situation 3) if the variance were not granted placement would be as objectionable to the'neighbors 4) if the 16wer profile is observed from the front and the house is located at the bottom of the property then it would mean an extremely steep entrance way or require an agreement with the lower neighbor to have a joint access road and 5) building at the bottom of the hill would be objectionable to proposed owner because a view would be non-existent. ........................ CommiSsioner Bacon"S't~ted that be'served On the Varian~"~rmnitt'e~"f0r this particular application and it is his opinion that dropping the ridge line 4-feet is a major factor and setting the house back " 20-feet offers a fair compromise. Mr. Stone requested' that the subject variance application be continued · in order to enable Mr. Moore to be present and state his objections. Chairman Li~ely explained that Mr. Moore's objections are on file as stated in his letter read earlier during this hearing. The Secretary explained that it has been the policy of the Planning Commission to prepare a written report relative to eacb item at the time appropriate action is taken. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 8:29 P.M., directed V-373 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Variance Committee for study and a report. -3~ Planning Commission Minutes 27 March 1972 - Continued II. D. V-374 - Brookside Club of Saratoga, Cox Avenue - Request for Variance to Allow Decrease in Front Yard Setback .Requirements for Construction Chain Link Fence - Continued from 13 ~ rch 1972 The Secretary stated that it would ~ot be necessary to open the public hearing relative to V-374 at this time since no action has been taken relative to the Use Permit (UP-207). No one present wished to comment relative to V-374. Chairman LiVely did not open the public hea~ing relative to V-374 and directed the matter continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Variance Committee. E. V-375 - Miljevich Enterprises, Inc., Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Request for Variance to Allow Increase in Square-Footage Area of Building - Continued from 13 ~rch 1972 Chairman Lively reopened the public hearing relative to V-374 at 8:30 P.M. The Secretary read: 1) A petition filed in opposition to the proposed Variance and signed by thirty-six (36) residents of the surround- ing area. 2) Acommunication filed in opposition to the variance proposal by James R. and Carolyn D. Hoffman of 12246 Via Roncole. 3) Another petition filed in opposition to this request and signed by .thirty (30) residents of this area. 4) 'A letter filed by Frank W..S~hp~k, President of Saratoga Manor Homeowners Associati'on, stating the Association is in favor of this variance being granted subject to very stringent conditions as stated in their letter. 5) A letter filed in opposition to V-375 by James C. Brown President of the Northwest Saratoga Homeowners Association. Commissioner ~rshall stated that 1) in order to cove~ [he. ground properly the Variance Committee discussed this variance request with the applicant, the architect, the realtor, and neighboring property owners 2) after that the Variance Committee viewed the site from four (4) individual homes located on Ritanna Court and Via Roncole 3)' the opinion is that the situation existing on this property involves much more. than a variance request and 4) the Variance Committee requested the Staff to prepare a status report in order to establish certain factors that should be taken care of on this property prior to any action · relative to this variance request. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 27 ~rch 1972 recommending that this request for variance be continued for the reasons stated in said report. ~ Commissioner Smith recommended that Condition "b" of the subject report be deleted. -4- Planning Commission Minutes 27 ~'~arch 1972 ~ Continued II. E. V-375 ~ Continued Mr. Sam Hernandez, owner of a business on Big Basin Way, stated that 1) he is in' favor of the proposed variance request 2) at one time the subject property was zoned differently than. it is today 3) granted the man that owns the property has not properly maintained the property 4) the entrance from the North sides of the City..of Saratoga on both highways are very ugly 4) the approval 'of this variance wo'Uld provide a chance for a decent entrance into Saratoga 5) prior to any approval a complete plan for development should be submitted by the applicant 6). s.trict architectural control should be imposed and 7) the applicant should be allowed to have the 28,000~square foot grocery store since a developer must invest his money in something that will prove to be economically feasible. Mr. Don Dicken, present to represent the applicant, stated that in the event something should happen to Mr. Miljevich, Senior~ a trust that haslbeen established would continue and if all legal owners were gone then the Bank of America wou~ld control the trust with shares being held by the remaining Miljevich family. Commissioner ~'~rshall requested that Mr. Hamilton, President of Miljevich Incorporated, submit a very thorough explanation of the legalities involved relative to this property. Mr. Hamilton was present and stated he would be delight'ed to prepare s~,ch a report. Commissioner Metcalf explained that if this Variance is approved it would clearly be in violation of the 1968' General Plan. Mr. Barney McLaughlin, 20640 Rftanna Court, inquired whether an automatic variance f'0r height control would be involved as a result of approval of the subject variance request. Chairman Lively explained that a height variation would require an additional variance. He then closed the hearing for the evening at 9:06 P.M., directed 'V-375 continued to the next regular meeting, and referred same to the Variance Committee for study. F. V-376 -' Edward H. Stirm, Nutwood Lane - Request for Variance to Allow Decrease in Both Side and Rear Yard Setbacks for Construction of Chain Link Fence Chairman Lively opened the hearing relative to V-376 at '9:07 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notice of Hearing was mailed. The applicant was present and stated that he has discussed the subject request with adjacent property owners, Mr. Mirayn and Mr. McKenzie and neither one of them have any objections to the proposed variance. No one else present wished to co~r~ne'.nt. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening'at 9:11 P.M., directed V-376 continued to the ne×t regular meeting,and referred same to the Variance Committee. Commissioner Martin, on behalf of the Variance Co~,nittee, made an appointment to meet with the applicant for an on-site inspection on Saturday, 1 April 1972 at 9:00 A.M. G. UP-209 - Royce S. Kaufmann, Pierce Road - Request for Use Permit to Allow Private Swim and Racket Club Chairman Lively opened the hearing [relatiye to UP-209 at 9:12 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notice of [Hearing was mailed. He then read several communications filed in opposition to the subject request for Use ~ermit by the following: -5- Planning Commission Minutes 27 ~iarch 1972 - ContinUed I!. G. UP-209 - Continued 1) Mr. and Mrs. Alan Bronzich of 13280 Pierce Road. 2) Rhoda Hansel of 13270 Pierce Road and Irene Whitaker of 13250 Pierce Rd 3) 'Gertrude Bowie and Dorothy Gloyd of 1323 Sierra Avenue, San Jose (property..Owners directly across Pierce Road from the proposed development); 4) Mr. and Mrs. S.D~ Selan of 13198 Pierce Road. Mr. Kaufmann, applicant,. stated tha~ 1) many people put this type of facility into their own back yard and this club would be for those people who enjoy this type of recreation and do not want the expense and maintenanc'e of having one in their own back yard 2) there is one entrance now and there can be two (2) entrances provided 3) he would simply like to get some idea of the Planning Commission's feeling at this time and 4) the property is 10.3 acres in size. Commissioner ~x~rshall stated he would like the Staff to do a more thorough study relative to the definition· of' private-non-co~mercial uses. Chairman Lively stated that the Zoning Ordinance under conditional uses lis,ts a variety of things and this use could be allowed under the section. Mr. Doug Wagner, 134].5 Pierce Road, read a letter written by David Royce of 13730 Pierce Road stating his objections to the proposed use permit. Mr. Wagner then stated that 1) his pro'perty is adjacent to the one currently under discussion 2) he is opposed to the subject request for use permit 3) there is a bad traffic situation already existing on Pierce Road and it would become hazardous if this use were approved and 4) 40% of the residents of this area have their own pools and those that do not are over sixty (60) years old and will not b'e playing a whole lot of tennis; the'refore, 98% of the people using the requested facility would come in from other areas. Mr. Richard Siegfried of 13388 Surrey Lane stated that 1) he would protest any use of the type proposed in this area 2) the applicant approached him three (3) weeks ago and stated the club would provide recreation for eight hundred (800) families in the area 3) with the number of families quoted membership would have to be drawn f.rom a much larger area than the i~m~ediate neighborhood 4) the membership list shown to him by the applicant listed residents from the o~her side of San Jose 5) he was l~.d to believe that this facility would, also, involve a bar and restaurant and some type of social activity every night 6) if this should be the case the residential property in the area would decrease in value' 7) when he moved into this area he was impressed by the fact that Saratoga· was a rural cormnunity and if the proposed use is allowed it would detract from the rural character of this area. Mr. Frank Gregory, resident of the 'area, stated that with a membership of the size proposed the .entire peaceful atmosphere and serentiy of this neighborhood will be disturbed. He urges the Planning Cormnission to .deny this reqt:est. Mr. John McCullin of 13290 Pierce Road stated that 1) he will not join this · club and 2) the noise that would be generalted by such a club would be objection- able and the request should be denfed. Mr. William' Tho:nas of ].3282 Pierce Road stated he could see no reason why this area should be changed from a 'peaceful residential-con~nunity to a cormnercial area such as the one proposed by the applicant. Planning Commission Min~tes - 27 March 1972 - Continued II. G. UP-209 - Continued Miss Karen Wagner, 13415 Pierce Road, stated that there are many animals that now roam this area freely and if this use were permitted the animals would be forced to leave. The request to allow a swim-and racketsclub at this location should be denied. Velma Cotanch stated she is opposed to the proposed request for Use Permit. Mr. William F. Sloan of 13360 Surrey Lane sta..ted that to build a facility of this type requires a great 'deal of money and the neighbors in this area will not support this use nor will they contribute any funds for construction. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 9:32 P.M., referred UPs209 to the Subdivision Committee for study, and directed same continued to the next regular meeting. III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SD-938 Saratoga Foothills Develo .ment, Corp., Saratoga Avenue - Subdivision Approval - 18 Lots - Continued from 13 March 1972 Commissioner Smith recoma-nended that SD-938 be continued at the request of the applicant. The applicant has sub~hi. tted a letter granting a thirty (30) day extension. Chairman Lively' directed SD-938 continued to the meeting of 24 April ].972. B. SDR-944 - Phillip R. Boyce, Boyce ~ane - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Continued from 13 March 1972 Cormmissioner Smith stated that the conditions of approval are ready for this building site and the applicant ha~ submitted a revised map showing all the existing trees and road turn-outs.' The Secretary recommended that the 'Building Site Committee Report be amended by adding the following to ~he 'end'iof Condition II-A. ."as shown on Exhibit "A-i". Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the Building Site Committee Report dated 27 March 1972 relative to SDR-944 be adopted, as ..~mended~-.and .that the tentative .map (Exhibit "A-i", filed 18 March 1972) b~_a_.p_.p_ro_v_._~_..d_.~subject to the conditions set forth in said ,report; motion carried unanimously. C. SDR-950 - Dr. Richard A. Wallace, Pierce Road - Building Site Approval - 4 Lots - Continued from 13 March 1972 Commissioner Smith stated this matter should be continued since the four (4) lots proposed do not conform with the emergenc)~-moratorium ordinance in effect in this area. The Secretary stated that the applicant is aware of this problem and is going to submit a revised map that will conform with the emergency ordinance. Chairman Lively directed SDR-950 continued to the next regular me.eting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for study. D. SD-952 - AVCO Community Development, Inc., Cox Avenue and Sea Gull Way Subdivision Approval 67 Lots - Continued from 13 ~rch 1972 The Secretary explained that the applicant is still making revisions to the lots and has met with the Subdivision Co~s~ittee to review this matter; however, the main hold-up is with the State Division of Highways. Chairman Lively directed SD-952 cont:inued. to the next regular meeting and referred the matter to the Subdivision Committee. -7- Planning Commission Minutes 27 March 1972 - Continued III. E. SDR-953 - Charla Ann Brown, Canyon, View Drive - Building Site Approval 1 Lot - Continued from 13 ~rch 1972 CommiSsioner Smith reco~mmended that SDR-953 be continued to the next regular meeting in order to allow time for some action relative to V-373 - a variance request directly related to this application. Chairman Lively so directed. F. SDR-955 - ~ngeline Arata, ~ude Avenue - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot The Secretary stated the applicant did review the proposed conditions of approval and expressed satisfaction with same. <.'Co~aissioner Metcalf stated that since the property is 4~-acres in size a plan for subdivision of the entire property should be required as opposed to permitting piece-meal dividing cf one lot at a time. Chairman Lively directed SDR-955 continued to the next regular meeting and requested the Secretary to obtain a revised map from the applicant showing development of the entire property'. G. SDR-957 - Andrew P. Lassen, Sobey ~oad - Building Site Approval 1 Lot The Secretary stated that this is an existing lot that was'subdivid&d many years ago. Parcel "A" was built on at the time the original approval was granted. The average slope is close to 10% although slope-density does not apply to this building-site since it is a legal non-conforming lot. Chairman Lively staled that it is his.opinion that the entrance to this lot should be changed. The Secretary stated that it is doubtful that the City can legally require the applicant to gain access on another road when he already has access. Chairman Lively advised that there are three (3) driveway entrances"along Sobey Road that could service this lot. Commissioner ~rshall recommended the City require the driveway design for this lo~ to be changed. The Secretary stated that the applicant located the d~i~eway in the proposed location because the bank increases in height as you proceed easterly on Sobey Road. Perhaps the applicant could negotiate with an adjoining property-owner Mr. Kirkham tO use his driveway for access. Chairman Lively directed SDR-957 continued to the next regular meeting and ~eferred the matter t'o the Subdivision Co~nittee for further review relative to the access to this prqperty. H. SDR-958 - Jerry C. Henry, Palomino Way - Building'Site Approval - 1 Lot The Secretary recommended that SDR-958 be continued to the.next regular meeting to await submittal of a revised map and some co~nent from the Saratoga Fire Department regarding the driveway-grade.' Chairman Lively so directed. I. SD-959 - Stoneson Construction Company, Big Basin Way - Subdivision Approval - 1 Lot Commissioner Smith stated that he ~ould recommend that the matter be continued to allow each member of. the Planning Commission an opportunity to make an on-site inspection of this site. Commissioner Metcalf stated that because of the increase in slope density he feels the City would be justified in requiring larger units in this development. -8- Planning Commission Minutes 27 March 1972 -· Continued III. I. SD-959 - Continued The Secretary stated that this property consists of approximately ten (10) acres and this development was reviewed in great detail at the time of original approval. '· Chairman Lively directed· SD-959 continued to the next regular meeting and and requested that each member of the Commission make a field-trip to look at this site. J. SDR-960 - Clara S. I~.~iggins, Pierce· Road and Surrey Lane - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot The Secretary stated that the applicant has requested that this application be continued to c~nsi·der further tl~e proposed conditions since they are more extensive than originally anticipated. This applicant intends to construct a modular home at this location. Chairman Lively noted that this is a corner lot and expressed the hope that this type' of house wo~,ld be an asset to the neighborhood. He then directed the matter continued to the next r~gular meeting and ref. erred SDR-960 to the Subdivision Committee. IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A~387 Abel M. Carreia, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Preliminary Design Review - Commercial Building Commissioner Metcalf requested that this matter be continued off the agenda until such time as the applicant has more information available as to what use will be made of the interior of the building. Commissioner Marshall stated that the present design s~,.~ws an incomplete shell and the Design Review Committee would like a complete design of the building made available prior to submitting a recormn~endation. Chairman Lively directed A-387 continued off the agenda until the applicant has further information available. B. A-388 - Robert H. Le·e Associates (Texaco Station), Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Final Design Review - Service Station Remodeling and New Identification Signs ~ Mr. Jerry Gere, present to represent the applicant, submitted colored drawings reflecting the chang?.s raquested by the Design Review Corf~nittee. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 27 March 1972 recommending that Fi.nal Design Approval be granted for A-388. Commissioner Metcalf moved, second.ed by Commissioner Marshall, that the Staff RepOrt dated 27 March 1972 be adop.ted and that Final Design Review be granted for the remodeling of the Texaco Station and for the two (2) new identification signs (with one small price sign) as shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. C. A-389 ~ Imperial Savings, Big Basin Way - Final Design Review - New Identification Sign Commissioner Metcalf stated that ir~ his opinion the proposed sign is not in good taste with three (3) colors as shown. It is his feeling that the sign should be limited to two .(2) colors. Commissioner Bacon stated he did not feel it appropriate to ask a company to forego its .established company colors. ·· Planning_Commission Minutes - 27 March 1972 Continued IV. C. A-389 - Continued Commissioner Marshall stated that he did not fee]. that allowing only <2) colors for a sign will result in an attractive sign in every case. He did not feel it would be proper t6 destroy the logo of a company's national sign. The proposed sign is somewhat smaller that the original one and will be affixed to the front' of the building as opposed to the former sign that projected from the building. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by C6nnnissioner Bacon, that the Staff Report dated 27 March 1972 be adopted and that Final Design Review be granted for installation of identification sign for Imperial Savings as shown on Exhibit "A" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried with Commissioner Metcalf voting"no.'~ D. A-390 - Osterlund Enterprises, CoX Avenue - Final· Design Review - Subdivi- sion Approval Connnissioner Metcalf introduced the Staff Report dated 27 March 1972 relative to A-390 recommending that Final DeSign Approval be granted for the new subdivision· (Tract ~4574). Chairman Lively recommended that the subje~t report be amended by adding the following condition "(g)": "(g) Plan 720 with elevation 710-B is disapproved." Cormnisssioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Cor~missioner Bacon, that the Staff Report dated 27 March 1972 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Review be granted for the new subdivision (Tract ~4574) for Osterlund Enterprises as sho~,zn on Exhibit "A" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. E. SS~70 - Saratoga Foothills Development Corp., Fruitvale Avenue - Final Design Review - Temporary Subdivision Sign Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Staff Report dated 27 March 1972 be adopted and that Final Design Review be granted for a temporary subdivision sign for Tract ~4954 as shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. ? V. CITY COUNCIL The Secretary gave a brief summary of items reviewed and action taken at the City Council meeting of 15 March 1972,. with emphasis on items of particular interest to the Commission. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. SDR-946 - Robert H. Bohn, Pike Road - Request for Reconsideration of Conditions - Continued from 13 March 1972 The Secretary stated that the Staff Report dated 27 March 1972 reconnnends that the subject request for reconSideration be disapproved. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that the Staff RepOrt dated 27 March 1972 be adopted and that the request for exception be disapproved and that the Planning Conm~ission recormnend to the City ·Council that the subject Condition II-A of the Building Site Committee Report dated 13 March 1972 be imposed as currently required; motion carried unanimously. Plannin8 Commission Minutes - 27 ~arch 1972 - Continued VII. NEW BUSINESS A. SD?~-943 - John T. Stone, Mt. Eden Road Request for Reconsideration of Condition of Building Site Approval The Secretary explained that the applicant requests a waiver of the requirement to provide a Record of Survey map on the basis that he has two (2) maps that together make a complete boundary survey of his property. The normal requirement is to have one map that shows one property on one map. ~'.. The Secretary recommended that the matter be continued to the next regular meeting. Chairman .Lively so directed and referred the matter to the Staff and Subdivision Committee for study. B. SDR-931 - Jordan M. Pennoyer,. Via R~gina - Request for Reconsideration of Condition of Building Site Approval ' -The Secretary stated that this applicant requests reconsideration of building-site conditions involving the access-road and bridge on his property. The Secretary reconm~ended that the matter be continued to the meeting of 10 April 1972. Chairman Lively so directed and referred the matter to the Staff and Subdivision Com~nittee. C. Variances in the "C-V" (Visi or-Commercial) Zoning Districts t The Secretary stated that 1) he has some comments relating to the variance requests made by Mr. Miljevich and Mr. Garcia for 28,000-square foot grocery stores in the "C-V" zoning districts on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 2) there have been many connnents offered by the residents of the surrounding area in the subject vicinities of these requested variances and 3) after reviewing the "C-V" ordinance he would recom_n~end that some consideration be given to prohibit or limit the square-footage for each type of cormnercial use in order to encourage retail stores. Commissioner Marshall stated that a .lot of time can be spent deliberating over the size of a grocery store in a."C-V" zone and then turn around and allow a 28,000-square-foot pharmacy. which would be in accord with the "C-V" ordinance° The list of uses allowed in the "C-V" zoning district should, also, be reviewed. Commissioner Metcalf stated he did not feel a variance application 'should be accepted for major changes such as the ones proposed. VIII. CO~D~NICATIONS A. WRITTEN MAP ACT - CITY A~FTORNEY LETTER The Secretary stated each Cor~miss~oner has been .given a copy of a letter from the City Attorney relative to the new law regarding the Map Act. B. ORAL Planning Policy Conm~ittee Chairman Lively explained that at2 the last meeting of the Planning Policy Committee the Fire Hazard ~'k~p was discussed and slides were sho~. tie' then asked the Secretary. about th'e status of the fire-retardant-roof plan. The Secretary stated that he would' discuss the matt~'~ and report back to the Planning Conm~ission. -11- Planning Cormmission Minutes 27 March 1972 - Continued VIII. B. Santa Cruz Mountain Study The Secretary stated that the County Planning Commission delayed adoption of the Santa Cruz Mountain Study for one (1) year. Miljevich Property Commissioner Marshall stated that the Variance Committee have discussed this matter with the neighbors of the area and it is obvious when you -~=w~lk this property that tree~ have been removed for fire-wood, and that the area has been used for a catch-all for debris for a number of years. ~. The Secretary stated that the matter is under study by the Code Enforcement Officer and the City Council. The matter is, also, scheduled for a court hearing. Guests Chai~an Lively acknowledged, with pleasure, the presence of Councilman and Mrs. ~er, Mrs. Mencacci of the League of Women Voters, Mrs. Stark and Captain Frampton of the Good' ~overnment'~roup~" a~ Mr. Be~nie Turgeon Saratoga Foothills D~=velopment Corp. He, also, thanked Mrs. Stark'fOr' the coffee served at recess. IX. ~JOUP~NT Chairman Lively adjourned the meeting at 11:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Stanley M. Walker, Secretary Saratoga Planning Co~ission j -12-