Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-27-2002 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Barry called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi Absent: None Staff: Associate Planner John Livingstone and Planner Ann Welsh PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Regular Meeting of March 13, 2002. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jackman, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the regular Planning Commission minutes of March 13, 2002, were approved as submitted. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Associate Planner John Livingstone announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 22, 2002. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Associate Planner John Livingstone announced that appeals are possible for any decision made on this Agenda by filing an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15.90.050(b). Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR – ITEM NO 1 GARROD FARMS, 22600 Mount Eden Road (503-10-028): - To approve the Resolution which found the Garrod Farm project to be consistent with the City of Saratoga’s General Plan. (LIVINGSTONE) Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Jackman, the Planning commission approved Consent Calendar Item No. 1, approving the Resolution finding the Garrod Farm project to be consistent with the City of Saratoga’s General Plan. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None *** PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 5 Application #02-047 (517-19-040) SIADAT, 14771 Montalvo Road: Request for Modification of Approved Project to remove a provision in the resolution for DR-99-006, which permitted construction of their new home. The applicant requests that the requirement to dedicate and build a 10-foot wide pedestrian trail on their property, parallel to Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, be omitted from the resolution approving the home, which is now built. (WELSH) Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:10 p.m. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jackman, seconded by Commissioner Kurasch, the Planning Commission continued consideration of Application #02-047 to a date uncertain. This item will be re-advertised and re-noticed. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None *** PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 2 Application #02-025 (386-01-008) YEH, 20444 Prospect Road: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to establish a 1,500 square foot Institutional Use for the purposes of teaching second languages, delivering the gospel message and other enrichment programs. The building contains 2,500 square feet and is zoned CV-Commercial. The lot is 18,590 square feet and the property has 10 parking spaces. (WELSH) Planner Ann Welsh presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicants are seeking a Conditional Use Permit for 20444 Prospect Road, within a CV-Commercial zoning district. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 3 • Described the parcel as a 18,590 square foot parcel with a 2,500 square foot building. Of that building, 1,000 square feet is occupied by a medical practice. The applicant proposes to occupy the remaining 1,500 square feet for an educational center offering tutoring, teaching second languages, delivering the gospel message and other enrichment programs. • Said that the applicant proposes operating three classes at a time with 10 students per class. The students range in age from five to twelve years in age. There would be three employees. Operational hours would be from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday. Typically, classes would run two hours, most of which occur after traditional school hours. In the summer, earlier classes would be held • Added that there are 12 parking spaces provided on site. The medical practice requires five spaces, leaving seven for this proposed educational center. The parking requirement for institutional uses is one space per instructor. • Advised that staff does not believe that the parking available is sufficient to support this proposed use, however, it may be possible to restripe more parking spaces on site with the removal of sheds. Another option might be to reduce the allowable number of students, perhaps two classes with eight students. Additionally, staggered class start times (perhaps by half an hour) would also be a means of dealing with the traffic for the drop off of students. Commissioner Kurasch sought further clarification as to what staff modifications to the proposal staff is recommending to deal with the parking shortfall. Planner Ann Welsh replied that based upon concerns raised by the Commissioners at the site visit, staff is suggesting a reduction in the number of students. Commissioner Roupe said that a periodic review, much like was recently conditioned for the orthodontic practice, would be a means of assuring adequacy of parking. Planner Ann Welsh pointed out Condition of Approval 2. Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the Commission can add to its motion the same Condition that was added to the approval for the orthodontic practice. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:20 p.m. Ms. Jean Wu, Agent for Applicant: • Reiterated that her clients will be teaching second languages, delivering the gospel message and providing enrichment programs. • Assured that they will comply with all imposed regulations. Ms. Gin Ju, Applicant: • Described her business as a learning center where second languages and the gospel message are taught. • Said that she is proposing 10 students per class for two-hour periods. She plans on having three teachers. • Assured that they will not create traffic impacts. • Stated that staggered class times and/or having a student drop off process might be methods used to avoid parking problems. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 4 Commissioner Roupe asked if the majority of the classes occur after school hours, between 3 and 6 p.m., and would consist of three classes at a time for a period of two hours per class. Commissioner Hunter suggested that moving the storage sheds on the property will allow more parking spaces to be striped on the parking lot. Commissioner Roupe said that he believed that staggered start times will help prevent parking problems. Mr. Jim Yeh, Property Owner: • Agreed to move the storage shed to create up to five more parking spaces. Commissioner Kurasch questioned what occurs on site before 3 p.m. and whether there would be more than just three classes per day. Ms. Gin Ju said that every two hours a class would start. She added that the youngest children attend class for an hour to an hour and a half. During the summer, classes occur all day. Commissioner Kurasch pointed out that for the one-hour classes, it may not be practical for a parent to drop off a child but rather would require that parent to stay and wait for their child. Asked if the shorter classes would also be conducted three at a time. Ms. Gin Ju said that she could ask parents not to wait. Pointed out that she already runs a school in Sunnyvale without parking problems. Commissioner Zutshi asked again how many classes would be conducted at any given time. Ms. Gin Ju replied that she is hoping to operate three classes at a time with 10 students each with staggered start times. Commissioner Zutshi said that the plan for drop off seems fine but the pick up process would be more difficult on this site. Pointed out the traffic tie-ups that occur on Cox due to the parents collecting their children from the Challenger School. Ms. Gin Ju pointed out that her school will have fewer students than the Challenger School. Ms. Jean Wu reminded that the students would leave at staggered times. Commissioner Zutshi pointed out that there is just one way in and one way out of this site. Mr. Jim Yeh said that he visited the Sunnyvale location. He added that most likely the children will be delivered to the site by van pool from their schools so that parents would not have to individually drop off the students. Commissioner Jackman: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 5 • Expressed concerns about the need to make right turns onto Prospect followed by a U-turn to return to Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. • Said that this site does not have a smooth flowing driveway and questioned if there is some way to improve that. • Stated that she has very real concerns about the traffic flow. Chair Barry said that she believes that at least four new parking spaces can be added to the right side of the building. Mr. Jim Yeh agreed to remove the shed. Chair Barry asked Mr. Yeh if he is willing to mark the driveway and tell the other tenant that there will be additional parking marked on their side for use by the school. Mr. Jim Yeh said that the medical office does not use all of their parking as they have but four employees. Chair Barry asked Ms. Ju what her minimum class size must be to be profitable. Ms. Gin Ju replied eight students. Chair Barry asked Ms. Ju if she would be willing to stagger the class start times by as much as 45 minutes so that there is as little overlap as is possible. Ms. Gin Ju replied that she would appreciate the limit to 30 minutes. She added that she has operated at her Sunnyvale location for the last nine years. Mr. Herbert Grabau, 12136 Atrium Drive, Saratoga: • Said that he is in favor of this proposed program but cautioned that there are four driveways within 600 feet with a lot of traffic. • Pointed out that there is much traffic on Prospect as well as turning off Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and DeAnza Boulevard. • Recommended that the City’s Traffic Department make a serious study. • Cautioned that this parking lot is shallow with people nearly backing out at the street line. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that the parking lot for the Atrium only had a couple of cars in it when the Commission went on its site visit. Mr. Herbert Grabau said that this lot is parked more at night and that there is no problem during the day or any concern about use of that parking. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:44 p.m. Commissioner Roupe said that the recommendation for a Traffic Study is an excellent one. Asked who has jurisdiction over Prospect Road. Planner Ann Welsh replied that she was not certain of the City’s jurisdiction over Prospect Road. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 6 Commissioner Jackman said that the Traffic Engineer could evaluate existing conditions. One solution might be to have a smaller garden to allow cueing around back. Commissioner Hunter: • Expressed that this is not a good location for this use. • Added that there appears to be too many children, on too busy a street, within too small a building. • Said that this is too dangerous for children. Commissioner Jackman expressed her agreement that this may not be a suitable spot due to traffic concerns. Commissioner Garakani suggested that the Traffic Study should be done before a final decision is made. Commissioner Hunter disagreed, saying that this is still not a good location and it would be important to find a more suitable location. Chair Barry: • Agreed with the assessment that this is not a very safe piece of property and does not lend itself well to the proposed school use. • Said that she agrees a Traffic Study is necessary if this proposal is to be considered. • Said that it would be necessary to significantly cut down on the number of students and classes. • Stated that, as proposed, this use would not work on this site. • Said that she is willing to suggest the Traffic Study but would also seek to limit the number of students per class to six and stagger the class start times by one hour. Commissioner Garakani said that he sends his own kids to after school programs and agrees that it is hard to find space to park at 6 p.m. when it is time to pick them up. Chair Barry said that perhaps a van could return the children to an off-site pick up point, such as a school or park. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that schools are not open that late and are dark at night. She added that she is in support of a school but that she would prefer a safer location for children. Commissioner Kurasch said that the Traffic Study might be helpful in determining the feasibility of this proposal. Commissioner Roupe suggested that the Traffic Study determine the number of students and class schedule although it appears that many of the Commissioners do not find this to be an appropriate location for this use. Chair Barry reopened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:52. Mr. Eric Soldan, 20746 Lowena Court, Saratoga: • Asked who would be paying for the cost of the Traffic Study. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 7 Planner Ann Welsh replied that it would have to be a consultant. Associate Planner John Livingstone added that a consulting firm performs the traffic counts and such. Chair Barry added that the applicant pays the cost for the Traffic Study. She added that there are two options to the applicant. One is to select an alternative site. The second is to go forward with a Traffic Study to better evaluate the potential for this site to accommodate this school. Commissioner Hunter advised that she would be voting against this project due to the insufficient parking spaces. Commissioner Garakani questioned whether they would have to have enough parking to be approved. Planner Ann Welsh reminded that the requirement for parking is one space per employee with the remainder of the parking requirement up to the discretion of the Planning Commission. Chair Barry said that the applicant is hearing the thoughts of this Commission that this does not seem to be a workable site. Commissioner Kurasch cautioned that there is no guarantee that this use will be approved even with a Traffic Study. Commissioner Roupe agreed but said that this Traffic Study is needed to support this use. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission continued consideration of Application #02-025, for a proposed institutional learning center at 20444 Prospect Road, to allow time for a Traffic Study to be prepared, with the cost to be borne by the applicant, which should take into consideration the proposed class size and staggered start times. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Jackman, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: Hunter ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry stated that she is in favor of this school but has concerns about traffic. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 3 Application #02-008 (366-027-003) HSU/BURROUGHS, 20802 Norada Court: Request for Design Review Approval to create a second-story addition to the existing residence and a Variance to the “floor area reduction rule.” The existing home, in the R-1-12,500 District, contains 2,769 square feet on a 12,712 square foot lot. The proposed home contains a 651 square foot second story and proposes a 216 square foot addition to the first floor for a total area of 3,636 square feet. (WELSH) Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 8 Planner Ann Welsh presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicants are seeking a Design Review Approval for an addition to an existing 2,769 square foot home on a 12,712 square foot lot. The proposed addition includes 216 square feet on the first floor and 651 square feet on the second floor, for a total square footage of 3,636. The proposed height is 22 feet. • Added that this proposal requires a Variance to the height penalty and another Variance to allow 149 square feet in excess of allowable FAR. With the setback penalty, a 14-foot side yard setback is required, four feet more than exists. • Informed that seven neighbors have provided written support and that one neighbor objects due to a loss of privacy. • Stated that the required findings to support the Variance may not be met and that granting this Variance would represent a special privilege. • Added that a landscape plan could address the privacy concerns. Commissioner Zutshi asked about the size of the other homes in the immediate area. Planner Ann Welsh replied that per the information provided by the applicant, the homes in the area range from 3,100 to 3,600 square feet. Commissioner Roupe asked whether the second story addition could be approved without need for a Variance since that addition would not be expanding on a existing non-conformity. Could the necessary findings be made to support that part of the proposal. Planner Ann Welsh said that the non-conformity is increased with an addition. Chair Barry asked if the project would be non-conforming without a second story addition. Planner Ann Welsh replied no. Chair Barry added that only with the second story addition does the sideyard setback become non- conforming. Commissioner Kuraasch pointed out that staff is recommending a revision to the proposal to reflect the 14 foot setback and reduce the floor area. Chair Barry said that with the elimination of 149 square feet, no Variance is necessary except for the setback Variance. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:10 p.m. Ms. Kathy Hsu, Applicant and Property Owner, 20802 Norada Court, Saratoga: • Thanked the Commissioners for their site visit. • Provided a background of their project. • Advised that when they purchased this home, there was an approval for an addition even larger than the one they now propose. • Stated that they have spoken extensively with the Planning Department. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 9 • Added that they learned later that their home is 200 square feet larger than they had been told which meant that they could add 200 square feet less to their proposed addition. • Said that they met with Director Sullivan in August 2001 and he suggested they apply for a Variance. • Pointed out that theirs is predominately a two-story neighborhood. • Explained that the City once had an Exception Clause, in effect when the original addition was approved. That Exception Clause has since been removed from the books and now a project such as theirs requires a Variance instead of an Exception. • Said that the size home they are proposing is in keeping with the neighborhood and would not represent a special privilege. • Said that they respect their neighbor’s concern for privacy and distributed photographs to demonstrate that their addition will not result in privacy impacts on their rear neighbor’s home or pool. Mr. Warren Heid, Project Architect, 14630 Big Basin Way, Saratoga: • Advised that he typically does not ask for Variances. • Said that this neighborhood is predominately two story and of 57 properties depicted on the area map, 36 are two-story homes or 63 percent. • Stated that his clients are hoping to enlarge their family room, and add a study and two bedrooms, for a total of five, without having to lose their large rear yard, which is used as a playground for the children. • Pointed out that there is but one window on the two-story elevation facing the rear neighbors. It is 71 feet from the property line and the neighbor’s yard and pool would not be visible from that window. Additionally, they are willing to plant buffer landscaping. • Said that the style of the addition would be match the existing, with a new Class A fireproof roof, a maximum height of 22 feet. The home will tie into the neighborhood. • Informed that he had tried alternatives including a single-story and tri-level design. • Advised that he could take off part of the garage and make a carport, which is allowed in the setback, but to do so would lose 236 square feet from the garage. • Stated that a Variance is a tool for the Planning Commission to work with and represents a part of Ordinance requirements. • Declared his belief that they have proven their case for a Variance. Commissioner Roupe suggested that reducing the width of the family room addition, to approximately 10 feet by 14 feet, would make the total square footage conform. Mr. Warren Heid said that they had considered that option. Said that the family wants a large family room and that family rooms typically face the backyard. Commissioner Roupe said that if the square footage can comply, there is more chance to get past the setback Variance. Asked staff whether the 14 foot setback would still be required if no first floor addition was made. Planner Ann Welsh said that this would not increase the non-conformity. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 10 Chair Barry added that the strict interpretation requires that a two-story needs the 14-foot setback. She added that it is arguable that if there is no first floor addition, this project would not be increasing the non-conformity and could be okay. Planner Ann Welsh replied as long as they cut three feet. Commissioner Roupe asked if no side yard setback Variance would be required if there is no first floor addition. Planner Ann Welsh said that the Commission could make that argument. Mr. Warren Heid suggested that they could reduce the height and gain 110 square feet. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that they still would require the 14-foot side setback. Commissioner Kurasch said that per the dissenting neighbor, there are two upstairs windows overlooking his property. Mr. Warren Heid said that there is only one window that faces that rear yard. Ms. Judy Alberts, 20747 Lowena Court, Saratoga: • Said that her Court is adjacent to Norada Court. • Stated that she knows the applicants very well and that they are friends but that she has concerns. • Informed that on Norada there are six two-story homes and five one-story homes so there is not a majority. • Said that this project would set a precedent and that she wants to be sure the Commission and Staff are clear on the requirements and use caution when approving a Variance. Mr. Eric Soldan, 20746 Lowena Court, Saratoga: • Advised that he purchased his home in 1999. • Said that he had wanted a neighborhood without Variances since his previous neighborhood had lots. • Stated that he remodels homes and has read the requirements and is prepared to accept the rules of Saratoga. • Said that if a Variance is approved it sets a precedent. • Stated that he does not consider this a predominately two-story area. Mr. Richard Leash, neighbor behind project site: • Said that he will be able to see this addition from his home and has concerns about plans for windows to overlook his yard. • Expressed doubt that the majority of homes in the area are 3,100 to 3,600 square feet and said that most are actually one-story homes. Commissioner Kurasch clarified that the Variance is not to allow the two-story addition but rather for exceeding floor area. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 11 Mr. Richard Leash said that his primary concern is having a two-story house overlooking his yard. Chair Barry reminded that the second story window would not look down onto his property but rather what he would see would be a blank wall. Asked whether a screening tree to block visibility of this wall could be an acceptable solution. Mr. Richard Leash said that if he cannot see the addition and they cannot see his property from that addition, it would not bother him. Mr. Eric Soldan asked how a records flaw could overlook 200 square feet of existing home. He added that the fact that the home is larger than originally believed is not a sufficient reason to support this Variance. Ms. Kathy Hsu: • Assured that they are happy to plant an evergreen tree to provide screening for their rear neighbor. • Declared that it is not setting a precedent to grant them this Variance and that each application needs to be looked at on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Warren Heid: • Distributed an alternative set of drawings, in which he has dropped the ridge over Bedroom No. 3, dropped 152 square feet and removed three feet of depth to the family room addition. Planner Ann Welsh said that this proposal could work if the roof is lowered by two feet. Commissioner Roupe said that the project still needs to get down to the proper square footage. Commissioner Jackman asked what the new roof height would be. Mr. Warren Heid replied 20 feet when the original ridge was 22 feet. Commissioner Roupe asked if the side extension is reduced by 149 square feet, eliminating the need for a Variance, whether this project could be approved tonight. Chair Barry replied yes, if the Commission makes the determination that this would not be increasing a non-conformity. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:50 p.m. Commissioner Zutshi said that she has worked with Warren Heid and that he stays within City regulations and appears to have come up with a different plan. Planner Ann Welsh reminded that the setback penalty requires one additional foot of setback for any height above 18 feet. If the project height is reduced to 20 feet in addition to an approximate three percent reduction in FAR, this project does not require a Variance. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 12 Commissioner Roupe suggested that staff and Mr. Heid have been given adequate direction. If no Variance is necessary, for square footage or setbacks, this project can be made to comply and be approved. Chair Barry asked for a sense of where the Commission is at. Commissioner Garakani said that if this were a new home, he would approve it. Said that with no need for a Variance, he can support this proposal. Commissioner Hunter said that there have been seven letters of support. There are no windows overlooking the rear neighbor’s home. Stated that she does not like granting Variances. Said that she supports both the original and alternate proposal by Mr. Heid. Commissioner Kurasch: • Said that by reducing the area and eliminating the need for a Variance, she can support this application. • Pointed out that there are no special circumstances to support a Variance and that Variances do have an impact on others. • Stated that she does not agree with the statement that this is a predominately two-story area but rather is more evenly a mixture of one and two-story homes. • Said that she is more comfortable allowing the applicant to work out the remaining issues with staff. • Expressed support for staff’s recommendations. Commissioner Jackman said that she cannot support this Variance as there is no justification to support it. Added that she thought it would look odd to cut the roof off and that it would look less attractive. Chair Barry wrapped up by saying that it appears the consensus is that the Commission is willing to recommend the interpretation that this proposed addition, as modified, will not be increasing a non- conformity. Commissioner Kurasch reiterated support for adequate screening. Chair Barry suggested that the screening tree be quick growing and evergreen. The specific species should be recommended by the Arborist. Commissioner Garakani suggested growing ivy on the wall. Chair Barry: • Said that it is important to have a strict criteria for approving Variances and usually the basis for support is topography. • Stated that it is her impression that it is not fair for this type of application to get this far before the Planning Commission sees it. • Declared that there are no real grounds for a Variance here. • Pointed out that the neighbors who support this request are not as directly impacted as the one neighbor who opposes. • Expressed support for the interpretation that this project will not extend a non-conformity as long as there is adequate screening of the addition and no Variance required. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 13 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Kurasch, the Planning Commission granted a Design Review Approval to allow a residential addition on an existing home at 20802 Norada Court subject to the following: 1. That the applicant work with staff to revise the design so that no square footage or setback Variances are required; 2. That the applicant provide screening across the back to protect the privacy of the adjacent rear property; and 3. With the understanding that this addition does not perpetuate a non- conformity. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 4 Application #02-044 (386-52-032 & 033) MAMMINI CORPORATION; LONGAY GUITAR CENTER (Tenant), 12302 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to conduct music classes in an existing 1,733 square foot commercial space located in the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District. (VASUDEVAN) Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of a music school, for classical guitar, within an existing commercial space. • Described the parking as including 23 spaces in front and 14 spaces at the rear of the building for a total of 37. The music school would require 16 spaces. The school would have four studios with an instructor and student in each one. Therefore approximately 10 vehicles would be affiliated with the use. Staff finds that the provision of parking is adequate. • Stated that twice a month, recitals are held on Saturday afternoons where approximately 24 vehicles are expected. When that occurs, there would still be 13 spaces open to the other uses on the site. • Said that staff can support this project with review and monitoring of parking. • Added that three more spaces would be marked for “10 minute parking” in front of the convenience market. Some are already reserved for short-term parking by patrons of the cleaners and salon uses. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Kurasch asked where the deficient spaces would come from when the recitals occur. Associate Planner John Livingstone reminded that street parking is also available. Commissioner Kurasch questioned the traffic circulation in this area compared to the earlier application this evening for the instructional use. Associate Planner John Livingstone advised that the circulation is better on this site than the previous site considered this evening. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 14 Commissioner Zutshi asked if this business is already in operation before issuance of this Conditional Use Permit. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes. Commissioner Jackman pointed out that a signal is pending on Seagull Way that will help traffic circulation. Chair Barry said that at the site visit she asked about growth and suggested to the applicant that larger recitals could be held off site. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 9:14 p.m. Mr. Frank Longay, Owner/Director, Longay Guitar Center, 12302 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga: • Said that he is glad to be in Saratoga. • Described his school as operating a unique program that teaches classical guitar per the Suzuki approach. • Expressed regret for not obtaining the required Use Permit prior to establishing his school. • Stated that he understands concerns for potential parking conflicts and has the flexibility to reduce his class sizes by working longer hours. • Pointed out that having 40 students in the program does not mean 40 cars since this is a family- oriented approach and parents accompany their child. • Said that he wants to provide good service to clients and has 27 years of experience teaching. Commissioner Kurasch asked about attendance at recitals. Mr. Frank Longay replied that there would not be more than 40 people at any event. Commissioner Kurasch expressed concern about the potential for extended hours due to the site’s proximity to residential uses. Stated that her only concerns were the proposal for larger groups and later night lessons. Said that she would not want to see extended weekday lessons. Mr. Frank Longay stated that his evening hours run from 7:30 to 9 p.m. and that there would be five to six people on the premises maximum at that time. Chair Barry inquired about the hours of operation for the convenience store. Commissioner Hunter replied that it is open 24 hours. She added that it is terrific to have a guitar center in the area and that she is glad to see this business come to Saratoga. Mr. Jeff Walker, 20451 Seagull Way, Saratoga: • Said that his home is located just behind this site. • Thanked staff and said that this proposed use is a fantastic use and asked the Commission to vote in support. • Said that he has some issues regarding impacts to his property as a result of this property. These impacts include noise, damage to the shared fence, trash, etc. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 15 • Suggested a closing time of 9 p.m. and a prohibition of amplification. • Proposed that a sign be posted for staff to park in the back instead of students. • Said that street parking should not be encouraged for overflow parking. Commissioner Roupe suggested that Mr. Walker contact the Code Compliance Officers to deal with some of the problems raised. Chair Barry asked if the fence in question is on the shopping center property or shared property line. Mr. Jeff Walker replied shared property line. Mr. Jack Mallory, 12258 Kirkdale Drive, Saratoga: • Said that he has lived in this neighborhood since 1967 and is in favor of this business. • Said that he is concerned about the excess parking needs and asked the Commission to pay attention to that part. • Pointed out that 20 new houses are currently under construction and he does not want to encourage parking along Seagull Way. • Said that the commercial property owner should be a better citizen to the area. Commissioner Jackman said that a brick or stucco fence should be required to separate this commercial property from adjacent residential properties. Asked staff to look further into the impacts on parking in the area as a result of the Azule Crossing Project. Mr. Jack Mallory said that compliance and monitoring of approved standards needs to occur. Chair Barry asked staff how the owner of this commercial center fits into this Use Permit application. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied that the owner is looking to get a tenant for his building and is responsible for the improvements. Chair Barry asked if placing conditions for site improvements fall on Mr. Longay. Commissioner Roupe questioned whether the Commission could impose fencing requirements with this application. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes. He added that if the owner wants to obtain a tenant, he would make the required improvements. Chair Barry asked if the owner is part of this process. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes. Commissioner Kurasch asked who was responsible for allowing this business to establish without the required Use Permit. Associate Planner John Livingstone said he did not know. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 16 Commissioner Hunter said that she didn’t notice the fence and did not feel comfortable requiring a fence of this tenant. Added that if there are problems with the convenience store clientele, the Code Enforcement Officer should address them. Chair Barry reminded that the condition for the fence replacement would fall on the property owner. Commissioner Garakani pointed out that if the fence is located on the property line, both neighbors would share the cost. Mr. Jeff Walker: • Said that the fence was probably not noticeable since it is covered in ivy. However, it is at an angle and propped up. He added that he did not want to see the fence replacement as a condition of this Use Permit approval but was interested in talking with the property owner himself to work out this issue. • Added that a commercial property owner is responsible for fencing that separates a commercial use from residential uses. Commissioner Jackman asked Mr. Jack Mallory how he was able to get his fence installed to separate his property from adjacent commercial property. Mr. Jack Mallory replied that the issue was that the commercial property was causing problems and an eight-foot masonry fence was required. Encouraged that City to place this requirement as a strategic item. Mr. Frank Longay: • Told Mr. Walker that he has an ally regarding concerns over property maintenance of this commercial center. • Said that the problems raised by Mr. Walker would be of concern to him too. • Stated that he would not want his students exposed to those problems either. • Assured that he would restrict his students from parking on Seagull Way. Commissioner Kurasch suggested that Mr. Longay split his recitals into smaller groups if they get too large to be accommodated by the available parking. Mr. Frank Longay said he can do that if they get too large. Commissioner Hunter suggested that Mr. Longay ask his staff to park in the back. Mr. Frank Longay said he had no problem with that requirement. Ms. Erin Donovan: • Advised that her son and daughter attend this guitar program. She drives them to the school together. • Said that once the lessons are done, they leave the site. Ms. Kim Buller, Administrative Director: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 17 • Said that this center’s property management company is very responsive and will be addressing the garbage issue by installing a garbage enclosure. Additionally, a van parked on site will be moved. • Stated that the fence issue could be addressed by the owner. • Advised that her son has studied in this program for six years and that it is an amazing thing for children and an asset for the City of Saratoga. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 9:40 p.m. Commissioner Hunter said that this project is just great and that she would support it. Commissioner Zutshi agreed to support this request with the added requirement for six and twelve month review. Commissioner Garakani said he was also in support. Commissioner Jackman said that she too is in favor. She asked staff to follow through on the idea for a masonry wall and contact with Azule Crossing Homeowner’s Association to ensure that garages are being retained for parking uses. Chair Barry said she agrees with the idea to contact Azule Crossing regarding parking but that she did not see the requirement for the masonry fence being applicable with this request. Commissioner Jackman said she just wants to encourage staff to initiate the study of the issue of masonry walls separating commercial and residential areas. Commissioner Kurasch: • Said that she is in support of this application with a caution on the possible traffic impacts on Seagull Way. • Said that she was also in favor of limiting hours and limiting the number of recitals to once a month on a Saturday and twice a month with a maximum of 15 students plus guests. • Stated concern for traffic in the area. • Supported the proposal for review of the adequacy of parking and circulation in six and twelve months. • Said that she was in favor of requiring the repair of the fence, finding it an appropriate request. • Expressed support. Chair Barry said that the applicant should stress to employees to park at the rear lot to leave parking at the front for the students as a means of limiting noise impacts on the adjacent residences. Commissioner Roupe said that this guitar school will be an excellent addition to the community and it appears the applicant has the flexibility and control to deal with parking on site. Additionally, there is recourse if the use does not work out. Suggested approving the project as is. Commissioner Garakani asked how the City would know how many recitals are held on site. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied that the City would respond on a complaint basis. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 18 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jackman, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of the Longay Guitar Center at 12302 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road with the added conditions of approval: 1. That there be no on-street parking on Seagull Way; 2. That additional parking spaces be marked for “10 minute parking” in front of the convenience store; 3. That there be no amplified music; 4. That the use close at 9 p.m.; and 5. That staff and the applicant work with the property owner on the issue of fence repair. AYES: Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None *** DIRECTOR ITEMS Explanation of Santa Clara County referral process Associate Planner John Livingstone advised that County projects regarding discretionary review are routed to the City of Saratoga for comment. Staff often emails comments to the County. Typically the reviews are for single family residences. Chair Barry advised that staff has found no review files on Quickert Road. Recommended that a letter by Council be drafted to ask the County to look into this matter of project review further. Commissioner Kurasch asked if there are any pending applications for review. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied that he checked the file cabinet where all County referral information is retained. There is no new info for the Quickert Road area in the last year and a half. Added that he has called the County Planning supervisor who found no pending projects on Quickert. Commissioner Roupe asked staff to continue to investigate. Commissioner Hunter cautioned that the projects could also be on Bohlman or Kittridge and not just Quickert. COMMISSION ITEMS Energy Efficiency – Review Conservation Element of the General Plan and consider adopting an Energy Element to form the basis for energy conservation ordinances. (LIVINGSTONE) Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff update as follows: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 19 • Advised that the General Plan has a Conservation Element to encourage energy conservation. The subcommittee wanted to look at improving the energy efficiency of homes in Saratoga in a two-part plan. The first part includes education using handouts and materials on the internet and to sponsor a workshop with contractors where providers would be present to provide information on green building technologies and resources. • Next the subcommittee recommends adoption of a new Energy Efficiency Ordinance. • Said that they have looked at different Ordinances nationally. In Aspen, new homes over 5,000 square feet must offset fossil fuel use through on-site energy generating or payment of a fee. In Marin County, a community most applicable to Saratoga, they have a “big and tall residence” Ordinance. Homes over 4,000 square feet must comply with Title 24 or install on-site renewable energy systems that provide 75 percent of the energy, such as solar. • Advised that the subcommittee likes that approach the best. • Asked the rest of the Commission to advise if the subcommittee is on the right path and then staff can seek out more information. Commissioner Zutshi said that she thought Title 24 was already in place. Chair Barry pointed out that the subcommittee is proposing improvements to the Title 24 requirements. Commissioner Roupe said that even if a home is larger than 4,000 square feet, the home must be as efficient as a 4,000 square foot home. Chair Barry said that if Green Building Guidelines are used, the efficiency levels are between 15 to 30 percent more efficient that Title 24. Commissioner Hunter asked about recycling building waste. Commissioner Kurasch advised that this is a separate issue. In fact, an Ordinance is currently under consideration by Council on that subject. Commissioner Roupe said that this report is a good start and that the subcommittee is heading in the right direction. Said that one alternative is to pay a fee if a project is unable to achieve compliance for energy efficiency. Chair Barry agreed but stated the importance that these fees not go into the City’s General Fund but rather be earmarked specifically for energy efficiency projects. Commissioner Kurasch said that Marin County is starting to implement this fee. Commissioner Roupe suggested involving experts such as architects in this process. Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the City of Davis also has a similar energy efficiency fee program. Said that the subcommittee prefers to see home energy efficiency implemented rather than payment of a fee. Commissioner Roupe said that both options are worth looking into since they would provide flexibility. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 20 Associate Planner John Livingstone said that he will call Aspen to see how they spend their collected money. Chair Barry suggested that an Energy Efficiency Report should be required with development applications. Commissioner Hunter stressed that a lot of education needs to be provided on this issue. Suggested working together with the other West Valley Area communities, such as Los Gatos and Campbell. Commissioner Roupe endorsed the need for education on this subject. Chair Barry agreed and added that education also has to do with financing for energy efficiency. It is not just the up front costs but rather education on the long-term benefits and savings. Commissioner Roupe said that a pay back period might be needed. Does energy efficiency need to pay for itself in 7 years, 10 years or 40 years. Associate Planner said that there is information available for large commercial buildings but there may not yet been such data for smaller single-family residential projects. Said that he would work to find tables on how long it takes to see a return on investment for energy efficiency. Commissioner Roupe said it is important to set some sort of criteria and establish some set standards. Commissioner Kurasch added that staff training is an important part of the educational process. Commissioner Hunter reiterated her suggestion for some sort of consortium of West Valley communities. Chair Barry pointed out that some of the larger communities are more likely to have models in place. Commissioner Kurasch: • Pointed out that the costs, impacts and benefits must all be considered. Benefits include cutting greenhouse gases and pollution. Secondly, energy efficient methods provide independence in case of natural disaster. There is also the security benefit that local sources of material are more secure. • Stated that costs are dropping every year for energy efficiency methods in significant numbers. Chair Barry: • Stated that this subcommittee report on Energy Efficiency was great and agrees that further education on energy efficiency methods makes sense. • Suggested that should the City decide to redo its City Hall, it could become a “Green” building. • Reminded that there is a financing issue and suggested that City staff learn about that issue and treat it as a high priority. • Said that the City should push forward in the directions the subcommittee has suggested. Miscellaneous Items Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of March 27, 2002 Page 21 Commissioner Jackman pointed out that she has a new homeowner’s insurance plan that includes as excepted perils issues such as Planning and Design Errors, Earthquake, Flood and Volcanoes. Commissioner Zutshi advised that there will be a Library site visit on April 3, 2002, at 10:30 a.m. Commissioners Kurasch and Zutshi are unable to attend the April 10, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Chair Barry adjourned the meeting at 10:43 p.m. to the next regular meeting set for Wednesday, April 10, 2002, to begin at 7 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk