Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-27-1976 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PL.~NNING CO~IISSION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, October 27, 1976 - 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, Laden, Marshall, Martin and Zambetti Absent: Commissioner Lustig B. MINUTES Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Martin, that the reading of the Planning Commission meeting minutes of October 13, 1976 be waived, and that they be approved as distributed Subject to the following correction: page 5, 5th paragraph under Item III-B, Mr. Guy requested PG&E beginlwork on relocation of the PG&E lines. The motion was carried;.:.~irman Belanger abstained due to absence' from the octgbe~ l~t~_me~ting. II. {T~'T'iVE'SUBUIVISIDNS/FINAL BUILDING SITES A. SD-1270 - Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, Saratoga Avenue, Tentative Subdivision Approval - 24 Units, Condominium Conversion Staff~equested this matter be continued pending receipt of agencies' ~esponses.. Chairman Belanger'd{r'ect'ed that SD-1270 be continued to the Pia~ning Commission meeting of November 10, 1976, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Commit- tee and Staff for further review. B. SD-1278 - James Day Construction Company, Sobey Road, Tentative Subdivision Approval - 6 Lots Staff requested this matter be continued pending receipt of agencies' responses. Chairman Belanger directed that SD-1278 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 10, 1976, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Commit- tee and Staff for further review. C. SD-1279 - James Day Construction Company, Sobey Road, Tentative Subdivision ApproVal - 5 Lots Staff requested this matter be continued pending receipt of agencies' responses. Chairman Belanger directed that SD-1279 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 10, 1976, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Commit- tee and Staff for further review. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS - A. C-183 - Larsen & Blackwell, Pierce and Ashley Way, Request for Change of Zoning for Two Parcels Located between Pierce Road and Ashley Way from "R-i-40,000" (Single-Family Residential, Very Low Density) to "R-I-20,000" (Single-Family Residential, Low Density); Continued from October 13, 1976 Note was made that the Subdivision Committee made an on-site inspection regarding this matter on October 26, 1976, and Staff explained that there had not been suf- ficient time in which to prepare a comprehensive report making a recommendation. Consequently, Staff suggested this matter be continued to the next Commission meeting. -1- CO~IISSION MINqJTES OF OCTOBER 2?, 1976 III. A. C-185 ~/ Larsen &\Blackwell ~--Cont'd Chairman Belanger asked whether, members'of the public wished to give testimony on this item. As there was no respon~; Chairman Belanger directed that the public hearing on C-185 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 10, 1976, and referred this matter to the Subdivision Committee and Staff for further review and report. B. UP-315 - Lillian Ro.doni, 14038 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Request for Use Permit in Accordance with the Provisions of Article 15 of Ordinance NS-3 (Zoning Ordinance) to Allow for the Continuation of a Non-Conforming Commercial Use in a Residential District; Continued from September 8,'1976 St~ff explained that the Subdivision Committee again reviewed this item at its meet- ing of October 19, 1976, and that a Staff Report had been prepared recommending .... approval of said use permit with an amortization schedule of 2 years. !Staff ~ "'--a"d'd~d'~hat a copy of'~i~'S~f'f Report had been forwarded to both the applicant '~ !' and Mr. Ruffo, the applicant's attorney. The point was made that Mr. Ruffo had .:o- _i~e~ueS~ediLp~a_~e.I.epho~e_com~uni~t'ion'tDiSiaffi-~£ "£hi~im~t/ier~b_~ C~it~i~d~?d. ~' "' ...... -i to the next Commission meeting due to a.conflict in schedules. C!Chairman Belanger asked whether members of the public wished to give testimony on ~this item. As there was no response, Chairman Belanger directed that the public hearins. on Up~SlS be continued. to_the Planning. Commission mee~inF of_November 10,. 1976 as per the request of the applicant's attorney. IV. DESIGN REVIEW A. A-531 - Plant World, Cox Avenue (Quito Shopping Center), Final Design Review Approval - Commercial Expansion; Continued from September'22, 1976 Note was made that the applicant was continuing to have delays in submitting re- vised plans on this matter. Consequently, Staff recommended this matter be denied without prejudice in order to allow the applicant to reapply at such time as the revised plans have been completed and submitted. Commissioner Callon moved, seconded bY commissioner Marshall, that the Planning Commission deny without prejudice application A-531. The motion was carried unanimously. B. A-537 - Security Pacific National Bank, Big Basin lVay, Final Design Review Approval - 1 Lot, Commercial; Continued from S~ptember 22, 1976 Staff explained that the present plans under review included drive-through windows, and note was made that the Commission had recently denied an appeal by the Bank to allow said drive-through windows. Staff noted that the applicant was appeal- ing the Commission's decision to the-Council, and the recommendation was made that action on A-537 be conti_D~e4 Until the C~upqi!.~.de its decision on the drive- through window issue. L Chairman Belanger directed that application A-537 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 10~ 1976. (NOTE: The applicant's representative, Mr. Foug, arrived after the above action had been taken. He was advised of the Commission's decision to continue application A-537.) C. A-541 - Warren Heid, 14590 Big Basin Way, Conversion of a Residence to Offices Staff noted that the Design Review Committee reviewed this matter on October 12th and October 26, 1976, and pointed out that a Staff Report had been prepared recom- mending approval. Brief discussion followed on the amount of parking spaces required, with note being made that Exhibit "A-I" provided for 10 regular parking spaces plus 2 additional tandem spaces. Staff explained that ~he par~ing .cqnfiguration and circulation plan proposed were compatible with t~e' size and intensity of the "' use. It was further explained that based on Staff's evaluation of the intensity -2- CO~[~IISSION MINIITES OF OCTOBER 27, 1976 IV. C. A-541 - Warren Heid - Cont'd of this use,~'h~D~ign Review C~i~e recommended that 12 parking spaces be provided instead"of ~h~'6 parking s~Ces which w6~a'H0rm~'ii~ b~"~eqUir~ ~e~ ........ Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance. A question was raised as to whether the property owner could be requested-Ato join~Parking Assessment District #~L.and_"~!-" Staff pointed out that this ~ad been discus~d'~ifH ~he ~r6per~y' 6~ner. It was noted that spaces could be provided adjacent to the Parking Assessment District at the Zoning Ordinance ratio using the District for access, but remaining____ separate from the District. It wasadded, however, that no additional spaces :'~c~l'd'b~d~Fd~h'~'~istrict due to legal ramifications. \: At this time, Commissioner Zambetti moved, seconded by Commissioner Laden, that the Planning Commission grant final design review approval to application A-541 per Exhibits "A" and "A-i" and subject to the Staff Report dated October 20, 1976. The motion was carried unanimously. D. A-542 - Pierre Bossaert, Woodbank Way, Final Design Review Approval - Single- Family Residence - 1 Lot Staff explained that:the Design Review Committee had reviewed this matter on October 12th and October 26, 1976, and that a Staff Report had been prepared "'-' .r'e~ommending approval. Considerable discussion followed on the type of roof material being proposed, with the point being made that 300-pound composition- shape shingles were proposed. It was pointed~out .thati the applicant had been requested to submit a sample of this roofing materialsfor Commission consideration. Mr. Bossaert and his representative, Charles Gibson, explained that they were unable to obtain a sampling of this requested roofing material. Concern was expressed by several of the Commissioners that the roofing material be of sufficient thickness so as to create an adequate shadow effect. After addi- tional discussion of the sampling~ it was recommended that the Staff Report be~ 'amended by adding. the foliowinE_Condition (2): "(2) ~Vood shake roof required unless a substitute thereof is approved at a later date by the Design Review Committee." At this point Commissioner Laden moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission grant final design review approval to application A-542 per Exhibit "A-i" and subject to the Staff Report dated October 27, 1976, as amended. The motion was carried unanimously. E. UP-119 - West Valley College, 14000 Fruitvale Avenue, Final Design Review Approval - Baseball Field Improvements Staff recommended this matter be continued pending completion of a dBA reading of the portable loudspeaker system the College was proposing. The Secretary explained that Staff wanted to make certain that the City Noise Ordinance maximum require- ments of 70 dBA are not exceeded. Staff added that it was anticipated that the results of this test would reflect existing traffic noise in ~ ~mm~d'i~e area to be 60 dBA. ~|argaret Dunn, Douglass Lane, stated that she was not aware that the College was proposing a portable loudspeaker system, and she contended that this'-.system would increase the overall noise in the area. DisCussion followed on this matter, with the point being made that the City Noise Ordinance specified that all noise within the City should not exceed 70 dBA, but that the ordinance did not specifically prohibit a portable sound system. The consensus of the Commission was to require that the College adhere to the Noise Ordinance requirements. Commissioner Laden noted that Mr. Keller of the College re~orted to the Design Review Committee that. anyone other than the College itself who wished to use this facility had to ~ill out a form which specified what the College per- mitted and did not permit, and she added that the form specified that these outside users could not use an amplification system of any form. -3- CO~IISSION MINIlTES OF OCTOBER 27, 1976 IV. E. UP-119 - West Valley College Baseball Field Improvements Commissioner Laden recommended that the Staff Report be amended to specify that the use of any amplified sound system be denied for any other activity held at the baseball facility. Additionally, Commissioner Marshall recommended that the Staff Report be further modified to: require that the College take all necessarX -steps to insure tha~h'~'C'iiFN6ise Ordinance requirements' ar'e met' during' all events held' at ~he fidili~y. "' Condition (S) of the Staff Report was amended as follows: "(3) A portable sound amplification system may be used to announce regularly- scheduled College baseball games between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. No sound amplification systems shall be permitted for other uses at this facility. In any event, the College shall take all steps necessary to insure that the City Noise Ordinance requirements are met during all events at the facility. Said amplification system shall not add to the source so as to produce a noise level exceeding 70 dBA at a distance of fwenty-five (25) feet under~its most noisy condition. (Section 8-84, City Health and Sanitation Code)" At this time Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Zambetti, that the Planning Commission grant final design review approval to Design Review application UP-119 allowing certain improvements to the baseball facility, per Exhibits "A" and "B" and subject to the Staff Report dated October 27, 1976, as amended. The motion was carried unanimously. V. MISCELLANEOUS A. Status Report: West Valley College Proposed Stadium and Ski Lights; Continued from October 13, 1976 ...... Staff explained t. hat the Subdivision Committee at its meeting of October 19th ~d'O~Fdber 26th'd~U~'~' revisions to the amendments suggested under the College's use permit (UP-119) referencing the stadium facility. Based on these 'meetihg~' Stkff 'poi'hted out th~' 'a 'dr~f~ ~esol~ti~n"~'~ard'{~g this matt~'~a'~" prepared, and further, that minor. changes had been made-by .the- City Attorney 'for clarifi'~i~H purposes. The City Attorney read into the record proposed Resolution PC-126 as follows: RESOLUTION NO. PC-126 RESOLUTION OF THE PL.~'qNING COF~IISSION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CLARIFYING AND REAFFIRMING CONDITION NO. 7 OF THE JANUARY 9, 1967 STAFF REPORT OF UP-119, WEST VALLEY COLLEGE I~EREAS, this Planning Commission on January 9th, 1967 granted a Conditional Use Permit, and being permit resolution UP-llg-l, to West Valley Joint Community College District, subject to certain conditions as specifically set forth in the Staff Report of January 9, 1967; and- I~EREAS, said conditions were imposed as reasonable regulations necessarily prescribed to assure that the development of a college campus would not adversely affect the residential neighborhood or surrounding property, its inhabitants and an- ticipated permitted uses; and -4- CO~BIISSION MIN]JTES OF 27, 1976 ; V. A. Status Report: West Valley College Proposed Stadium - Cont'd ~EREAS, it was determined by this Commission, as set forth in Condition 7 of the January 9th, 1967 Staff Report, that "an outdoor sports stadium designed for large-scale public attendance" would be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare and materially injurious to properties and improvements in the vicinity, and consequently would not be in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the "R-I" zoning district, and such was therefore prohibited; and ~EREAS, this Commission's continuing jurisdiction under Section 16.6-1 of Ordinance NS-3 includes the power to both definitize and clarify as a necessary corollary to its power to modify. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Commission does hereby find and determine, in clarification and reaffirmation of said Condition 7, that an outdoor sports stadium specifically designed to attract and accommodate spectators and which includes such facilities as outdoor lighting, ticket booths, press boxes, public address system and other spectator-oriented accessory structures is detri- mental to the health, safety and welfare of persons residing in the surrounding areas, and is detrimental to existing and prospective property values and improve- ments in the surrounding areas, and the enjoyment thereof, and as such, is included within the terms and meaning of the prohibition of Condition 7 of said use permit. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the outdoor sports stadium as proposed by West -Valley Joint Community College District and as specifically described in the Staff Report of April 9, 1976 and accompanying exhibits is hereby determined to be an outdoor sports stadium specifically designed to accommodate large-scale spectator attendance at intercollegiate games or events, and as such is violative of the use permit and is therefore prohibited by such use permit. PASSED ~ND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of .......... Ca-ti-forniay--th~s ................ day-of ............ ,' 1976'-by'the--following'rot-e: .................... AYES: NOES: ABSENT: After brief discussion of this matter, Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Martin, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC-126 as read into the record on October 27, 1976, and that said Resolution be forwarded to the City C6uncil with the recommendation for approval. The motion was carried unanimously. B. UP-S14 - Spaich Corporation, 20401Miljevich Drive, Resolution for Use Permit to Allow for the Continuation of a Non-Conforming Use in a Residential District Staff explained that a resolution (UP-S14-1) had been prepared in follow-up to the Commission's action on this matter in accordance with the Staff Report condi- tions approved by the Commission at its October 13th meeting. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Martin, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution UP-3~14-1~.issued to Nick Miljevich, including ~Xh~bits .."A" and "B". The motion was car~jie~unanimously. " q" ~:'" .......... ' ~'~ -S- CO~IISSION MIN]jTES OF 27, 1976 'VI. ~ITTEN CO~B~NI~ATIONS A~ Environmental Impact Determinations The following Negative Declarations were filed between the period of October llth and October 22, 1976: ® SDR-!272 - Orville Telstad, Padero Avenue, Tentative Building Site Approval, 4 Lots ® SDR-1274 - Daniel Antovich, Sperry' Lane, Tentative Building Site Approval, 2 Lots · SDR-1275 - Robert Eppstein, Saratoga Hills Road, Tentative Building Site Approval, 2 Lots · SDR-1276 - DaVid McKenzie, Vessing Road, Tentative Building Site Approval, 3 Lots · SD-1277 - James Day Construction Company, Sobey Road, Tentative Subdivision ApprOval - 6 Lots · SD-1278 - James Day Construction Company, Sobey Road, Tentative Subdivision Approval - S Lots · UP-S18 - International Order of Oddfellows (IOOF), 14500 Fruitvale Avenue, Senior Citizens Project -- This application has been reques~d to supply the City with an. Environmental Impact Report. B. Other 1. Memorandum dated October 22, 1976'from the Planning Director to the City Manager regarding Senior Citizen Housing Ordinance Alternatives. The Secretary noted that this was for information, and pointed out that the memorandum was discussed at the last City Council Committee-of-the-]~ole meeting. : 2. Letter dated October 22, 1976 from Frances Anderson, 14649 Oak Street, expressing concerns over design review aspects of the Village and the City's hillsides. This letter was referred to the Design Review Conunittee for consideration. 3. Ridership report for September 1976 from the Santa Clara County Transporta- tion Commission dated October 13, 1976. 4. County of Santa Clara Planning Department "Info" Report of July 1976. Staff explained that additional information regarding any of the specific items referenced in the Report could be obtained from the Planning Department upon request. 5. Planning Policy Committee of Santa Clara County Agenda of October 28, 1976, and PPC Minutes of September 30, 1976. VII. ORAL CO~UNICATIONS A. City Council Report Commissioner Laden gave a detailed oral report of the City Council meeting held on October 20, 1976. A copy of the minutes of this meeting is on file at the City Administration office. B. Other 1. The Secretary suggested a Commission Committee-of-the-~ole meeting be scheduled to discuss issues which might need to be resolved regarding the proposed shopping center to be located on Prospect Road/Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (SDR-1242 and SDR-1243). Additionally, the Secretary stated that review -6- .CObBfISSION MINTjTES OF OC.~,BER 27, 1976 = =.":~' ~_ r VII. ORAL CO~'~NICATIONS - Cont'd of the human relations housing plih-in Santa Clara County also needed to be reviewed by the Commission at the. Council's request, and noted that informa- tion regarding this had been submitted to the Commission at an earlier meeting. Discussion followed on the proposed shopping center~ with specific attention placed on the draft EIR's economic section. The consensus of the Commission was that the economic section wasl essentially conjecture on the part of the consultanti. Commissioner Marshall sugg~_~b~.~.h~._E.~B__shq~ld be_ce~7..' \. fled by the C6nn~i~io'~'as'beiHg'c'omplete with the point being made that the economic section exceeded the requirements for an EIR. He added that the Commission should state that the 'conjectures were not recognized as such by the Commission and consequently would not be approved except for source in- formation purposes only. The City Attorney added at this point that when the Commission certified an EIR t.hey were not approving it; they were simply stating that in their opinion the input in the EIR was complete. It was the consensus of the Commission that a Committee-of-the-l~ole meet- ing be scheduled for Tuesday, NoVember 16, 1976 at ?:30 p.m. in the Crisp Conference Room, to discuss the proposed shopping center and the human re- lations housing p!a~ in Santa Clara County. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Zambetti moved, seconded by Commissioner Martin, that the Planning Com- mission meeting of October 27, 1976 be adjourned. The motion was carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Marry VaniSh, Secreta~jj7 sko/ .-_- 7':-"