Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-28-1976 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING CO~RSSION MINUTES TI~: Wednesday, January 28, 1976 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: City Council Chambers - 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Belanger, Callon, Lustig, Marshall, Martin, Woodward and Zambetti Absent: None B. MINUTES Commissioner Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner Woodward, that the reading of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 14, 1976 be waived, and that they be approved as distributed to the Commission. The motion was carried unanimously. C. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chairman: The Secretary opened the floor to nominations for Chairman. Commissioner Zambetti nominated Commissioner Lynn C. Belanger for Chairman. -' Charr~'M~rshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Woodward, that the nominatidns for Chairman be closed. The motion was carried .unanimousIv. - -- - ~ ..... Commissioner Lynn C. Belanger was ielected Chairman of the Planning_ Commission from January 28, 1976 t~°'january 2'6, 19'77 by acclaim. Vice Chairman: Chairman Belanger opened the floor to nominations for Vice- Chairman. Cormnissioner Woodward nominated Commissioner Norman Martin for Vice ~hairman. Chairman Belanger moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the nominations for Vice-Chairman be closed. The motion was carried unanimously. '~ Commissio,ner Norman Martin was ielected Vice Chairman of the Plan-- ning Commission from January 28, 1976 to January 26, 19~_by ~cclaim~ Secretary: Chairman Belanger opened. the floor to nominations for Secretary. .~ .............C~n'~'~Fm'~"'B~l~ger n~fn~'~'~'d'M~'y Van Duyn ~ Secretary. Commis- ~-~. sioner Lustig moved, seconded by Chairman Belanger, that the nomina- l. tions for Secretary be closed. The motion was carried unanimously. ' -! Mr. Marry Van Duyn was ~l'~'~'~d'S~.tary of the Planning Commission from Januar~ 2'8, 1976 to 'january '26, 1977:by acclaim. On behalf of the individual members of the Planning Commission, Commissioner Woodward expressed appreciation to Commissioner Marshall for his guidance and ~ leadership as Chairman of the Planning Commission in the past. Chairman -~ ' ~elang~r'statea ~ha~ ~n setting a keynote 'for the' ~w yea~ 'she hoped '~o ~on- tinue on the course set by Commissioner Marshall in his chairmanship in being open to all public input at the meetings, in conducting the meeeings with dis- patch, and in hoping that the Commission members would take their duties as seriously as they had in the past. -1- MINUTES OF JANUARY 28, 1976 Io D. SUBCOmmiTTEE ASSIGNMENTS The Commission members indicated individual preferences relative to subcommittee assignments. However, after brief discussion of these assignments, it was the C~m~Lission's determination that subcommittee assignments would be finalized at the Commission meeting of February 11, 1976. II. FINAL BUILDING SITES~TENTATIVE SUBDIVISIONS A. SDR-1047 - John McLaughlin (David Landsness), Vig Regina, Final Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Staff noted that all conditions of tentative map approval had been met, and recommended final building site approval be granted to this application. Commissioner Callon moved, seconded by Commissioner Woodward, that the Planning Commission grant final building site approval to application SDR-1047. The motion was carried unanimously. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. UP-293 - Ronald J. Mackay, 12167 Terrence Avenue, Request for Use Permit to All~v an Accessory Structure in Excess of 6 Feet in Height to be Erected Within the Required Rearyard Setback (Ordinance NS-3, Section 3.7-1); Continued from January 14~ 1976 The Secretary noted that it had been the desire of the Planning Commission at its last meeting that the Subdivision Committee make an on-site inspection of this matter. He pointed out, however, that due to electrical problems, the applicant was not able to inflate the pool bubble for the Subdivision Commit- "' tee's review. Staff noted that its recommendation to deny this use permit request per the Staff Report dated December 4, 1975 had not changed. However, Staff recommended this matter be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting.' to allow the Subdivision Committee an opportunity in which to inspect the pool cover on~site. Chairman Belanger reopened the public hearing on UP-293 at 7:47 p.m. as there were citizens present who wished to give public testimony. The following let- ters were read into the record on this item: (1) Letter dated January 16, 1976 from Mrs. T.A. Hooper, 12368 Viewoak Drive, opposing approval of this use permit request. (2) Letter dated January 19, 1976 from Nelia Garner, 12176 Scully Avenue, opposing approval of this use permit request. (3)Letter dated January 20, 1976 from Mrso Barbara Leonhardt, 12188 Scully Avenue, opposing approval of this use permit request. (4) Letter dated January 20, 1976 from Thomas Stephens, 12164 Scully Avenue, objecting to the granting of this use permit request. Dr. Jack Chan, Scully Avenue, stated that he had objected to the swimming pool cover at the first public hearing on this matter on the basis of it being an attractive nuisance. Additionally, Dr. Chan explained that he was a certified pediatrician and on the panel for Cripple Childrens Services/.f'R~iative to the / health problems involved' in this request for a use permit, Dr. C~an stated ' that he did not know to what degree the applicant*s child was affected by; '~ ~'celebral palsy, but he stated that he did not see where therapy in a pool ~ located some distance from the home could be of much benefit to the muscular ~ ..... ~yt__e~.pf the child because of the temperat~ ~ariations encountered in walking from the ~[~"~[~"p'0oll' 'Dr. Chan added: "I hope that Mr. Mackay has looked into other community resources which may not be as expensive as such a structure, and also obviously not such an affront to the interest of ~s neighbors." ~ -2- MINUTES OF JANUARY 1976 III. A. UP-293 - Ronald J. ~ckay - Cont'd At this time Commissioner Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the public hearing on UP-293 be closed. The motion was carried~unanimously, and the public hearing was closed at 7:58 p.m. Although it was Staffts recommendation that this matter be continued, Commissioner Marshall~"moved, seconded by Conmissioner Lustig, that the Planning Commission deny application UP-293 per the Staff Report dated December 4, 1975. The motion was carried unanimously. B. C-181 - Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Saratoga Avenue, Request for Change of Zoning for a 4.456-acre Site Located on Saratoga Avenue from "A" (Agriculture) to "R-l-10,000" (Single-Family Residence, Medium Density) Staff explained that it had come to the City's attention that application had been made to place this site on the National Registrar o5 Historic Sites. As a re- sult, Staff was requesting that because of the good possibility that this would be designated as such, the City should attempt to prepar~ in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, environmental documents which would address this issue specifically and offer possible mitigating alternatives. Staff noted that the applicant had been required to prepare an environmental impact report on this matter, and the recommendation was m~de that C-181 be continued until such time as the EIR had been reviewed and certified. After brief discussion, Chairman Belanger directed that C-181 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 25, 1976, and referred 'this matter to Staff for furthe~ review. IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-513 - Rolf Kirsch~ Pierce Road~ Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot Commissioner Woodward gave a brief description of this application, and noted that the revised plans requested by the Design Review Committee had been sub- mitted to the City for review. She noted that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending approval, and recommended, as chairm~n of the Design Review Committee, that this application be approved. Brief discussion followed. Commissioner Martin expressed concern that the open railing on the deck might be a dangerous situation for small children. The Secretary explained that the Building Code specified the maximum amount of space which could be between railings for safety purposes, and noted that this railing met those specifications. Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Plan- ning Commission grant final design review approval to application A-513 per Exhibit '~-1" and the Staff Report dated January 23, 1976. The motion was carried unanimously. B. SS-98 - Allstate Savings and Loan Association, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (Argonaut Place Shopping Center), Final Design Review Approval - Commercial Iden- tification Sign; Continued from January 14~ 1976 Staff explained that the Design Review Committee had reviewed this matter on several occasions in conjunction with Design Review application SS-98, and had determined these two items should be addressed separately. Further, Staff noted that a Staff Report had been prepared relative to these sign standards recom- mending they be adopted. After brief discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission that this Staff Report should be connected with the design review application for the Argonaut Shopping Center and designated as such (A-431). The Commission discussed several matters relative to these sign standards: Regarding measuring the intensity of illuminated signs, Commissioner Woodward explained that representatives of the applicant's sign company MINUTES OF JANUARY ~.. 1976 IV', B. SS-98 - Allstate Savings and Loan Association - Cont'd had indicated to the Design Review Con~nittee that they would send informa- tion to the Planning Staff on this subject. The Design Review Con~nittee felt that this information would be helpful to Staff in determining the amount of light intensity that was being emitted from a sign and at what point it was to be measured. Commissioner Marshall pointed out that in the past the Cormnission had found in practical fact that illumination was not an easily measurable entity, and that the Commission had abandoned the practice of attempting to measure illumination intensity. He cited the condition used by the Commission earlier, and suggested the following be added to this Staff Report regarding illumination measurements: "All illuminations shall be checked by the Planning Staff subsequent to ,in~ation to insure tha~h'~d~'~'6~'h'~V~'h'~'f~h'~'~d' annoying glare." Chairman Belanger suggested this be made a condition of the Staff Report subject to a possible revision when more specific ~tandards were received from the sign company. · Commissioner Zambetti suggested that the following condition be added to Item IV of the Staff Report as subsection (B): "The free-standing sign of the Argonaut Place Shopping Center be turned off oneshalf hour after the closing of the Safeway Store to customers." Brief discussion followed on this suggestion, and Commissioners Callon and Belanger both expressed opinions that the shopping center sign should be turned off one-half hour after the closing of the last store in the shopping center. The Secretary pointed out that this was not a major tenant sign but rather a shopping center sign, to be tied in with the previously-approved sign permit applications on the Argonaut Shopping Center and the Safeway store. He suggested this time limit stipulation be discussed with the applicant prior to making it a condition of these specific sign standards, and it was the consensus of the Commission that this matter be agendized for Design Review Corf~f~ittee review. Commissioner Zambetti pointed out that the applicant had promised delivery to the Design Review Committee a copy of the lease renewal schedule of the shopping center, and he drew the Commission~s attention to the fact that one of the shopping center tenants had been renewed but that the sign had not been changed. Commissioner Woodward verified this verbal agreement with the shopping center owner, fconcurred that said schedule had not been received, and suggested this issue be addressed'u~er application SS-98. At this time, Commissioner Woodward moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the Planning Commission adopt the sign standards for Argonaut Place Shopping Center per Exhibits "S-I" through "S-6" and the Staff Report dated January 22, 1976 with the following amendments thereto: - The addition of Condition I-F as follows: "All illuminations shall be checked by the Planning Staff subsequent to ins~rl~ion to insure ~ha~h~y'd~not have harsh and annoying gla~" - The inclusion of Conditions III-C and IV-B as follows: "Lighting specifications shall be as per Item I above." -These set of standards be made part of the Design Review file, number A-431. The motion was carried unanimously. -4- }~NUTES OF J~NUARY 1976 IV. B. SS-98 - Allstate Savings and Loan Association - Cont'd Relative to nhe specific sign proposal on this item (SS-98), Commissioner Wood- ward as chairman of the Design Review Committee requested this matter be con- tinued. She explained that an agreement had been made by the owner of the shop- ping center that a schedule of tenant renewals would be submitted to the Design Review Committee prior to this meeting, and pointed out that such a schedule had not been received. Discussion followed on this request. Con~nissioner Callon pointed out that Allstate Savings, the applicant of SS-98, had complied with the sign standards just recently adopted, and voiced objections to continuing this matter on the basis that the continuance was being used as a leverage to get the owner of the shopping center to meet his agreement. Other Commissioners felt that the matter should be continued until the promised material had been submitted. Many of the Commissioners felt that it !y~..~h_e_ oW~j.~_~.~sponsibility to inform ~ · potential'~e~[~ of what the requirements were for signage in the shopping -' center, and also take part in the enforcement process involved in seeing that these sign standards had been met. The point was made that the owner of the ~rgonaut Place Shopping Center had made an agreement with the Design Review = Committee to do this by ~ub_m_itting to the City a schedule of t~n~nt-re~ewals, '-~ and he had not met this agreement. Additionally, Commissioner Zambetti noted ~ that one of the shopping center tenant's lease had been renewed recently, that .. the tenant had relocated to another shop within the Center, and that the sign = the tenant was using was not in conformance with the newly-adopted sign standards '- j of the Center. After additional discussion, it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that application SS-98 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1976, and referred to the Design Review Committee for further review and report. C. SS-99 - Imperial Savings and Loan Association, Big Basin Way, Final Design Review Approval - Commercial Identification Sign; Continued from January 14, 1976 Commissioner Woodward requested this matter be continued pending further review of the revised plans by the Design Review Committee. After brief discussion, Chairman Belanger directed application SS-99 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1976, and referred this matter to the Design Review Committee for further review and report. V. ~SCELLANEOUS A. Abandonment of Easement: Harleigh Drive; Continued from January 14~ 1976 ~Note was made that a Staff Report had been prepared on this matter (SD-969) ~recommending that ~he C'ommiSsion den~ ~he request for abandonment Of the ease- ment. '~[he~, 'three letters of correspondence were introduced into the record relative to this matter: · Letter dated January 26, 1976 from Glenn H.'and Betty J. Robinson, 18741 Harleigh Drive, requesting that a pedestrian wal~.~ay across the easement be established so that residents of the neighborhood could enjoy access to the area. The letter made mention to the fact that the Campbell Union School District property ~,~ich was adjacent to the Harleigh Drive cul-de-sac and the easement in question would be up for sale in the near future, and they requested the City establish a 20-foot easement along Wildcat Creek at the north end of the prSperty to ensure safe pedestrian access to Gardner Park and the facilities at West Valley College. · Letter dated January 28, 1976 from Veronica R"aB~da~,l'8~'3'~ Harleigh Drive,__agreeing with [he Planning Commissi0~'~'s consensus that abandonment ~of the easement was not ~oper. She did, however, favor a footpath~ ~connection along'Wildwood Creek 'l-'~ng to Gar~r Park. -5- ~INUTES OF JANUARY 28, 1! V. A. Abandonment of Easement: Harleigh Drive - Cont'd · Letter dated January 18, 1976 from T.E. Kilcoyne, 18750 Harleigh Drive, stating agreement with the previous Commission consensus that "a flexible plan for Harleigh Drive is the prudent way to handle the uncertain develop- ment of the C.U.S.D. property." Further they opposed a Harleigh Drive road- way extension which they felt would permit more than a 25% increase in traffic flow. However, they expressed favor of a pedestrian walkway which would permit access to both the school district property and Gardner Park. In response to the Commission request at the last Planning Commission to pro- vide alternative subdivision layouts for the Campbell Union School District property located between the east and west portions of Harleigh Drive, the Secretary presented 2 hypothetical subdivision layouts which could be designed for the school site for single-family development in accordance with the present zoning. It was pointed out that these were schematic and that other alternatives · to the subdivision of the site were feas{~l~.. ~ Staff pointed out that there were 16 lots existing on the east portion of Harleigh Drive cul-de-sac which normally would have required not only a primary, but secondary, access on Harleigh Drive. Note was made that when the subdivi- sion was given approval, the Commission had waived the secondary access require- ment which was stipulated by City ordinances on all cul-de-sacs in excess of 14 lots, on the condition that a 4e-foot easement be provided for emergency access. Additionally, Staff also felt that the easement should be retained in order tD insure flexibility of site design if the Campbell Union School District property was ever develop'ed as a school or residential subdivision per exist- 7 ing zoning. Discussion followed on this referral. Questions arose as to whether the general public had a right to use the easement as a footpath, and some concern was ex- pressed that the easement was presently being used illegally in prevening public or emergency access. It was the Commission's consensus that the 2 Harleigh Drives not be connected, and that the easement not be abandoned. Mr. Eric Groom, 18681 Harleigh Drive, informed the Commission that the Campbell Union School District had declared the school district property abutting this easement as excess property, and had offered it to the City and other public agencies for purchase. Councilman Corr was present and concurred with this information. She pointed out that the City was on official notice from the School District for acquiring this property for a possible park, and note was made that the Parks & Recreation Commission as well as the City Council were addressing this matter. At this time, Commissioner Lu~tig moved, seconded by Commissioner ~rtin, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the easement on Harleigh Drive not be abandoned; that the two Harleigh Drives not be considered for connection with one another; and that the City Attorney be'requested to make an interpretation on how the easement was to be used by the public, both for recreational and emergency access purposes. The motion was carried unanimously. B. SDR-1207 - Jeffrey L. Omodt, Sobey Road, Tentative Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Request for Reconsideration of Condition "B" of Staff Report dated November 4~ 1975; Continued from January 14~ 1976 Staff explained that the Subdivision Committee had met with the applicant at its meeting on January 27, 1976, and had in~idated a desire to make an on-site inspection of this property. In compliance with this decision, Chairman Belanger directed application SDR-1207 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1976, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review, an on-site inspection, and report. C. EP-6 - Dividend. Industries, Carnelian Glen Court, Request for Encroachment Permit to All~ ~o (2) Subdivision Entry Pylons within the 40-foot Right-of-Way Staff requested this matter be continued pending further review. Chairman Belanger directed EP-6 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 11, I976, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. -6- · ' : ~'}fINUTES OF JANUARY 28, '6 V. D. Referral from City Council RE: Amendment to Site Development Plan on Parker Ranch ChanSe of Zonin8 Request (C-172) Staff explained that the City Council had referred revisions to the Parker Ranch site development plan to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation. Specifically, the City Council indicated a desire to eliminate the 5 sites surrounding the eucalyptus grove (Lots 21-25), and to consider resiting Lots 26-28 which were located below ~he grove to the west. The Secretary explained that the Council had expressed concern over the preserva- tion of the eucalyptus grove which it felt to be of singular importance as a primary viewshed from the Valley floor. The Secretary presented several slides illustrating two basic alternatives to the site development plan as reviewed by the Subdivision Committee at its meeting on January 27, 1976. In addition to these slides, the Secretary also showed viewgraphs on site distancing projections of the eucalyptus grove as seen from the site due west of the grove (Greely residence), a site in the Maria Lane subdivision, a site on Norada Court, and a site located at the end of Arroyo de Arguello. Note was made that Lot 22 was in direct view of Norada Court and Arroyo de Arguello; and Lot 21, while visible from these 2 locations, was partially hidden by a grove of pine trees located nearby. Discussion followed on these alternatives, as well as suggested modifications to the resiting of Lots 21 and 22. It was the consensus of the Planning Com- mission that Lot 22 be relocated.to a site near the oak grove on the southerly end of the property, and that Lot 21 should be retained in its present location. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Lustig, that the Planning Commission approve the Alternate 2 plan (Exhibit A-9) as an amendment to the site development plan on C-172 originally approved by the Planning Commission on June 11, 1975, eliminating Lots 22-28, retaining Lot 21 in its present loca- tion, and resiting Lot 22 to a site near the oak grove on the southerly end of the property, thereby providing a maximum number of 100 lots on the proposed C-172 site development plan. The motion was carried unanimously. VI. WRITTEN CO~fUNICATIONS . ~. Environmental Impact Reports - Note was made that no Negative DeClarations were filed within the period of January 15-January 28, 1976. Note was made, however, that the determination had been made that an environmental'.impact report would be required on C-181. B. Other 1. Letter dated January 21, 1976 from the League of Women Voters to the City Council relative to the proposed HC-OS District Ordinance. 2. Noteddated January 27, 1976 from James T. Craig, 20524 Manor Drive, relative to the recently-published public notice on UP-296, Lyngso Garden Materials. Staff was directed to make this part of the file on UP-296, and to enter same into the record at the first public hearing scheduled on this item. 3. Letter dated January 25, 1976 from David L. Mendenhall, 7497 Bollinger Road, San Jose, California, requesting the reinstatement of application SDR-1059. The letter pointed out that SDR-1059 included 2 lots, and that a one-year extension had been granted only to Lot A. He requested that --' Lot ~ be given an extension also'so that he could apply for final site' approval. This item was referred to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for review, and Chairman Belanger directed that SDR-1059 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1976. 4. Relative to the PPC-sponsored seminar for Planning Commissioners to be L-Held on February 7, 1976 at De Anza College, Commissioners Belanger, Martin, Marshall and Callon requested reservations be made for their attendance. Staff suggested that the Commissioners submit their receipts-for attendance of this seminar for reimbursement by the City. -7- ; "' ~TINUTES OF JANUARY 28, '6 ~ VII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council Report Commissioner Zambetti gave a detailed report of the City Council meeting held on January 21, 1976, highlighting many areas of interest to the Commission. Cit ' A copy of the minutes of this meeting is on file at the y s Administration office. B. Other Chairman Belanger welcomed the presence of Councilmen Corr, Kraus and Matteoni; -also Mrs. Runyan of the AABq, and Mr. Bridenbac~ and Ms. ~en of the Good Gdvern- ment GroUp.__.A~prec~ation was expressed to the GGG for serving coffee. VIII."AD~OURNMENT Commissionera Lustig moved, seconded by Commissioner ~rshall, that the Planning Commission meeting of January 28, 1976 be adjourned. The motion was carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, skw/ Marty Van Duyn, S~~ -8-