Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-30-1970 City Council Minutes? CITY COUNCIL - PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT STUDY SESSION 7:30 P.M. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1970 - COUNCIL CHAMBERS, lj'777 FRUITVALE AVENUE, SARATOGA I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Mayo~ Robbins called the meeting to order. All Councilmen and Planning Cbmmissioners were present.'II II. SARATOGA VARIANCE POLICY Mayor Robbins stated that in his experience on the Council there had only been' two cases where the Council .had disagreed with the Planning Commission on variance rulings. The first one concerned an auxiliary structure and the second was the~:~r[bn Lane case. Mayor Robbins suggested two amend- ments: i) that a var%~d~ might be granted if the same result could be ob- tained in some other legal manner; and 2) that a variance may be granted if a less desirable result, from the standpoint of the City, may occur if it is not granted. Councilman Dwyer felt that changes might be useful, but individual judgement is still required in each case. He did not feel that the two reversals would warrant changing the .zoning ordinance. He felt it understandable that one group might see these matters from a difference perspective than the other. Commissioner Norton stated that~the conditions for granting a variance are quoted from the State Map Act. He felt there would continue to be differences of opinion between the %Council and the Planning Cormnission. However, he stated the Planning Commission was following Council policy as understood b~ tBe Commission. Mayor Robbins asked the City AttOrney what his views were on the various ordinances and the city policy as stated in Burton Brazil's letter of 1959 as related to State law. The City Attorney replied that Commissioner Norton's observations wer~ correct. The City does not have much leeway under State law. The City ordinance simply paraphrases the State law. He did not think the criteria for granting a varian6e could be relaxed. He did not think that either of Mayor Robbins' suggestions would 'satisfy the criteria set forth by the Planning Act. On the basis of the City Attorney~s statement Mayor Robbins withdrew the changes he had suggested. He noted that the Planning Commission in Saratoga has traditionally been the first line of defense and he felt the Commission should continue to serve in that .capadity. Commls~ioner Smith stated that the Commission was primarily concerned with precedent. The±r criteria has been whether or not a person is suffering a hardship, other than a financial ~ardship. A physical hardship is given very careful consideration. Councilman Sanders stated that he did not think that two differences of opinion in two years constituted a serious problemsand he was not seeking a change in the variance ordinance. Commissioner Kraus felt that the .issue revolved around the word "hardship".' He stated that the concern was that there is now a precedent for granting a variance. Commissioner Norton stated that if the Council wanted to change the policy he would agree,however, he felt the council must lay down the rules and follow them. Councilman Smith felt that a councilman had a responsibility each time an issue came before them to make a study as to that particular~case~and the law. 'CITY COUNCIL - PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION - NOVEMBER 30, 1970 Commissioner Crisp proposed that the matlet be closed by leaving the ordinance as it is. It was the consensus that the ordinance remain unchanged and the City follow the letter that Burton Brazil wrote in'i959. ~ III. PLANNED COMMUNITY - CLUSTER CONCEPT Commissioner Crisp stated that they have been approached by people lately who feel that a planned community is a means of increasing density. It is supposed to permit the same number of units as ifit were developed on the basis of straight zoning. Mayor Robbins felt that planned community should onlybe adopted if there is a benefit to the City. We don't want to increase density - we may want to reduce it. Another consideration is that by going to planned community the City has more control. We may get less damage to the terrain by control over the development. Councilman Sanders felt that the PC ordinance did not allow for the kind of planned community that he had in mind. The cluster concept to him meant two or more units built close together on one lot or a common area. He noted that cluster develop- ment, which is very popular in Europe and' Asia, is coming back into popularity in this county. He was thinking of the kind of development where there is a common area for recreation and planned o~en space and building units of four or · six units in harmony depending on the size of the area. Commissioner Norton noted that the present ordinance goes as far as three units.. l~3or more than three units in one structure an ordinance amendment would be required. Mayor Robbins noted that there did not seem to be agreement on the concept of plahned community development. Councilman Dwyer questioned whether reduction of population would be the Eight direction for the city. He felt we should keep in mind that the developer was not interested in the cluster c~ncept in C-130 because the same utilization of the property would make it necessary to sell each unit at approximately the price of a standard single family unit and he felt there~-was no market for this. Commissioner Lively did not think that the people in Saratoga wanted this type of development unless it was tailored to a s~ecific site and very carefully planned for a particular plot of ground. He did not think the citizens would back up the Council on this because they do not wanti~ishal density. Councilman Sanders stated that he was not! advocating that we launch a program of cluster zoning that is profitable to one particular building. He thought that C-130 looked like ~ acre houses in a one acre zone. Commissioner Norton wondered whether we wanted open space which would require a watchman protecting it against mis-use and irresponsible damage. In response to a question from Commissioner Kraus as to how you differentiate between the type of cluster development being discussed and a condominium, Councilman Sanders replied that you can have apartments or condominiums that are cluster. A common feature is that each family unit is not on a separate lot. You can have cluster that can be used as apartment rental, condominium or a community type of investment in which you have an equal share of everything. Commissioner Norton felt that this bmught up another question - even assuming we are all agreed, how are we going to persuade the city at large that any cluster development in their neighborhood is a good thing. It seems obvious now that the citizens are not going for this type of development. Councilman Sanders felt that the people who were voting against C-130 were voting against the appearance. Councilman Bridges felt that the Mayor had outlined some very specific'advantages and no cluster development to date has offered these advantages. None of the proposals were in a position to add to the liveability of Saratoga as a whole. Commissioner Smith felt it was necessary to get a definition of cluster. He did not think it was necessary to have a common wall to have a cluster development. Cluster utilizes a key plot of land and cbes not increase the density. ~ITY COUNCIL - PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION - NOVEMBER 30, 1970 Conmissioner Crisp noted that any PC development that you have in an R-i-40,000 zoning district in Saratoga is going to have ~ acre lots. If you have a planned community in a 20,000 zone you are going.to have 10,000 s.f. lots. Mayor Robbins proposed: 1) that we don't'actively go out and solicit PC development; 2) if we get a PC application that we consider it on its own merits; 3) that we do not accept a PC development unless it has some real advantages to the city over an existing situation. Commissioner Norton referred to the maintenance situation in connection with public recreation and noted that if the developer is to give up some of the land, it would' require a change in the ordinance. He wondered whether the ordinance would require the developer to give away 10 or 20 acres and would the city tehcnically require that he have at least as much acreage as ~he has units. Commissioner Crisp replied that if the developer has ten acres, he can give half to the City and still build the same number of units on the other half. Commissioner Kraus wondered how we would recognize a good planned communityconcept. Commissioner Metcalf replied that you would recognize it when you saw the preliminary plans and preliminary landsCaping'which is superior in planning and execution. Cal- West, across from Paul Masson is a good example~ Similarly, when we see a set of plans for a planned conmmnity where there are not only building sites selected and located but also preliminary house plans ~or particular sites, which conform to the topography. I,f the developer has done all these things ahead of time and brings in an integrated plan, we will recognize it. Commissioner Norton had the impre'~Sion that there was still a good deal of doubt and all that can be done is to deal with this on a case by case basis unless the Council wants to give the Planning CommisSion a line as to what they think is favorable. He stated the Cormnission would welcome this. In the meantime they can study the PC ordinance. Mayor Robbins stated that there has been a feeling that if PC is to be used there should be some kind of auxiliary structure. He stressed that there should be some benefit to the city. Commissioner Norton noted that the Planned Community ordinance is very tightly written, at the moment it has some flexibility but not very much. Councilman Dw-yer felt that we should be moving as strongly as we can to decide what we want Specifically. He felt it was important to define what the advantages were to the C~y and aesthetically what w~ think a development should look like. Mayor Robbins suggested that the best way. to do this would be to have the Planning Committee of the Council and an appropriate cormnittee from the Planning Commission work out some concrete criteria with staff assistance. Commissioner Norton will advise the Mayor who will work with the Planning Committee to draw up guidelines for Planned Community development. IV. HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT The Planning Director referred to the study of the Santa Cruz mountain area involving Monte Sereno, Saratoga and the County. So far they have reviewed the topographyl~ land use, soil conditions, and hazardous areas. Now they have come up with a set of<'~liminary standards primarily for prevention of fire and will also include eventuall~"development standards for the hillsides. The objective here is to come up with development standards and some type of zoning that might prevent haphazard development. As an interim project the county has invoked a three acre minimum lot size on unincorporated Santa Cruz Mountain area. Councilman Smith noted that the County isreferring all matters that come up under this interim ordinance to the PPC Hillside Committee for recommendation and review. They have obtained the cooperation of the Flood Control District in stopping the formation of~new water district in the area which would have -- brought development before standards could be set. The conclusion will be some strong recommendations for enforcement of these guidelines and ordinances. - 3 - CITY COUNCIL-PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION -NOVEMBER 30, 1970 - CONTINUED Commissioner Norton stated that the staf~ has been directed to draw up an ordinance as an interim measure. Councilman Smith '~{~t~d that the Water D~strict was delayed until next sunmet and he felt there would be satisfactory reconmendations for these ordinances, Cormnissioner Norton stated we did adopt a revised hillside ordinance, it changed the former resolution which was not very clear. We now have a double requirement - there should be a certain amount of area and avoid excessive cutting and filling. Another matter under consideration is whether inflame areas 80,000 s.f. zoning should be required, rather than 40,000. Stan Walker stated that there are some tenative aesthetic grading standards such as maximum height of retaining walls, maximum exposed face of the cut, etc. An engineered site plan is required if the ~lope is any more than 10%. There is a conflict between safety standards such as proper width and grade of road and the effort to minimize the impact of grading. CommissioDer Norton felt we should go ahead with a requirement for fire resistant roofs. Councilman Dwyer was amazed that brush clearing is not practised around the hillside homes. He referred to an area around Bohlman Road where very greasy, highly combustible plants, such as broom, are right'up again.st the houses. Commissioner Norton suggested a weed abatement ordinance as a possible solution. Councilman Smith stated that the proposed' FPC standards should be finalized within a month, and Commissioner Norton ~su~ested that the staff review them to see where our ordinances can be improved. Commissioner Martin wondered whether the Hillside Committee had considered a type of development where the houses would be closer together to provide p otegtion r against fire by leaving a large open =lZarea surrounding the struckures, and Councilman Smith stated that the last'meeting was given over to'r~h~s concept. Dan~Coleman, the guest speaker who has a lot of experience in cluster development, described a situation in San Rafael which'was ~milar to the C-130 proposal. V. 1970 GENERAL PLAN REVIEWS A. Discussion of Items of Interest to the Planning Commission Commissioner Norton stated that it was his understanding that legally any changes the Council makes on Planning Commission ~econm~endations with respect to the General Plan mast be sent back to theZPlanning Commission. He referred to Fruitvale Avenue width, the central park, and the Pierce~Road-Ashley Way area and wondered whether any subsequent~!Cl~'anges by the Council must be referred back to the Planning Commission. He ~sked what persuaded the Council that Fruitvale ought to be four lanes. Mayor Robbins replied that he had been in favor of keeping Fruitvale to two lanes and discouraging four lanes. H0wever~· he could see there was a 50% change that traffic would. increase to the point where we wished we had four lanes. This may come about because of the college and the development of the area between Sobey Road and Fruitvale'Avenue. The City should avoid the necessity to purchase the reqUired rights of way which are now undeveloped if Yit~%sI n~cessary to widen Fru~t~v~ez He stated that the Council has not decided whether Fr6itvale should be~ ~ivided or undivided but it will be necessary to V t San with policy outlining what kind make a plan line from Valle ~Sta o Marcos a of a road it should be. The present landscaping plan is just to plant trees. We do not plan to have landscaping similar to that on Saratoga Avenue. Councilman Sanders stated that he resisted this to the very last and was finally persuaded by the argument that the City had no legal b~sis on which to require dedication for the width that we would need unless we had this in the General Plan backed up by a Plan Line. Commissioner Norton referred' to the p~oblem with its present width which is rather narrow and hoped that some improvement could be started very soon. He noted that we are not confronted with immediate development of a four lane road which is comforting. - 4 - CITY COUNCIL-PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION - NOVEMBER 30, 1970 - CONTIED Mayor Robbins stated that the city staff would have to come up with some alternatives - what will a divided road or an undivided four lane road look like? How many trees will be removed? How will it affect people's houses? B. Retirement Housing Study The Planning Director reported that this was only a progress report. They did not intend to present any reconnnendations. He introduced Paul Moeller who was conducting the study. Mr. Moeller stated that they have gathered most of the background data including population, age group, incomes, etc. They have done a land use'availability study for certain various parcels available and*mapped them and w~itten down factors in- volved in their development. They have listed physical, social and economic development factors and have tried to come up with some criteria. They have made a study of present and future needs as to%the number of units required. Basically they have stayed pretty close to the retirement housing outlines.the council and the commission has already seen. In the doming week they plan to meet with developers who are directly concerned with retirement housing. Then the matter of actual policy will be studied andSfinally a written report will be made. With regard to the low cost aspect, basically the only information obtained so far is how many people in Saratoga are on Old Age Assistance or receiving Medical Assistance from the County. Mr. Moeller noted that there were more than he thought. Commissioner Norton asked whether it made' any difference in location, types of styles, etc. as to how much income individuals may have. Assuming there is some demand for low cost housing, do you think you would be able to find someplace to put it? Mayor Robbins noted that Palo Alto is following a land bank type of idea for the specific purpose of buying land so that the city could prevent a developer from making a killing as a result of higher density. l~r. Moeller stated that t~ey would certainly review all these things. CormnisSioner Crisp wondered whether the study would determine the number of people required to support such a development. Mr. Moeller repiied that t~ey will explore the whole range of facilities - from the newly retired, independent person to the older person who requires medical facilities. The report should be submitted the second. week in December to the Planning Commission following a series of meetings with the General Plan Cormnittee of the Planning Commission. VI. TIMETABLE FOR 1971 GENERAL PLAN REVIEW Mayor Robbins stated that the Planning Commission!~eld a study session for the 1970 General Plan on June 1 and the Council adopted the General Plan, following four Public Hearings, at the first meeting in November. Commissioner Norton felt we needed a systematic updating of the General Plan. He suggested approving some changes and making a notation on the General Plan. He suggested that we run on a fiscal year - starting in September and submitting it to the Council by January. It was the consensus of the Council to let the Planning Commission establish the General Plan review schedule. VII. COMMUNICATION BETWEEN COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Mayor Robbins noted that the last time a similar meeting had been held was over two years ago. At that time it was a dinner meeting and he did not feel that a great deal had been accomplished. He would like to see a closer association between the Planning Commission and the Council and favored this type of meeting as being more productive. - 5 - CITY COUNCIL-PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION - NOVEMBER 30, 1970 - CONTINUED Commissioner Crisp asked whether the Planning Committee met at specified times. He suggested that the Chairman of the committees get together when there is a matter of importance to discuss before the action is taken. Conmissioner Norton thought there could still be a problem when there is a difference between the Council or the Commission an~ he felt this type of meeting was a good idea. He suggested once or twice a year. It was the consensus that a joint study ~ession should be scheduled twice a year and more often if necessary. In response to a question from Mayor Robbins as~to whether the schedule of Councilmen appearing at Planning Commission meetings was working out satisfactorily, Commissioner Norton replied that it did seem to be a Worthwhile thing and wondered whether the Council felt they were getting anything out of it. Councilman Smith felt it was important t~ get an insight into the feeling of the Commission. Sometimes we tend to depart~entalize a group and start to think about it in generalities rather than as human Beings. Commissioner Norton stated that regular attendance by a member of each body at meetings of the other was important. IX. STATUS OF ZONING ORDINANCE IN RELATION TO HOUSING FOR ALL ECONOMIC LEVELS Mayor Robbins stated that periodically he has read in the newspapers about attempts to break down the Zoning Ordinance. There are laws being considered which, if successful, would prevent the.city from maintaining our zoning ordinance as our General Plan says. He has asked the staff and the city attorney to give us a general review of the status of efforts to overturn local zoning ordinances. The City Attorney replied that there wasn't ~oo much to discuss in this realm right now. There is a tendency on the part of minority groups to seek ~ecial zoning for special low cost housing and this has been ~ne in other areas. Where a city is zoned so as not to permit this, there is a direct confrontation. He noted that this was covered by two different bodies of law - State Law and the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. There are several State laws which uphold "bedroom communities" excluding certain types of uses and high density residential type uses. He cited a case in Piedmont, California which is a low density type city surrounded by Oakland and Berkeley, which wa~ created as a bedroom community. The supreme court dpheld their ability to d o this since there is low cost housing available in the neighboring city of Oak~nd and other satellite=cities. By taking the connnunity as a whole, the whole spectrumwas covered and the City of Piedmont was looked at as if it were a zoning district. Mr. Johnston also referred to a federal case called Sasso vs the City of Union City. Sasso is a southern Alameda Spanish speaking organization created to foster and promulgate low cost housing. It bought a piece of ground in Union City and had the Planning Commission re-zone it to high dehsity multipie zoning. It had been master planned for R-1. Under political pressure the Council re- zoned it to R-M and on referendumit was ~knocked'out. Sasso went to the District Court seeking a federal injunction. to reverse the referendum. The City Attorney commented that we are going to start running into more and more of this type of case at a federal level but there is no indication that any of our State courts are making any moves to tell a city that it must zone in any particular fashion or include in its particular boundaries various types of density for residential development. The City of Los Altos Hills completely excludes commercial or industrial zoning and that ordinance is now being contested. In that case the position of the people in question is that~/complete exclusion is a violation of the equal protection clause of the federal constitution. In our understanding the whole county housing element program is based on the theory that you are not bound by the City limits of any particular city as long as the conmmnity as a whole offers areas for low cost housing. That is the theory on which the existing program is being worked. Mayor Robbins adjourned the meeting at 9:55 P.M. Respectfully submitted JRH:r ~~