Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-25-1975 Planning Commission Minutes OF SARATOGA PLANNING CO~i] ~ff. hrUTES TI~: Wednesday, June 25, 1975 - 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, Callon, Lustig, ~rshall, ~rtin, Woodward and Zambetti Absent: None B. ~ffNYTES Commissioner. Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner Woodward, {hat the reading of the minutes of the June lI; 1975 Planning Commission meeting be waived, and that they be approved as distributed to the Commission subject to the following corrections: (1) page 7, correct spelling of Miss Moss' name; (2) page 13, A-467, Commissioner Lustig voted against the motion to grant final design re- view approval for Lot 11 of Tract 5011 because he felt the house had been poorly designed; and (3) page 14, A-481, Commissioner Lustig commended the applicant /on"t~' design of the house. The motion was carried; Commissioner Martin ~ F~b~ained. C. CITY COUNCIL REPORT Commissioner Zambetti gave ~ ~etailed oral report of the City Council meeting of June 18, 1975. A copy of the minutes of this meeting is on file at the City's Administration Office. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. V-425 - John Colistra, Canyon View Drive, Request for Variance to Allow a 20-Ft. Frontyard Setback in Lieu of the Required 30-Ft. Frontyard Setback (Ordinance NS-3~ Section 3.7-1); Continued from June 11~ 1975 Chairman Marshall reopened the public hearing on V-425 at 7:45 p.m. He intro- duced into the record a letter dated June 25, 1975 from Albert Ruffo, attorney representing the adjacent property owner, withdrawing Mr. Meitus'.objection to this variance as a result of the balloon experiment performed to determine elevation of the proposed house. Relative to this, Commissioner Woodward explained that the Design Review Commit- tee, in review:of Design Review application A~482, had taken a balloon test to ascertain the elevation of the proposed house in an attempt to determine whether Mr. Meitus' view would be obstructed. She stated that the results of the test indicated that the adjacent property owner's view would not be obstructed, and that the Design Review Committee, in concurrence with the Variance Committee, felt that the variance should be granted. Note was made that Staff Reports recommending approval had been prepared on both Variance application V-425 and Design. Review application A-482, and that the Planning Commission at its meeting of June 11, 1975 had indicated a desire to handle both matters concurrently. Mr. Colistra, applicant, was present and indicated acceptance of the Staff Reports. There were no further comments. Commissioner Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the public hearing on V-425 be closed. The motion was carried unanimously, and the public hearing was closed at-7:50 p.m. Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Belanger, that the Planning Cormnission grant a variance to application V-425 per Exhibit A and subject to the Staff Report dated June 25, 1975. The motion was carried unanimously. -1- MINUTES OF JUNE 25~ 1975 II. A. V-425 - John Colistra - Cont'd Chairman ~rshall reagendized Design Review application A-482, John COlistra, Cabyon View Drive, Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot, to be addressed at this time. Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission grant final design review approval to application A-482 per Exhibit A and the Staff Report dated June 25, 1975. The motion was carried unanimously. Commissioner Woodward informed the applicant that the CC&Rs of Wildwood Tract specified that proposed design plans be reviewed and approved by an architectural design review committee of the Tract. She noted that-since the last Commission meeting, such an architectural review committee had been formed, and notified Mr. Colistra that a member of the committee would be contacting him to schedule a review time of~his design plans. B. UP-239 - Boething Treeland Nursery Company, Prospect Road, Request for Use Permit to Allow the Construction of an 8-Ft. High Storage Shed to be Erected in the West Valley Freeway Right-of-Way; Continued from June 11~ 1975 Note was made that the applicant had been requested to submit revised materials, and Staff recommended this matter be continued. Chairman Marshall directed UP-239 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 1975, and re- ferred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. C. UP-274 - Eldon Hoffman, Bank Mill Road, Request for Use Permit to Allow the Con- struction of an 8-Ft. Tennis Court Fence (Ordinance NS-3, Section 3.4); Continued from June 11~ 1975 Chairman ~rshall opened the public hearing on UP-274 at 7:55 p.m. Note was made that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval of lthis matter, and that the Subdivision Committee had reviewed the application. Further note was made that the matter had been continued pending fdrther dialogue on the re- quest for grading; and subsequently, plans had been submitted reflecting the grading to be no more than 60 cubic yards. / Commissioner Belanger recommended that the Commission add a second condition ! to the conditions of the Staff Report as follows: .. (2) Opaque fencing material will not be permitted. The applicant's representative was present,_ and indicated acceptance of the Staff Report'and additional Condition (2). There!were no further comments. Con~nissioner Belanger moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the publiq hearing on UP-274 be closed. The motion was carried unanimously, and the public hearing on UP-274 was closed at 7:58 p.m. Commissioner Belanger moved, seconded by Commissioner Callon, that the Planning Commission approve application UP-274 per Exhibit A-1 and subject to the condi- tions of the Staff Report dated June 20, 1975 a~he additional Commission c6ndition. The motion was carried unanimously. D. UP-276 - Robert C. Truax, 12401 Green Meadow Lane, Request for Use Permit to Allow the Construction of an Accessory Structure in the Required Rear- yard Setback (Ordinance NS-3 Section 3 7-1) ~ · Mr. Truax, the applicant, stated that he f&lt he should be granted the use per- mit for two reasons: (1) ~is property was bound on the north'b~ two rights-of- way (PG&E and Southern Pacific Railroad) and on the west by the Santa Clara Valley Water District; and as a result, he pointed out that he was quite iso- lated and the addition of the accessory structure would not be visible to neighbors; and (2) there was no other place in which to put the extension~'in his opinion, than what was presently proposed. Note was made that a Staff Repprt had not been prepared on this matter as yet ~pe_nd~ng comment from outside agencieS, and the recommendation was made that this matter be continued. -2~ II. D. UP-276 - Robert C. Truax - Cont'd Discussion followed on a question raised by Commissioner Callon as to the reason why publication of public hearings was made if the Commission was not ready to act upon it at the time of the Commission meeting. She asked: '~4hy don't we publish the notice when Staff has a Report ready, and when we are ready to act on it?" The City AttorneLpointed out that it was assumed at the time of publish- : ing a public hearing notice that adequate review and'~"~rt p~e~aration · would be completed prior to the Commission meeting_ ~ate, and that it was more ad-. visable'to publish public hearing notifications based on this assumptiOn'instead of waiting until after a Report had been prepared. Commissioner Callon asked what-p~6~i~y was followed in notifying an applicant that his matter would be con- tined. The Secretary explained that-notices were mailed to applicants and adja- cent property owners of public hearing dates, that agendas of Commission meetings were mailed to all applicants on the agendas, and that Staff Reports were mailed to the respective applicants prior to Commission meetings. He stated that it had been Staff's policy to notify subdivision and building site applicants of Staff's recommended action prior to Commission meetings. He added, however, that rela- tive to public hearing matters, Staff did not discourage applicants from appear- ing at agendized public hearings, even if Staff recommended continuance, because public testimony from adjacent property owners might be given which would be of interest and relativity to the applicant. He explained that in this specific instance, comment had been solicited by[-S~aff, but not received yet, from the Santa Clara Valley Water Distr~ct, PG&E and the Southern Pacific Railroad; and additionally, that the Santa Clara Valley Water District had requested this matter be continued panding further review and comment by that agency. Commissioner Lustig indicated that h~ felt the responsibility of finding out in advance of a Planning Commission meeting as to what action would be t~k~n on an application was that of the applicant, and he suggested notification be given to the applicant at time of fi~ing to contact Staff a few days prior to Commis- sion meetings as to what action would be recommended ~"S~fff~h~eeting. At this time, Chairman ~rshall closed the public hearing on UP-276, directed same be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 1975, and re- ferred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. E. C-179 - Albert Hanson, 13761 Dolphin Drive, Change of Zoning Request from "R-I-20,000" (Single-Family Residential, Low Density) to "R-1-12,500" (Single-Family Residential, Medium Density) the Parcel Designated at Parcel 65 of Book 391 at Page 37 Located on the Northwest Corner of Allendale Avenue and Dolphin Drive (Ordinance NS-3, Article 18) Staff recommended this matter be continued pending further review. Mrs. Hanson, applicant, was present and indicated acceptance of this recommendation. Chair- man ~rshall directed C-179 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 1975, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. III. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SDR-1164 - Frank Shepherd, Douglass Lane, Building Site Approval - 4 Lots (Expiration Extended to June 25, 1975)~ Continued from May 14, 1975 Note was made that a l~tter had been received from the applicant granting an ex- tension to the Planning Commission meeting of August 13, 1975. Chairman Mar- shall directed SDR-1164 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of August 13, 1975, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. B. SDR-1170 - Alexander M. August, Live Oak Lane, Building Site Approval - 3 Lots (Expiration Extended to ~une 25~ 1975)~ Continued from June 11~ 1975 Note was made that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting this matter be withdrawn, and Staff recommended such request be accepted. Commissioner Belanger moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the Planning Commission accept request for withdrawal of application.SDR-1170. The motion .~as carried unanimously. -3- ~fINUTES OF JUNE 25, 1975 III. C. SDR-1174 - Thomas N. Foster, Horseshoe Drive, Building Site Approval - 3 Lots (Expiration Extended to June 25~ 1975); Continued from June 11~ 1975 '- Note was made that this matter had been pending resolution of a question on the minimum access road, and that the applicant had submitted acceptable revised plan's reflecting this requirement. Staff noted that a Report had been prepared recommending approval of this matter. Commissioner Belanger raised several questions regarding the Staff Report as follows: ~ ®- Relative to Condition (D) clarification of "acceleration and deceleration lanes" was asked for. Mr. Trinidad, Public Works Department, explained that these t~nns referred to a tapering of the street so that when the private street meg HorseShoe Drive it would flare for prope~ access. ® Relative to Condition (Q), Commissioner Belanger _Suggested that specific mentiqn.'B'~ made in the Staff Report as to the size of the water main. Mr. Burt, Staff member, pointed out that this area required a 6" water main, and that plans showing the location of water mains would be approved by the Fire__ Department; consequently, the proper size of.~ ~ater main would be necessary in order to obtain [ire Department approval. · Commissioner Belanger asked what had been resolved regarding the tennis court, and Mr. Burt noted that the tennis court was not in violation, but rather, the fence, and that the applicant would be required to file for a use permit for this fence. Mr. J.P. Vanderlaan, applicant's representative, indicated acceptance of the Staff Report, and asked if the use permit was required to be filed prior to recording of the final map. Chairman Marshall explained that a use permit for the tennis court fence was a condition of tentative building site approval, and therefore, had to be complied with prior to approval of final map. Commissioner Belanger moved, seconded by Commissioner Callon, that the Planning Commission grant tentative building site approval to application SDR-1174 per Exhibit A-l, and General Conditions I and Specific Conditions II (A) through (U) of the Staff Report dated June 20, 1975. The motion was carried unanimously. D. SDR-1176 - Lyngso Garden Materials, Inc., Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot (Expiration Extended to June 25, 1975); Continued from~y 28, 1975 Note was made that a letter had been-received from the applicant's representative granting an extension on this matter to the Commission meeting of July 23, 1975. Chairman ~rshall directed SDR-1176 be continued to the Planning Commission meet- ing of July 23, 1975, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. Note was made that the files on the following applications were not complete, and Staff recommended these items be continued: E. SDR-1189 - Charles Bilek, Sobey Road, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot (Expires July 9~ 1975); Continued from June 11~ 1975 F. SDR-1190-- James Keator, San Marcos Road, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot (Expires July 28~ 1975) G. SDR-1191 - Fred ~rburg, Sarahills Drive, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot (Expires July 30~ 1975) Chairman Marshall directed applications SDR-1189, SDR~ll90 and SDR-1191 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 1975, and referred these matters to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. -4- MI~rUTES OF JUNE 25, 1975' IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-467 - Osterlund Enterprises, Fruitvale Avenue, Final Design Review Approval, Tract=~5011, Lot #18 Staff noted that the Design Review Committee had reviewed this matter, and that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval. Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Plan- ning Commission grant final design review approval to application A-467, Lot #18 of Tract ~5011 per Exhibit A and the Staff Report dated June 19, 1975. The motion was carried unanimously. B. A-470 - Lyngso Garden Materials, Inc., Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot; Continued from May 28~ 1975 Note was made that this matter should be handled concurrently with application SDR-1176. Chairman ~rshall directed A-470 be continued to the Planning Commis- sion meeting of July 23, 1975, and referred same to the Design Review Committee and Staff for further review and report. C. A-472 - Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Douglass Lane, Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot; Tract #5583~ Lot #8 Note was made that the Design Review Committee had reviewed this matter, and that a Staff Report had been prepared.recommending approval. Commissioner Belanger recommended the Staff Report be amended to specify "wood shingle roof" in the third paragraph under Project Description. Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission grant final design review approval to application A-472, Lot #8 of Tract #5583 per Exhibit E and the Staff Report dated June 20, 1975, as amended. The motion was carried unanimously. D. A-480 - Osterlund Enterprises, Radpyka Drive, Final Design Review Approval - Fencing for Tract #5631; Continued from June 11~ 1975 Staff recommended this matter be continued pen~in__g review of the recently sub- / mitted variance application V-427 relative to this item. Chairman Marshall ~ directed A-480 be~-continued to the Planning Commission meeting.of July_o~,_!9__7_~,_ ~ and referred t~is mat~'~r"'to the Design Review Committee and Staff for further 7 ~ review and report E. A-482 - John Colistra~ Canyon View Drive~ Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot See Item II-A. Staff recommended the following applications be continued pending further review: F. A~483 - James Skinner~ Pierce Road~ ~inal Design Review Approval - 1 Lot G. A-484 - Thomas Fryer~ Saratoga Hills Road~ Final Design Re~iew Approval - 1 Lot H. A-485 - Roger Christensen~ Canyon View Drive,'Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot J'~'A~87v~i~h~'d'C~l~"'~l~d~'F{~l Design Review Approval - 1 Lot Chairman Marshall directed applications A~483, A-484, A-485 and A-487 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 1975, and referred these matters to the Design Review Committee and Staff for further review and report. I. A-486 - Charles Lau~hlin~ Canyon View Drive~ Final DesiSn Review Approval - 1 Lot Note was made that the Design Review Committee had reviewed this matter, and that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval. Mr. Loewke cormhended the applicant on the design of the house, adding that he felt it was a good solu- tion for development of this lot. Commissioner Woodward agreed, and offered -5- ~fINUTES OF JUNE 25, 1975 IV. I. A-486 - Charles Laughlin - Cont'd notice to the applicant that a representative from the architectural ~e~ig~'~- view committee of Wildwood Tract would be contacting him for review by'~he committee of his design plans. Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission grant final design review approval to application A-486 per Exhibit A-2 and the Staff Report dated June 20, 1975. The motion was carried unanimously. The f~llowing design review matters were introduced at this time for Co~x~ission consideration: K. A-467 - Osterlund Enterprises, Fruitval~ Avenue, Final Design Review Approval - Tract ~5011~ Lot ~18 L. A-481 - Stekoll Development Corporation, Ten'Acres Road, Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot Mr. Loewke noted that at the last meeting., ~he above two matters had been condit~o~e'd . {~ ~'~i~'~d~'fBY"l~d~ap~ '{~p~ements as an insurance '~hat proper l~'d~'a~g"' would be installed. He added that since that ~ime, it had been discovered that it was very difficult and cumbersome to acquire bonds for this type of requirement, and Staff consequently felt that the withholding of an occupancy permit was suffi- cient enforcement to insure that landscaping was completed. He noted that revised Staff Reports had been prepared recommending_a~proval of these two applications ~ditions as (1) No Occupancy Permit is to be issued for this house until all land- scaping as per Exhibit "A" has been satisfactorily installed. Discussion followed on this recommendation. Several Commissioners felt it was not advisable to place a stipulation on an applicant where, unless landscaping was in- stalled, the applicant could not move into his house, pointing out seasonal hard- ships as being a determining factor. The City Attorney questioned whether the applicants had actually requested a reconsideration of conditions, and it was noted that Staff had initiated the .changes with the applicants' concurrence. The consensus of the Planning Commission was to refer the above-mentioned Staff Reports to the Design ReviewS.Committee for further discussion, and~'~o reaffirm in the interim th~''~ original Staff Reports approved at the Commission meeting of June 11, 1975 on A-481 and A-467 was made.by the Commission. V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DETERMINATIONS Note was made that no Negative Declarations had been filed between the period of June 12, 1975 and June 25, 1975. VI. MISCELLANEOUS A. SDR-1083 - Frank Schillace, Upper Hill Drive, Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Request for One-Year Extension; Continued from June 11~ 1975 Staff noted that the originally-approved application and Staff Report had con- ~ tained no input from the Fire Department; further, that there were potential problems involved with development of the lot in that the site specified for the house bordered on a 40% slope. Because of these reasons, Staff recommended the request for one-year extension be denied. Commissioner Belanger moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the Planning Commission deny the request for one-year extension=~0~ application SDR-1083. The ~otion was carried unanimously. Staff was' directed to notify the applicant of the above action, and advise him of the appeal procedure to the City Council. B. SDR-1167 - Dennis Bryan, Bella Vista Avenue, Building site Approval - 1 Lot Reconsideration of Conditions of Staff Report dated March 21, 1975; Continued from June 11~ 1975 In explanation, Staff pointed out that this property had two legal accesses and that the applicant had requested reconsideration of the condition requiring a -6- SDR-1167 - Dennis Bryan - Reconsideration of Conditions - Cont'd fire hydrant to be installed at both access points to one fire hydrant being installed at only one access point. Note was made that per discussions with the Fire Department, Staff, the Subdivision Committee and the applicant, it was felt to be to the applicant's and the City's best interest to require a fire hydrant to be installed on the easterly access of the property. Note was further made that this did not prevent the applicant from using both access points, but that the easterly access would insure the City adequate fire protection in the area. Commissioner Callon expressed concern that there was an injustice in requiring one person to take the responsibility of installing and paying for a fire hy- drant in an area, and asked if there was a way in which to force participation by surrounding residents who benefitted by such a fire hydrant into sharing the cost. The City Attorney explained that the way in which to achieve this would be to require partidipation in a mini-assessment district, but that under the present ordinances the City had no enabling legislatibn in which to do this. He explained h~.~ever, that the new State Map Act provided that a city could relate to developed-~lands as well as undeveloped lands for such assessments, and pointed out that the proposed Subdivision Ordinance presently before the City Council gave the City the enabling legislation to enforce such participation in an assessment district. Commissioner Lustig asked if, should a mini-assessment-- distriht be possible at a future time predicated on Council approval of the proposed Subdivision Ordinance, Mr. Bryant at that time could seek relief retro-- actively for his outlay of fire hydrant cost. The City Attorney informed him -that this could not be done. ~ After further discussion, CDmm~ssi6ner Belang~r moved,_s~nded_b~_Cor~m~ssione~---- Zambetti, tha~ the Planning Commission approve the revised set of conditions for tentative map application SDR-1167 and Exhibit A filed February 26, 1975, using the revised Staff Report dated June 20, 1975 as a guideline, referring to General Conditions I and ~ific _~pndit~0p~._II thereof as follows: (A) Easterly access of Exhibit A shall be the principal access. (B) Same as Condition (A) of June 20, 1975 Staff Report. (C) Same as Condition (B) of June 20, 1975 Staff Report. (D) Construct access road 14-feet wide plus 1-foot shoulders using double seal coat oil and screening or better on 6" agg. base from end of Bella Vista to the east driveway to proposed dwelling. Slope of access road shall not exceed 12~% without adhering to the following: Access roads having slopes between 12~%-15% shall be surfaced using 2~% of A.C. on 6" of agg. base. (E) through (N) - Same as Condi-tions (D) through (M) of June 20, 1975 Staff Report. (0) Construct a parking area/turnaround (inside radius of 32-feet) for four (4) emergency vehicles at proposed building site. Details shall be sho~n on building plans. (P) Extension of existing water system adjacent to site is required for fire protection. Plans must be submitted prior to final approval showing loca- tion of water mains and fire hydrant. One (1) fire hydrant is to be in- stalled as sheen on Exhibit A as FH-2. Exact location to be approved by Fire Department Chief. Water system/~=[~ed to hydrant shall be~6" mini- mum size water pipe. (Q)Same as Condition (Q) of June 20, 1975 Staff Report. Items (C) and (D) of III-Comments deleted. Commissioner Belanger explained that relative to Condition (D) she felt that ~fS~ing ~'~ street standards on Bella~St__aAjenue would ruin the environment \ of this country road. With regards to the Fire Department conditions requiring a turnaround having a 32-foot inside radius and a parking area for 4 emergency vehicles, Mr. Burt explained that the Fire Department~s primary concern was to insure proper turnaround by fire trucks in anaarea=w~ere 4 emergency vehicles Were parked. Commissioner Belanger felt these conditions could be interpreted as requiring two separate areas, and she recommended combining the two conditions to require a combination parking area/turnaround as stated in Condition (0). The applicant, Mr. Bryan, was present and indicated acceptance of all amendments to the Staff Report. A resident on Bella.Vista asked what t~pe of improvements would be called for on the 14-foot right-of-way, and was told that essentially th~ road would be kept the same as it presently was with possible repairs and upgradi~g of the present road and cutback of some of the overhanging shrubbery to provide the 14-foot access. -7- MINUTES OF JUNE 25~ 1975 ~' ~i. B. SDR-1167 - Dennis Bryan - Cont'd The motion to approve reconSideration of conditions relative to application SDR-1167 was carried unanimously. Commissioner Callon stated that she voted in favor of this motion only because the applicant had indicated acceptance of the conditions. C. Quito Area Study - Continued from May 14~ 1975 Staff noted that there had not been adequate time in which to-review this area, and recommended the Study be continued. Discussion followed by the Commission, and it was reconmended that the Variance Committee give input on the_progress of the Study at the Planning Commission meeting of July 23, 1975. It was agreed that the Variance Committee would consult with Staff on the best way of conduct- ing the study of the Quito Area. D. Review of-Fourth Street Staimcay Design Note was made that amended plans for the Fourth Street stain~ay had been reviewed by the Design Review Committee as well as the Subdivision Committ~.~,_ and that essentially they were as o~iginally planned, but with considerable economy and several improvements. Nofe was made that Mr. Rubnitz, applicant's representative, had' given a verbal commitment to the City that completion of the stairway would be at the same time as completion of the Oak Street condominium project. Brief discussion followed on this matter, and Commissioner Lustig went on record '~ -/~tating~"'~f"ll b~f{~V'~'that stairway when I see it." The consensus of the ~ Commission was to'endSrse the amendments made to the Fourth Street Stairway Design with the stipulation that a certificate of occupancy be withheld for the condo- minium project until completion of the stairway. Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the Planning Commission approve the amended development requirements-for the Fourth Street Staim.~ay, that the Staim~ay be completed at the same time of the condominium project on Oak Street, and that the Certificate of Occupancy for the condominium not be granted until the completion of the Staim.~ay. The motion was carried unanimously. VII. CO~ftr~ICATIONS - WRITTEN The following written cor~espondence~ere intr~d~c~d~i~ ~e r~6Y~ A. Letter dated June 12, 1975 from Miles Rankin, president of the Saratoga Chamber Of Commerce, to ~. Henry Duque of Western Federal Savings & Loan Association complimenting Mr. Duque and his architect "on the outstanding appearance of your new building in Big Basin Way." This letter was directed to be made part of the V-424 file. 'B. Letter dated June 16, 1975 from Judy Vance, 19363 Athos Place, requesting alter- nate approaches be considered regarding the proposed Hillside Conservation Ordi- nance. Note was made by Chairman ~rshall under Oral Communications that this _.~- letter summed up the feelings of many of the citizens in Saratoga who disagreed with the proposed Hillside Conservation Ordinance. He explained that similar feelings had been communicated to him at a meeting he artended recently at the home of an interested citizen. C. Letter dated June 17, 1975 from Jacqueline Beaumont (address not given) oppos- '~g approval of the Parker Ranch change of zoning request. This letter was directed to be made part of the C-172 file. D. Letter dated June 17, 1975 from Frank Perdichizzi, president of Prides Crossing .Homeo~.mers & Taxpayers Association, requesting notification of future Commission meetings concerning the proposed Residential HillSide Dfst~{~'[ Ordinance. The cost of mailing agendas and various requested information to interested parties was discussed, and the point was made that Staff presmntlymailed 300+ agendas £or~ each Planning Commission meeting to interested parties. Commissioner Lustig stated~tha~', as earlier expressed, he felt it was the citizens responsibility to contact City Hall regarding matters of interest. The s~gg.estion was made that, in an attempt to curb mailing costs,-'either pre-paid envelopes for agendas be provided the City or interested citizens 'subscribe tO the City for this service. -8- ~NUTES OF JUNE 25~ 1975 .VII. WRITTEN CO~INICATIONS - A~enda ~iling List - Cont'd A question was raised as to the City's legal responsibility to notify residents of meetings, and relative to public meetings the City Attorney'Explained that City policy called for posting of all public meeting dates held at City Hall at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Relative to mailing agendas, it was noted that this was a courtesy extended to the citizens by the City. VII. CO~'RINICATIONS - ORAL A. Mr. Russell Crowther, representative of the Arguello Homeowners Association, stated that it was his understanding that the Brown Act required the City to send out agendas upon request, and he objected!to th~ idea that agendas not be _~ailed out to citizens. It was pointed outjto Mr. CroWChef that the dialogue held previously was not on stopping t~"~fl%'~'~f'~'dh'~da'~'~'i~te"fg~'d Cit ' persons, but rather on ways in which to meet the y s cost of such ~ilings. The "Ci~Attorney added that the B~w~"~ did not specify what ~r. crowther referred to. Mr. Crowther also noted that a meeting had been held on June 16, 1975 of which his organization had not been notified and which addressed specific ~tters of concern to them. The Secretary pointed out'thai'the June 16th meeting was a C~ittee-of-the-~ole meeting to discuss the General Plan Review, and that agendas were not no~lly ~iled out.-'~He explained that the Special Public Hearing on'the General ~i~'R~view held May 19, 1975-had been continued to this Co~i~tee-of-the-I~ole meeting; further, that announcements had been ~de of this meeting at each Co~ission meeting between the May 19th and June 16th meetings. B. Comissioner }~rtin asked if the agenda mailing list for Planning CEission meet- ings was reviewed periodically; and the Secretary noted that it had been recently updated, and was reviewed at least once a year. C. C~issioner Callon asked for clarification of the Broom Act, asking if it was in violation of the Act for more than a Planning Co~ission quorum to meet. The C{ty Attorney explained that the Bro~Act allowed~[' more than a quorum could- meet if proper notice had been given. He added that it was City policy to post. notice of public meetings at least 24 hours in advance. D. The Secretary suggested meeting dates be scheduled for the following: 'e Julyil5, 1975 at 7:30 p.m. - Co~ittee-of-the-~ole meeting in Arts & Crafts Ro~'of C~unity Center to discuss the proposed Hillside Conservation Ordinance. ·July 21, 1975 at 7:30 p.m. in Council Cheers for second S~eial Public Hearing on General Plan Review. Both meeting dates were acceptable to the Comission, and the Secretary was directed to publish notice of the General Plan ReView Special Public Hearing. E. ~e Secretary requested a CoEission consensus relative to the CoEission's rec~endation on the rezoning of the Lyngso property. After brief discussion, Co~issioner Belanger moved, seconded by CoEissioner Callon, that the Planning Co~ission reaffi~ its reco~endation to the City Council t0 rezone the property referred to as the Lyngso property located on Saratoga-SunnFale Road to "R-1-12,500", and that the City Council furth~ be infomed that the C~ission will further consider the question of alternatives under its General Plan Review. The motion was carried unanimously. F. Chai~an Marshall welcomed Council~n Kraus to the Co~m~ission meeting, ~d expressed appreciation to the Good Gover~ent Group for serving coffee. VIII. ADJOUrNmeNT Co~issioner Lustig moved, seconded by Co~issioner Callon, that the Planning Comis- sionjmeeting of June 25, 1975 be adjourned. The motion was carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Marry Van Duyn Secreta~i SkW / -9-