HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-24-1974 Planning Commission Minutes OF PLANNING
MINU~ES
*************~*****
TIME: Wednesday, April 24, 1974 7;30 p.m.'
PLACE: City Council Chambers - 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California
TYPE: Regular Meeting
***********~*********
I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION
A'. ROLL CALL
Present: CommissiOners Belanger, MarShall, Matteoni, Smith and Woodward
Absent: Commissioner Martin
" .....~ B. MINUTES
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by!Commissioner Woodward, that the reading of
.the minutes of April 10, 1974 be waived, 'and that they be approved as distributed
to the Commission. The motion was carried unanimously.
C. CITY COUNCIL REPORT
Commissioner Woodward presented an oral report of the City Council Meeting of
April 17, 1974. A copy of the minuteb of this meeting is on file at the City
Administration office. Of special interest was the passage of Resolution 687
commending Councilman Dwyer for his years of service on the City Council.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. UP-239 - Boething Treeland Nursery, Ihc., Prospect Avenue - Request to Permit a
Temporary Office Trailer
The Chairman opened the public hearing on UP-239 at 7:38 p.m.
The Secretary stated a Staff Report had been prepared relative to this which
recommended approval of the request for a temporary office trailer on the leased
land from the State in the West Valley Freeway right-of-way off Prospect Road.
Mr. Stockard, applicant, acknowledged2 receipt and acceptance of the terms of the
Staff Report.
Mr. James McPhail, 12339 Marilla DriVe, expressed concern that his family room
overlooked this trailer site. It was, pointed out that the trailer would be located
on the farthest side of the freeway r~ight-of-way, and that appropriate screening
and landscaping would be required.
A gentleman residing on Marilla Court asked how much wholesale traffic would be
anticipated, and what kind of sewage facilities would be used. Mr. Stockard ex-
plained that the nursery was a growing-yard rather than a wholesale nursery, and
that large sections of the trees would be developed at one time; consequently,
there would be a very small amount of traffic. He further added that portable
sanitation units would be used.
Mr. Turgeon..~sked if the proposed trails project of the General Plan would be
prevented if this Use Permit was granted. Chairman Marshall replied that the
i"' proposed trails plan wou'fd]~ot be prevented inso'~h'~ih~N~s'~y was temporary,
on leased land'~r'~he'S'~'~"~d 'ff necessary, ~buld be'cleared out in a short time.
Commissioner Belanger requested that 'Condition 4 of the Staff Report be amended
as follows:
"Telephone and electrical ;wiring to trailer to be underground."
There were no further comments made.
~1-
April 24~ 1974 Minutes
A. UP-239 - Boething Treeland Nursery - ~ontinued
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by'Commissioner Woodward, that the public hear-
ing on UP-239 be closed. The motion was carried unanimously. The public hearing
was closed at 7:49 p.m. :
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by;COmmissioner Belanger, that the Staff Report
dated April 24, 1974 relative to UP-2~9 be accepted, and the request for Use
Permit to allow a temporary trailer be granted subject to Conditions (1) through
(8) of the report, as amended. The motion was carried: 4 ayes and Commissioner
Matteoni abstained because he did not.hear all of the testimony.
B. UP-240 - Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Shadow Oaks Way, Request to
Permit a Model Homes Sales Office
The Secretary stated that a Use Permit had been requested to allow operation of a
model homes sales office on an ll-lotZsubdivision on Shadow Oaks Way. He explained
that past policy relative to model-homes sales-offices indicated subdivisions of
20 lots or less should not be allowedfto have model sales offices. He stated that
in the light of this policy, a Staff Report had been prepared dated April 24, 1974
in two parts: one part reaffirmed this past policy and denied the request, and
· one part recommended approval subject. to conditions stated within the report. He
added that Staff =ecommended approval%of this request.
Commissioner Smith explained that this Sales Office Policy had been adopted in
September 1969 at the request of the Subdivision Committee for the purpose of
allowing Staff to sift through the overwhelming amount of applications submitted.
He stated he'felt the Policy should be modified to reduce the number of lots inso-
much as the tracts were smaller now than they had been in 1969.
Mr. Turgeon, representative of the applicant, stated the Corporation would be
vacating their present model-homeS sales-officesion Wardell Road if this applica-
tion was approved. He added that other model-homes sales-offices at the following
tract locations would be consolidatedlinto this one sales office on Shadow Oaks
Way: Sevilla Lane - 1 lot; Fruitvale'Avenue - 15 lots; Michaels Drive - 8 lots;
and Shadow Oaks Way - 6 lots. Because there were actually 30 lots involved,
· Mr. Turgeon requested the time limit on this Use Permit be extended to six months,
and added that the Corporation would be willing to post bond on this matter.
A question was raised as to Item 4 of' the Policy relative to the subdivision's
having a non-tract sales office within two miles of the nearest tract. Mr. Turgeon
stated that he had a resale real-esta'te office on Highway 9 within two miles of
this proposed office, but that new homes were not sold there.
Commissioner Matteoni moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the public
hearing on UP-240 be closed. The motion was carried unanimously. The public
hearing was closed at 8:05 p.m. ~
The matter of the Sales Office Polic~ was addressed at this time, and the ques-
tion of reducing the minimum lot requirement was discussed. Commissioner Woodward
suggested this number be ten lots. Commissioner Matteoni felt the number should
be higher in order to encourage developers to consolidate sales offices.
Chairman Marshall directed the Sales ;Office Policy be referred to the Subdivision
Committee for review and modification, and requested that a report on this matter
be made at the next Planning Commission meeting.
The Staff Report was next discussed and the following amendments were made:
1. Condition (a): This Use Permit {s granted for a period of six (6) months
from date of approval and subject to extension upon receipt of applica-
tion and review by the Planning Commission.
2. Condition (b): Use is limited t0 sale of lots, with or without houses, within
the tracts now under development by the contractor. Use as a construction
yard, or for administrative or engineering functions is prohibited.·
~2-
April 24~ 1974
B. UP-240 - Saratoga Foothills DevelopmeAt Corporation - Continued
3. Condition (e): Use Permit is revocable in the event any of the conditions are
not fulfilled, or in the event.there are parking problems?-ass0ciated with
the model homes sales office a~jacent to Saratoga Avenue.
This Condition (e) was added after the matter of potential parking problems
on Saratoga Avenue was discussed.: It was pointed out that the Sales Office
Policy stipulated the location of%a sales office to be on an internal street
of the subdivision, and that this;model home faced a major thoroughfare. Mr.
Turgeon explained that the only other house which could be used as a model
home was 2~ months from being completed. He further stated that the model
home chosen was 70 feet from Saratoga Avenue, and that there was sufficient
parking space available on Shadow:Oaks Way to handle traffic. He indicated
the Corporation would take responsibility of preventing parking on Saratoga
Avenue, and agreed to the addition of Condition (e).
There were no further comments.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by%Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative to UP-24Obe accepted, and the request
for a Model Homes Sales Office be granted subject to Conditions (a) through
(~) of the report, as amended. The m6tion was carried unanimously.
C. V-404 - Robert Miller, Lomita Avenue ~ Request for variance to Allow a New Two-
Story Residential Structure o~ Property Not Opposite or Contiguous to
the Same (Section 3-7-2 of Ordinance NS-3)
The Secretary stated the applicant proposed a new two-story house off Lomita
Avenue, abutting the Madronia Cemetery. He explained that the new Two-Story'
Ordinance provided that "conversions of existing single-story houses to two-story
houses required a public hearing and a use Permit. Also, new one lot, two story
houses must meet the given setbacks of the Code and they must be contiguous to a
two-story structure." He noted that ~he latter statement was the issue in this
matter, and that it was Staff's opinion that the intent and letter of the Ordinance
was not met by this application. He explained that Mr. Miller had requested a
second opinion be given, and that Staff recommended this be referred to the
Variance Committee for review. He added that this had been referred to the City
Attorney for interpretation.
It was noted this matter had not been:publicly noticed, and was thus an informal
hearing. Chairman Marshall opened the informal public hearing on V-404 at 8:20 p.m.
Mr. Robert Miller, applicant, was present and contended the proposed house was
contiguous to a two-story dwelling next to the cemetery. He further requested
that a second opinion be given on this matter.
Chairman Marshall explained that the Two-Story Ordinance was newly adopted, and
that this was the first issue to come~before it. He recommended 'this matter be
referred to the Variance Committee for an on-site review~ and that a duly-noticed
public hearing be held on this.'at the next meeting of the Planning Commission.
He added that if the application was ~enied, Mr. Miller had the right of appeal to
the City Council.
A gentleman from the audience, residing at 20610 Lomita Avenue, stated he had a
contiguous lot to the applicant's property, and requested he be allowed to attend
the Variance Committee meeting relative to the interpretation of the Two-Story
Ordinance. A lady from the audience stated her property was close to that of
the applicant's, and indicated she would object to the Commission's granting
approval of this request.
There were no further comments' made. Chairman Marshall closed the informal
public hearing on V-404 at 8:45 p.m.
-3-
1974 Minutes~
C. V-404 - Robert Miller Continued
Chairman Marshall directed V-404 be dOly noticed and be continued to the Planning
Con~nission meeting of May 8, 1974; that this matter be referred to the Variance
Committee for an on-site review with ~he applicant on May 4, 1974 at 9:00 a.m.;
and that this be followed by a meeting with neighbors on-site at 9:30 a.m., May 4.
III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS
A. SD-1057 - Gerald D. Butler, Walnut A~enue, Subdivision Approval - 6 Lots;
Continued from July 23~ 1973
The Secretary stated this was a request for a 6-lot subdivision off of Walnut Ave-
nue adjacent to Saratoga Creek. He stated a Staff Report dated April 24 had been
prepared in two parts on this matter: one part recommended approval of the request
subject to conditions contained. therein, and one part recommended denial of the
request based on exceptions to the Code and'the number of variances the City
would be required to make. He added that Staff recommended denial of the request
based on the following reasons: (1) Lot #1 could not meet lot-depth requirements;
(2) due to Lot #i's proximity to rearZyard precipice, there/was a question of
public safety; (3) the proposed access would result in an illegal sideyard situa-
tion relative to the house on the west; and (4) the W. Peck property located to
the southwest of the project would be landlocked.
Chairman Marshall gave a brief history of the application, and explained that the
problem at this point was that the subdivision would create many automatic variance
situations which the City would not be willing to make. He added that the denial
was without prejudice which would allow the applicant to refile.
Mr. Reckenmacher, the applicant's representative, stated that this application
had been brought before the Subdivision Committee four times; and that at the
January 17 meeting his understanding was there would be no problems with the
general configurations subject to Flood Control approval. He stated Flood Control
approval had been given, and at the February 6 meeting, the Subdivision Committee
had indicated a variance.could be granted on the one lot which did not comply
with the Code. He further stated that Mr. Burns of the Flood Control District
had made a mistake in his letter of April 18 to the Planning Commission which
had been corrected to state that the top of the bank would be the right of way
but would require a 15 foot building Setback.
The Secretary confirmed this statement, but noted that L~t ~1 still remained
very awkward in that there was a 30 foot precipice at the rear of the property.
It was felt that because of the precipice, even iS fenced, a public safety problem
would be created. It was further pointed out that Lot #1 aggravated a non-con-
forming side yard situation on property to the west.
Commissioner Woodward stated that she' felt there were too many lots for the
amount of space, and that there was a moral obligation on the part of the developer
to not create a hazardous situation.
Mr. Cliff Beck, another representative of the applicant, stated that there were
many hardships involved in the development of this property: (1) the size
was difficult to develoR; and_.(2) there were tremendous improvement costs in-
volved (approximately $80,000)~ He added that on a 6-lot basis, these improve-
ment costs would barely be covered. Be further explained that the previous
owner had been required to install a storm drain through the property as well
as a sewage line, and that certain pieces of property should not have to bear all
of the cost burden. He concluded tha~' because of the hardships faced in the
development of this property, the developer should be given some leniency.
Commissioner Smith ~'~l~'ined that the Subdivision Committee had been discussing
this matter since M~re'h 1970 with various representatives of various developers.
He stated that the.reason why some of: these variances had not been pointed out
April 24~ 1974 Minutes
A. SD-1057 - Gerald D. Butler - Continued
earlier was that the Committee had to'wait until Flood Control and the developer
worked out a solution to the creek problem. He emphasized that the City should
not create an illegal lot by allowing'! substandard depths or improper clearances on
the lot to existing houses. He recommended the application be denied.
Commissioner Belanger commentedT"we C~nnot engineer this at a public hearing~
?~'~d')asked that Commissioner Smith call for the question. There were no further
comments ma. de.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative to SDR-1057 be accepted, and the request
for subdivision approval be denied without prejudice on the basis of the condi-
tions of the report. The motion was carried unanimously.
B. SDR-1093 - Dav'id N. Grant, Canyon View Drive, ·Building Site Approval - 1 Lot;
Continued from April 10~ 1~74
· The Secretary stated that the applicant had submitted a revised map which depicted
the access of the adjacent property (SDR-1090). He further stated that prior to
granting final building site approval·, the applicant was being asked to demon-
strate that easement rights had been granted. He added that a Staff Report had
been prepared dated April 24, 1974 which recommended approval of this request.
Commissioner Belanger recommended Condition "S" be amended as follows:
"Prove irrevocable access easement rights have been secured."
Mr. Dan Apker, representative of the ~pplicant, was present and submitted a map
~h~i~ he stated mee the requirements of Condition "S". ~Mr. Dan Trinidad, Depart-
ment of Public Works, stated that on ~he surface, the map submitted offered proof
that this Condition had been met; he added that he would review this matter further.
There were no further comments.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by: Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative to SDR-1093 be accepted, and that the tenta-
tive map (Exhibit A-2 filed April 11,;. 1974) be accepted subject to General
Conditions I and Specific Conditions II (a) through (s) of the report, as amended.
The motion was carried unanimously.
C. SDR~ll00 - A.R. Woolworth, Brandywine. Drive, Building Site Approval - 4 Lots;
Continued from April 10~ 1'.974
The Secretary stated that the applicant would be submitting revised plans, and
recommended this matter be continued.· It was noted that time would expire on this
prior to the next Planning Commission· meeting.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the application
relative to SDR~ll00 be denied subjec'·t to receipt of a written extension from the
applicant prior to the expiration dat'e. The motion was carried unanimously.
D. SD-1101 - Avco Development Corporation, Cox Avenue Subdivision Approval - 18 Lots;
Continued from April 10~ 19'.74
The Secretary stated the Staff Report of April 24, 1974 was in two parts: one
which suggested minimum conditions be' imposed in the event the Commission approved
the design; the other part being a re:commendation for denial based upon design
criteria.
Chairman Marshall gave a brief histor'y of this application, and noted that pre-
vious development of this property had resulted in a long,narrow cul-de-sac which
provided no access.
Mr. Cecchi, representative of the app, licant, stated that the only economically
feasible solution to this access problem had been to provide for an emergency
· April 24~ 1974 Minutes
'D. SD-1101 - Avco Development Corporation - Continued
right-of-way. He stated they had requested clarification from the State Depart'
ment of Transportation on their'l~tter of April 16, 1974, and indicated that the
stipulation contained in this lette~ ½egarding a Highway Commission resolution
had been part of the State's Code for many years. He further pointed out that
Avco was aware of the City's goals relative to the freeway right-of-way, and stated
that they had tried to provide for these goals in their plans. Relative to this,
he cited statements from the proposed 1973 General Plan: Item 8, Area C; Stem 2,
Area D; and Item 3, Area D. He concluded his statements with the request that if
the application was to be denied, could it be denied without prejudice. Chairman
Marshall indicated the Commission would not object to this request.
Commissioner Smith stated he would like to commend Mr. Cecchi on 'the cooperation
received from him by the Subdivision Committee in attempting to solve the access
problem. He stated that the developer had tried negotiations with owners of
adjoining lots, but had not been successful. He indicated that he felt their
efforts in finding a solution to the access problem had been noteworthy, and
stated, "I will personally vote against the denial." He further recommended the
Staff Report be amended by deleting everything after the first line of Item 2,
and based this amendment on the fact that the 1973 General Plan had not yet been
adopted.
After further discussion, Commissioner Belanger moved, seconded by Commissioner
Woodward, that approval of the tentative map be denied/without prejudice
based upon those reasons in the Staff. recommendation for denial relating to design
criteria for cul-de-sac streets (exceSsive length and inadequate emergency access),
and the policy against double frontage lots. The motion was carried: 4 ayes;
Commissioner Smith voted no.
E. SDR-1102 - Mike Purcell, Big Basin Way, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Commercial;
Continued from April 10~ 1974
The Secretary stated a Staff Report had been prepared on this which recommended
approval of the request. He explained that this project was conditioned for
design review and it was dependent upon the formation of the parking assessment
district. He added that if the parking district failed to go through, the appli-
cant would be required to submit new plans which depicted parking.
The applicant was present and acknowledged receipt and acceptance of the Staff
Report. There were no further comments made.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by. Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative ~o SDR-1102 be accepted, and that the tenta-
tive map (Exhibit A filed March 19, 1974) be approved subject to General Conditions !
and Specific Conditions II (a) throug~ (o) of the report. The motion was carried
unanimously.
F. SDR-1103 - Fred Marburg, Sarat0ga-Sunnyvale ROad, Commercial Expansion; Continued
from'April 10, 1974
The Secretary stated input from the Santa Clara Valley Water District had not been
received, and recommended this matter% be continued. It was noted that a letter
from the applicant dat~ April 23, 1974 had been received which granted an exten-.
sion to the Planning Commission meeting of May 8, 1974.
The Chairman directed this matter be ~ontinued to the Planning Commission meeting
of May 8, 1974, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Co~fm~ittee for review.
G. SDR-1104 - Ben Yates, E1 Camino Grand~, Building Site Approval - 3 Lots; Continued
from April 10~ 1974 ~
The Secretary stated a Staff Report had been prepared on this matter which recom-
mended approval of this request.
April 24~ 1974 Minutes
G. SDR-1104 - Ben Yates - Continued
Mr. Lou Frankel, representative of the applicant, acknowledged receipt of the
report. He questioned Conditions K and L which stated that the applicant must com-
ply with the requirements of letters from the Health Department and the Santa
Clara Valley Water District. The Secretary explained that these conditions were
standard, and that there were no specific conditions requ~red.
Commissioner Smith corrected the Staff Report to provide for the standard pream-
ble. There were no further comments made.
Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded'by Commissioner Smith, that the Staff Report
-dated April 24, 1974 relative to SDR-!103 be accepted, and that the tentative map
(Exhibit A-1 filed April 15, 1974) be.approved subject to General Conditions I and
Specific Conditions II (a) through (z) of the report, as amended. The motion was
carried unanimously.
BREAK: 9:50 p.m.
MEETING REOPENED: 10:05 p.m.
H. SDR-1105 - Danforth Apker, Sperry Lane, Building Site Approval - 3 Lots; Continued
from April 10 ~ 1974
The Secretary stated a Staff Rep=.ort had been prepared on this matter which recom-
mended fapproval of the reque.st. ! It was noted that revised maps were not required
depict{ng easements and water drainage course insomuch as Condition "M" of the
Staff Report covered this drainage course requirement.
Mr. Trinidad ·requested that Condition "N" be stricken from the Report, and called
for renumeration of the remaining conditions of the Report.
Mr. Ralph DiTullio, applicant, acknowiedged receipt of the Staff Report and asked
for clarification of same. Chairman Marshall gave an explanation of the Report's
conditions, and recommended he confer with his engineer, Mr. Dan Apker, for
further clarification. There were no! further comments made.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by~ Commissioner Woodward, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative to SDR-1105 be accepted, and the tentative
map (Exhibit A filed March 29, 1974) be approved subject to General Conditions I
and Spedific Conditions II (a) through (s) of the report, as amended. The motion
was carried unanimously.
I. SDR-1106 - Mary Lynn Dutro, Big Basin' Way, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot; Con-
tinued from April 10~ 1974.
The Secretary stated this matter should be continued in that input from the State
Highway Department had not been received. It was noted that time would elapse on
this application prior to the next meeting of the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by' Commissioner Belanger, that the application
relative to SDR-1106 be denied subjec.t to receipt of a written extension from the
applicant prior to the expiration dat~. The motion was carried unanimously.
J. SDR-1107 - Caryl Groteguth, Ten Acres Road, Building Site Approval 1 Lot; Con-
tinued from April 10~ 1974
The Secretary stated a Staff Report had been prepared on this matter which recom-
mended approval of the request.
The applicant's ~e·~resentative was present.and acknowledged receipt and acceptance
of the Staff Report. There were no further comments made.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff Report
dated April 24, 1974 relative to SDR-1107 be accepted; that the tentative map
(Exhibit A filed March 29, 1974) be approved subject to General Conditions I and
Specific Conditions II (a) through (v), including the asterisked note explaining
Items_ (i) through (v) of the report.. The motion was carried unanimously.
April 24, 1974 Minutes
K. SDR-1109 - John Terrill, Pierce Road,~ Building Site Approval - 1 Lot; Continued
from April 10 ~ 1974
The Secretary stated that the applicant had been requested to submit revised maps,
and recommended this matter be continued to the next meeting of the Planning
Commission.
Chairman Marshall directed SDR-1109 be continued to the Planning Commission meet-
ing'of May 8, 1974, and referred this~matter to the Subdivision Committee for
review.
L. SD-1110 - Dividend Industries, Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, Subdivision Approval;
18 Lots; Continued from April 10p 1974
The Secretary stated this matter had not been adequately reviewed, and recommended
this be continued to the next meeting~ of the Planning Commission. It was noted
that time would elapse on this matteriprior to the next. meeting of the Plann_ing
Commission..
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded byiCommissioner Belanger, that the application
,relative to SD-1110 be denied subject to receipt of a written extension from the'
~ap~l%cant' prior to the expiration date. The motion was carried unan'{m~usly.
M. SDR-1111 - Royce Kaufman, Canyon View:Drive, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot;
Continued from April 10~ 1~74
The Secretary stated a Staff Report had been prepared on this matter which recom-
mended approval of the request.
The applicant was present and acknowledged receipt of the Staff Report. He asked
for clarification on Conditions L and;iQ. Mr. Trinidad explained that Condition L
was a standard condition.; Chairman Marshall suggested Mr. Kaufman contact the Fire
Department for further explanation of 7Condition Q. There were no further comments.
Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative to SDR-1111 be accepted, and that the tenta-
tive map (Exhibit A filed April 1, 1974) be approved subject to General Conditions I
and Specific Conditions II (a) through (t) of the report. The motion was carried
unan imou sly.
The Secretary stated that the files on th~ following applications were not complete,
and recommended these matters be continued to the next meeting of the Planning
Commission:
N. SDR-1113 - Carolyn R. Buehner~ Allendale Avenue, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot
O. SD-1114 - Ruth & Going~ Montalvo Roads; Building Site Approval - 5 Lots
P. SDR-1115 - Marvin Kirkeby, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Building Site ApproVal - 3 Lots
Chairman Marshall directed that SDR-1113, '.SD-1114 and SDR-1115 be continued to the
Planning Commission meeting of May 8, 1974, and referred these matters to the Subdi-
vision Committee for review.
IV. DESIGN REVIEW
A. A-391 - George W. Day & Company, Fruit'~vale Avenue & Douglass Lane, Final Design
Review; Single-Family Resident'ial~ 1 Lot (Tract 5327~ Lot #20)
Mr. Don Burt, City Planner, .read the S. taff Report dated April 24, 1974 relative to
this matter which recommended approval' of the 'final design request. He pointed out
that the house would be situated diffe:.rently than what was shown~'on the approved
Site Development Plan.
-8'-
April 24~ 1974 Minutes
A. A-391 - George W. Day & Company - Continued
Mr. Lou Leto, representative of the applicant, explained the reason for situating
the house differently, as shown on Exhibit C-C-l, was because of the position of
the swimming pool. A question was raised as to setbacks relative to the adjacent
Lot ~19, and it was noted that these setbacks would not be less than those shown
on the approved Site Development Plan,
The Staff Report was amended in the following ways:
1. Paragraph 2, second sentence:
"The street elevations will consist of vertical wood siding; the rear
elevations will be of stucco."
2. Condition (a) was added as followS:
"That a condition be incorporated'into the subdivision's deed restrictions,
to be reviewed by the City Attorney, stating that the design and location
'~"~ of all interior fencing and/or poqls for each lot of Tract 5327 be submitted
to the Design Review Committee of.the City of Saratoga for review or approval."
3. Condition (b) was added as followj:
"Stipulation that rear yard setbacks of Lot #19 be not less than those
shown on the approved Site DevelOpment Plan."
There were no further comments.
Commissioner Belanger moved, seconded!by Commissioner Matteoni, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative to A-391 be accepted, and final design be
granted subject to Conditions (a) andZ(b) of the report, as amended. The motion
was carried unanimously.
B. A-429 - Church of the Ascension, Prospect Avenue and Miller Avenue, Final Design
Review - Religious Education Center; 1 Lot
Mr. Burt stated that the architect had requested this matter be continued due to
revisions being made to the final design. Commissioner Matteoni requested that
the Architectural Advisory.t~m!mittee be asked to assist the Design Review Committee
on the review of this application. There were no further comments made.
Chairman Marshall directed A-429 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting
of May 8, 1974, and referred this matter to the Design Review Committee and the
Architectural Advisory Committee'for further review.
C. A-430 - Almaden Development, Oak Street, Preliminary Design Review - Multiple
Family Residential (6 Units)
Chairman Marshall directed that Item A (SDR-1076) of Section VI-Miscellaneous be
addressed prior to the matter of A-430.
The Secretary stated that the applicant had submitted a revised map (Exhibit D)
relative to SDR-1076. It was observed that a note on Exhibit D indicated that
the responsibility of the walkway should be that of the Parking District.
Chairman Marshall explained to the applicant, Mr. Franklin, that the City Manager
had specified the responsibility of installing the walkway would be that of the
townhouse development; and that if Exhibit D was not amended to reflect this
specification, it could not be adopted by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Franklin stated that he felt the walkway expense should be the responsibility
of the Parking District in that: (1) ~the original owner had been told that when
the commercial area was developed, a Walkway must be installed; (2) the walkway
would serve all of the commercial area as well as the townhouse development; and
(3) if the Parking District did not g0 through, the townhouse development would
have to install the walkway anyway.
-9-
~ "'~7'~ril 24~ 1974 Minutes
C. A-430 - Almaden Development = Continued
Discussion of the note on Exhibit D fSllowed, and the applicant stated, "If you
want to strike that out, that's O.K. with me."
Chairman Marshall modified Exhibit D By depicting a double cross-hatch indicating
the walkway be part of the townhouse development. He signed his endorsement of'
this modification on both copies of the Exhibit. There were no further comments.
Commissioner Matteoni moved, seconded'by Commissioner Woodward, that Exhibit D
of SDR-1076, as modified and signed by Chairman Marshall, be accepted as the
Exhibit of record. The motion was carried unanimously.
At this time,. Mr. Trinidad recommended the original Staff Report be amended to
include that the applicant comply with the State Map Act. This was so directed
by Chairman Marshall.
Mr. Franklin requested the parks fee be waived in lieu of this walkway expense.
Chairman Marshall stated this would be a matter for the City Council to deter-
mine, and stated he felt the City maylbe receptive to this request.
The matter of A-430, Preliminary Design Review, was next discussed. Mr. Burt
read the Staff Report dated April 24, 19~4 which recommended approval of this
request.
Commissioner Belanger requested the Staff Report be amended as follows:
1. Recommended Action: Preliminary Design Approval as per Staff Report and
Exhibit "A" and "B", and subject to the following conditions to be shown
on final drawings:
2. Condition (b): Submit for final design approval the design and location of
stairways and walkways on Fourth Street prior to receipt of final building
site approval.
3. Condition (j) be added: Final drawings to depict roof stacks and vents.
Commissioner Belanger further requested that the color be specified on the Staff
Report, but it was noted this was part of Exhibit "B".
Mr. Franklin questioned whether the present flora could be incorporated-as part
of the stairway landscaping. Chairman Marshall stated this could be acceptable,
but advised Mr. Franklin that landscaping plans would be required on the walkway
installation prior to granting final design approval on A-430. There were no
further comments.
Commissioner Belanger moved, seconded:by Commissioner Woodward, that the Staff
Report dated April 24, 1974 relative ~o'A-430 be accepted, and that preliminary
design be granted subject to Conditions (a) through (j) of the report, as amended.
The motion was carried unanimously.
V.. MISCELLANEOUS
A. SDR-1076 - Almaden Development~ Oak Street Submittal of Revised Exhibit
See Section IV (C).
VI.' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATIONS
The Secretary reported that the draft EIR on the Painless Parker property was presently
being reviewed. It was noted that the traffic increase on Prospect Road had not been
mentioned ~ the report, and it was suggested the report address this matter.
Commissioner Belanger stated that the Hillside Committee of the County Planning Depart-
ment had prepared a traffic study on the Monte Bellow Ridge area, and inquired~!
April 24~ 1974
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATIONS - Continded
if this study related to the Painless Parker property. Mrs. Greeley, a lady in the
audience, reported that the study did not'include this matter. After further discussion,
Chairman Marshall directed the Secretary to report on the findings of this study at
the next meeting of the Planning Commissi6n.
The Secretaty then stated that Mr. Moerdyke, representative of the Painless Parker
development, had requested the City Attorney to determine the project's progress.
The City Attorney reported at the City Council meeting of April 12 that continuing
this matter off the agenda was not appropriate, even with the absence of the final EIR.
It was determined that the Painless Parker application for a change of zoning (C-172)
should be reagendized for a future Planning Commission meeting. The Chairman requested
that the developer be asked to set a time.for the matter of C-172 to be heard before
the Planning Commission, and that the Secretary report this time at the Planning
~pmmission meeting of. ~y 8.
VII. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Written
1. Input from Mr. Miles Rankin which.requested that Resolution 506, Architectural
Advisory Committee, be included in the 1973 General Plan.
2. A seminar entitled "Short Course for Planning Commissioners" to be held on
May 31~June 1 in San Francisco. Interest of attending this course was
indicated by Commissioners Belanger, Woodward and Marshall, and the Secretary
was directed to'deter~i~'~if funds would be available for same.
B. Oral
1. The Secretary announced that there would be a Committee-of-the-Whole meeting
on Tuesday, May 7 between the City Council and Planning Commission. The
General Plan will be discussed as well as a presentation given on senior
Citizens. He stated that more information would be provided on this meeting
at a later date.
2. Mr. Greeley asked when copies of ~he final and preliminary ~IR on the Painless
Parker property would be made available. The Secretary~ stated that he would
ask the consultant to identify a point in time when the EIR would be released,
and added that it would probably be made available to the public within a month.
3. Commissioner Belanger inquired about the outcome of the meeting held April 22
regarding the Water District fencing issue on Wildcat Creek. The Secretary
stated that the Parks and Recreation Department had attended this meeting, and
that he would make a report on this matter at the next Planning Commission
meeting.
4. Chairman Marshall expressed appreciation to Mrs. Parker of the Good Government
Group for serving coffee.
VIII.ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Matteoni moved, seconded by Commissioner Woodward, that the Planning
Commission meeting of April 24, 1974 be adjourned. The motion was carried unanimously.
Chairman Marshall adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Charles Y~v.'~{ow~,~ ~ting Planning Director
-11-