Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-09-2002 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, January 9, 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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Roupe and Zutshi Absent: Kurasch Staff: Director Tom Sullivan, Associate Planner John Livingstone and Planner Lata Vasudevan APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Regular Meeting of December 12, 2001. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Jackman, the regular Planning Commission minutes of December 12, 2001, were approved with the following modifications: Page 6 – Commissioner Hunter said that retaining walls might become prevalent. Page 7 – Commissioner Hunter said that it is very valid to state that a 4,800 square foot home is a very large house. Pointed out that she lives in a 3,000 square foot house with four kids and her husband and it is plenty big. Said that she would go for a smaller house on this lot, considerably smaller. Page 9 – remove the first bullet within the motion for approval: That the applicant reduce the structure by an additional eight percent. Page 9 – Chair Barry said that Commissioner Garakani is simply suggesting a Study Session be held early on. Added that if she had her way, there would be no building on the hillsides at all. Page 12 – Chair Barry pointed out to Mr. Pridham that the intent of the Ordinance is that folks in the Hillside Residential Zoning District give gives up the fenced-in aspect of properties. Page 13 – Chair Director Sullivan suggested that the Commission vote on the proposed amendment and than then vote on the main motion. Page 14 – Bullet 3 from Associate Planner John Livingstone’s report should read: Stated that this applicant has contacted each of his neighbors… AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Kurasch ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 2 REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 3, 2002. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar items. *** NON PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 1 GARROD FARMS, 22600 Mount Eden Road (503-10-028): Request for General Plan clarification to allow three new dwelling units on one parcel of land where two dwelling units currently exist. The area is within the jurisdiction of Santa Clara County and is prezoned Hillside Residential. The County requires the project be consistent with the City of Sara5toga’s General Plan. (LIVINGSTONE) (CONTINUED FROM 11/14/01) Associate Planner John Livingston presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicants seek approval for the construction of three new homes on a site with two existing residences. One unit is proposed at 3,000 square feet plus a garage and the two remaining units are proposed at 2,500 square feet plus garages. There will be 1,500 cubic yards of cut and 1,200 cubic yards of fill. • Identified the site as being located within an unincorporated area of Santa Clara County within Saratoga’s sphere of influence. The County requires that this proposal meet the General Plan policies of the City of Saratoga. Following that determination, the County would process Architectural and Site approvals. • Stated that staff finds this proposal to be in conflict with the Hillside Specific Plan. • Recommended that the Commission review this proposal and provide direction to staff and the applicant. Commissioner Roupe sought assurances that public testimony can be taken on a Non Public Hearing Item. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Chair Barry clarified that the Commission’s direction is being requested. Asked about the Open Space Plan proposed. Associate Planner John Livingstone: • Advised that the applicant is proposing a trail dedication to the City to try to meet the Open Space section of the plan, concentrating on the phrase “preferred” instead of “required.” • Pointed out that the Commission can take one of four actions including: 1. Find the proposal consistent with the General Plan and Hillside Specific Plan and instruct staff to come back with a Resolution for approval under Consent, including the acceptance of the trail easement proposal. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 3 2. Find the proposed density to be inconsistent and recommend staff to forward that finding to the County. 3. Explore additional revisions to the project to enhance the Open Space to justify the increased density. 4. Applicant could submit an application to amend the Hillside Specific Plan. Commissioner Garakani asked for more of an explanation for Option 3. Director Tom Sullivan restated that this would require enhancements to those options already offered. Commissioner Zutshi asked if this means fewer units. Director Tom Sullivan stated that it means further options to enhance the proposal. Commissioner Jackman said that revisions to the Hillside Specific Plan would require a community vote. Director Tom Sullivan reminded that this parcel is not currently within the City’s limits. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:10 p.m. Mr. George Cooper, Property Owner/Applicant, 22701 Mount Eden Road, Saratoga: • Said that he has resided on the property since 1945. • Expressed appreciation for the patience of the staff and Planning Commission. • Advised that the family has retained the law firm of Matteoni, Saxe and O’Laughlin. • Said that he would provide a project overview. • Pointed out that they seek authorization to construct three new residences on an 11-acre parcel to house family members and staff. The new homes would be single-story ranch style homes consistent with the existing homes on site. They plan to retain the agriculture and landscaping on the property. • Describe that the family operates two agricultural/recreational businesses on their property, both of which are labor intensive businesses, mainly family operated. Key on-site employees have housing provided. Currently his own daughter drives 65 miles from Pleasanton to work for the family business. The Garrod family has farmed on its property continuously since 1893. The riding stables were established in 1966. The vineyard was planted in 1972. The winery established in 1991. The have achieved a national reputation for their wines, having won numerous awards. Said that the businesses include horse shows, wine tasting and fundraising events. • Informed that there are currently eight houses on the entire 120-acre property. Three of the homes house senior family members. The Operations Manager, Wine/Marketing Manager, Stable Manager, Riding Director and Office Manager occupy the five other homes. There are currently three units short of what they need. • Reminded that they have deeded 120 acres of the original 240-acre property to the Mid-Peninsula Open Space Authority. They also propose to provide links to the trails as called for in Saratoga’s Master Plan. • Introduced his attorney, Peggy O’Laughlin. Peggy O’Laughlin, Attorney for the Garrod/Cooper Family: • Said that she wanted to put Mr. Cooper’s proposal into context. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 4 • Pointed out that the Garrod/Cooper family are not developers but rather they operate a farm. This is a unique use in Saratoga. The family has been in the area for more than 100 years. • Said that she has reviewed the City Attorney’s memorandum to the Community Development Director and agrees on the law that applies. • Said that the Commission clearly has the discretion to determine if the proposal is consistent with the General Plan and Hillside Specific Plan. • Reminded that State Law does not require a precise match. • Described a court case out of Oakland where the Court stated that a City can find a proposal is in harmony with the General Plan. • Assured that this proposal is in harmony with Saratoga’s General Plan. • Read Policy 7 of the General Plan into the record. • Pointed out that a significant component of the Open Space Element comes from agricultural uses, including the discouragement of early cancellation of Williamson Act lands. The Element also allows additional dwellings on family farm operations. Additionally, a density bonus can be allowed if a significant investment exists on the property. • Reiterated that these three homes represent necessary housing for this family to continue its farm operations. • Said that the Garrod/Cooper family has shown its commitment in preserving open space, specifically by dedicated 120 acres to Mid-Peninsula Open Space Authority. Additionally, they are offering to deed a trail easement to Saratoga, 1,000 feet in length. This easement will provide a crucial link that Saratoga includes as desirable within its Master Trails Plan. • Said that although City staff finds conflict with this proposal with the Hillside Specific Plan, the plan does not include a mandate but rather a preferred density. • Reminded that this is a Williamson Land Act holding. • Recommended adoption of Alternative 1 as provided by staff. Chair Barry asked Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin if her clients would support a Deed Restriction that requires the property to revert to compliance with existing General Plan Zoning in the event that they opt out of the Williamson Act. Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin: • Advised that she spoke early in the process with Saratoga’s City Attorney as well as staff. • Informed that the Garrod/Cooper family has just renewed with the Williamson Act for another 10 years. • Reminded that this is not a subdividable lot. The units cannot be sold outside of the family. • Said that an Agricultural Easement Overlay had been considered in the past but found to be unnecessary. Chair Barry asked if they would object if the Commission were to require an Overlay. Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin replied that it would have to be specific. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that the Williamson Act lasts for 10 years and there are no guarantees that it will be renewed after that time. Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin reminded that the family has been on this land since 1892. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 5 Commissioner Roupe suggested that a formal stipulation should be considered as the City may be setting a precedent by stating that this project conforms to the City’s General and Hillside Specific Plans. Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin clarified that tonight’s request reflects just 11 acres of the entire 120 acre family holding. They might consider a deed restriction on those 11 acres tonight but not the entire 120 acres. The Garrods had previously expressed reluctance to do so. Commissioner Garakani sought clarification that there are two homes existing on this 11 acres with the proposal to construct and additional three units. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:42 p.m. Mr. Bruce Jensen, 12679 Carneysville, Saratoga: • Expressed his support of this proposal. Ms. Deborah Lang, 13172 Montrose Street, Saratoga: • Expressed her support of this proposal. • Pointed out the long-standing commitment to the community demonstrated by the Garrod/Cooper Family. • Said that they represent a part of the past and an ability to maintain farming in the area. • Identified herself as a 4H leader of a group with 90 youth members. • Stated her support for the efforts to maintain the farm operation by providing affordable living units for its employees. Mr. Vince Garrod, Property Owner/Applicant: • Informed the Commission that the Williamson Act contracts last 10 years but are renewed automatically each year for an additional 10-year period. They plan to continue with the Contract and continue the family use of the land for agricultural uses as long as it is economically feasible to do so. • Stated that in 2001, they had 18,000 riders on their trails. • Said that they are also in the fruit business. The community likes grapes and the wine business. • Asked for the Commission’s support to allow them to continue their operations. Commissioner Zutshi asked for clarification from Attorney O’Laughlin on the Williamson Act renewal process. Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin said that the Act works just as Mr. Garrod described. It is renewed annually. Additionally, the Williamson Act Contract is not easy to cancel and, if cancelled, that cancellation is not effective for 10 years. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that if back taxes are paid, the Williamson Act Contract can be cancelled. Reminded that the purpose of the Act is to lower property taxes for farmland. Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin said that the Garrods are not proposing the cancellation of their Williamson Act Contract. Commissioner Garakani questioned if some sort of guarantee not to cancel can be offered. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 6 Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin said that it is hard to guarantee forever. Added that the Williamson Act first passed in 1971. Director Tom Sullivan proposed that a Condition can be imposed that if any further urbanization of this 120 acres occurs, the owners will be required to process an Annexation of their property into the City of Saratoga’s jurisdiction. Chair Barry questioned whether the applicant makes this request for Annexation or the City. Commissioner Roupe sought clarification regarding what Director Sullivan means by the urbanization of the property and whether that means the potential of development of the property. Director Tom Sullivan said that if any further urbanization is proposed, this property should be within the City of Saratoga rather than within County jurisdiction. An agreement to that effect can be processed. Attorney Peggy O’Laughlin said that this possible Condition can be discussed. With the trigger being the cancellation of the Williamson Act, this Condition could be appropriate. Commissioner Roupe asked who initiates this action. Director Tom Sullivan advised that the City, Applicant and County would do it together. The applicants are here today at the request of the County. Chair Barry asked if Attorney O’Laughlin finds this proposal to reflect the family’s willingness. Attorney O’Laughlin replied that they can look into the idea. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 8:00 p.m. Commissioner Hunter: • Stated her support for Alternative 1. • Said that the Cooper/Garrod family is an extraordinary family that has been here for more than 100 years. • Said that she is grateful for the 120 acres they have already deeded to Open Space. • Said that they have helped make Saratoga what it is today. • Said that the City can be flexible as there is room here to accommodate this request. • Asked staff to draft a Resolution of approval. Commissioner Roupe: • Said that he shares Commissioner Hunter’s view and is also in support of Alternative 1. • Stated that the Commission does have the discretion to support this request. • Pointed out that there is ambiguity in the General Plan with the language reading “preferred” rather than absolute. • Said he is in favor but also intrigued by the proposed Condition to require Annexation if the land comes out of the Williamson Act Contract. This Condition makes sense. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 7 Commissioner Jackman: • Agreed. • Said that this land is important to the history of Saratoga. • Pointed out that the Housing Element demonstrates how difficult affordable housing is to develop. • Supported Alternative 1. • Declared that she would like to see this family farm continue for another 100 years. Commissioner Zutshi: • Stated her support for Alternative 1 with the added Condition requiring Annexation in the event that the Williamson Act Contract is discontinued. Commissioner Garakani: • Stated his support for Alternative 1. • Agreed with the need for housing for agricultural uses. • Supported the Annexation requirement. Director Sullivan said that staff would bring back the Resolution. Chair Barry: • Stated that while the family has farmed this land for 100 plus years, the Commission has to consider that the property may have to be split in the future. • Agrees that the Commission has the discretion to approve this request. • Thanked the family and their attorney and encouraged them to work with the Community Development Director. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 2 DR-01-021, V-010-012 & BSA-01-002, HUSTED, Kittridge Road: Request for Design Review and Building Site Approval to construct a two-story craftsman style, single-family residence on a vacant lot. The floor area of the proposed residence and attached two-car garage is 4,810 square feet. The maximum height of the residence will be 26 feet. The site is zoned Hillside Residential (H-R). A variance is requested in order to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet. An exception is also requested to exceed one thousand cubic yards of cut and fill allowed in the H-R Zone. (OOSTERHOUS) THIS ITEM IS REQUESTED TO BE CONTINUED Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report: • Informed the Commission that as there are many issues still to be addressed, this item will be renoticed to a future meeting date. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 3 UP-01-018 (381-01-026) AUGUST PARTNERS II, LLC; DR. KATHLEEN BAN, DDS (tenant), 12132 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road: Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to establish a dental Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 8 office in an existing 1,440 square foot office space in the Park Saratoga Center. The office space is located in the Visitor Commercial (C-V) zoning district. (VASUDEVAN) Planner Lata Vasudevan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking approval to establish a general dental practice within a 1,440 square foot office within a Visitor Commercial (C-V) zoning district. This use requires a Use Permit from the Planning Commission. • Stated that the space has been vacant for more than one year. It is easily visible, located close to the main entrance. This use will be beneficial to the Center. • Said that there are 195 parking spaces available. Staff finds parking to be sufficient as this use is not intensifying the former use, a hair salon. Both uses have the same parking requirement. • Informed that necessary findings can be made to recommend approval. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:12 p.m. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:12 p.m. Commissioner Roupe expressed his endorsement since the proposal meets all requirements. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jackman, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (UP-01-018) to allow the establishment of a dental office at 12132 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road: AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Kurasch ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that there is a 15-day appeal period. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 4 DR-01-031 & UP-01-017 (397-05-091) – SAN FILIPPO, Sobey Road: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 4,981 square foot two-story residence with 608 square foot basement and 528 square foot cabana on a vacant lot. The Use Permit is necessary to allow the cabana to be 15 feet in height. The maximum height of the residence will be 26 feet. The site is 43,042 square feet and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review approval for a 4,500 square foot, two-story residence with a 600 square foot basement, 500 square foot two-car garage and 500 square foot cabana on a vacant lot. Additionally, a Use Permit is required to allow the cabana at 15 feet in height. Without a Use Permit, the height would be limited to 12 feet. • Informed that this project has a history, having come before the Commission and Council before. That proposal was denied. • Said that this is a new application with changes that now meet the five design policies. It will follow the contours of the slope; the landscaping plan includes native trees and shrubs and various Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 9 materials to soften the structure as well as protect privacy for the neighbors; varying roof lines break the elevation; the structure meets design for energy efficiency. The use of solar panels as alternative energy to heat the pool and provide radiant floor heating. • Described the color palette as being dark tan. • Said that the cabana is proposed at 15 feet in height. Zoning allows 12 feet or up to 15 with Planning Commission approval if two findings can be made. One required finding is that the increased height is necessary for architectural compatibility. The second is that the proposal is compatible with the existing neighborhood. Staff finds that these two findings can be made in this case. • Recommended approval. • Advised that the neighbor that had previously expressed concerns is now in support of this revised plan. Commissioner Roupe asked if this application has received partial credit for use of pervious materials. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied that they have just a small portion that received credit. The applicant is using the most pervious material available. To receive an additional credit a percolation test would be required. The applicant can do this later. Chair Barry asked staff to identify this material that is the most pervious available. Associate Planner John Livingstone promised to provide samples to the Commission in the future. Commissioner Roupe said that this sample is not necessary as part of this application. Chair Barry agreed but added that it would help with future projects. Commissioner Jackman asked if a side view drawing of the cabana is available. Commissioner Roupe pointed it out to Commissioner Jackman. He added that there appears to be a substantial slope with a 16-foot drop and asked whether a retaining wall is necessary that will require a variance. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied that there are no retaining walls required that exceed Code allowances. Commissioner Roupe asked if there would be plantings to buffer the side of the house. Associate Planner John Livingstone replied that there would be a fairly dense landscaping plan. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Ms. Grace San Filippo, Applicant, Sobey Road, Saratoga: • Said that she is hoping for approval this evening. • Advised that her architect and contractor are available for questions. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 10 Commissioner Roupe expressed appreciation for the effort to substantially change this project to address the concerns of the Commission. The applicant has found an middle ground. Thanked Ms. San Filippo for her efforts. Commissioner Garakani asked about the glass blocks and solar panels. Mr. Maurice Camargo, Project Architect: • Said that the glass blocks are part of a floor system to allow light into the lower floor. • Said that the solar panels are located on the south facing flat roof area that will be screened by a parapet. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Camargo if the solar system will provide electricity or radiant heat, since the same panel cannot serve both functions. Mr. Maurice replied that these are heat-collecting panels and not electricity generating. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 8:30 p.m. Commissioner Roupe: • Stated that this new proposal represents a substantial improvement. • Stressed that the applicant’s work with the neighbor was important. • Said that the new proposal has addressed the bulk and mass issues, with the rearrangement of the structure’s second floor. • Said that a remarkable job has been done in toning down this home. While it will still be imposing since it is on a hill, it also fits within the surrounding community quite nicely. • Stated that the story poles were quite helpful and in this case were a good idea. Commissioner Jackman: • Expressed that she is pleased with the redesign. It fits better. • Agreed that installation of the story poles really told a story. • Said that this home will be a nice addition to the community. Commissioner Roupe: • Added that the step down of the retaining wall helps keep it from being a monolithic structure. A nice job was done in addressing a difficult problem. Commissioner Garakani asked for the maximum retaining wall height for this project. Commissioner Roupe replied five feet. Mr. Maurice Camargo clarified that the highest point is actually four feet and that a planter area is also incorporated. Commissioner Garakani asked Mr. Camargo if there are plans to install vegetation. Mr. Maurice Camargo replied that the area will be fully landscaped. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 11 Commissioner Hunter said that the house looks fine and is very nice. Commissioner Barry: • Agreed with the comments made by Commissioners Roupe and Jackman. • Said that this is a really nice design and that she is pleased with the changes. • Said that she thinks Ms. San Filippo will really like this house and that she is glad the issues with the neighbors were resolved. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission approved DR-01-031 & UP-01-017 to allow the construction of a new 4,981 square foot, two-story residence (maximum height of 26 feet) with a 608 square foot basement and 528 square foot cabana (maximum height of 15 feet) on property located on Sobey Road: AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Kurasch ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that there is a 15-day appeal period. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 5 DR-01-043 (397-28-005) – FITT, 20461 Walnut Avenue: Request for Design Review approval to add 360 square feet to the first floor, 334 square feet to the second floor and 360 square feet to the basement of the existing 1,800 square foot dwelling. Maximum height of the structure will be 24 feet. The 7,658 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. (SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking approval for a 360 square foot first floor addition, 334 square foot second-story addition and 360 square foot basement to an existing home that was constructed in 1906. • Said that the Heritage Preservation Commission researched the list and Ordinance and Walnut was not listed. Staff will be working with the Heritage Preservation Commission to add to the Historic Resources Inventory. • Stated that the addition will match the existing dwelling. A new roof will be installed. Fire had no requirements. Public Works had no requirements. • Said that new windows will be included on the second story on the south, north and west elevations. There are no privacy impacts with the windows on the south and north elevations. The windows on the west elevation could have privacy impacts. Staff is recommending the use of either opaque or translucent glass on the west elevation windows to ensure privacy. • Said that staff is pleased with the design. Consideration of a garage modification had been considered. However, to do so would destroy the existing yard. It was decided to leave the garage alone. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Zutshi asked where the two-foot setbacks are located. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 12 Director Tom Sullivan replied only for the garage. Commissioner Roupe asked if the two-car requirement is being waived for this addition. Director Tom Sullivan said that since the applicant is not adding 50 percent or more to the home, they are not triggering the requirement for compliance with the provision of a two-car garage. Commissioner Hunter: • Advised that it has been the practice of the City to forward any homes constructed prior to 1950 to the Heritage Preservation Board for review. • Said that she is uncertain when that practice was stopped. • Declared that this is a fabulous 1905 home. • Asked what list Director Sullivan refers. Director Tom Sullivan replied that the Municipal Code sets out the duties and responsibilities and how heritage structures are determined. Staff and the Commission must follow the Code or change it. Commissioner Hunter stated her hope that the list gets updated soon. Director Tom Sullivan assured that it is his intention to have staff update the list. Chair Barry suggested that this matter, as far as potentially changing Code, could be deferred to later in the agenda under Commission Sub-Committee Reports. Commissioner Hunter said that she is grateful for the care the Planning Commission takes in their consideration of each application. It is just as careful as the Heritage Preservation Commission. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5 at 8:50 p.m. Ms. Elsbeth Newfield, Project Architect, 119 Bryan Street, Palo Alto: • Said that she would be available to address any technical questions. Commissioner Roupe asked Ms. Newfield if she could incorporate opaque or translucent glass in the windows on the west elevation. Ms. Karen Fitt, Applicant, 20461 Walnut Avenue, Saratoga: • Agreed that she does not want to look into her neighbor’s property. • Pointed out that the windowsill is located at the four-foot level. Commissioner Jackman asked about concerns raised on the site visit regarding the dormer height in relation to the chimney. Ms. Karen Fitt replied that they would be dropping the height of the dormer. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5 at 8:52 p.m. Commissioner Garakani stated that this project looks good. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 13 Commissioner Roupe said that it is a good design that fits into its neighborhood. Said that it is important to ensure the privacy with the bedroom windows and asked staff to work with the applicant on that issue. Director Sullivan said that he would amend Item 5 in the Resolution. Commissioner Hunter said that this is a wonderful house now and will also be wonderful with this addition. Suggested that the current colors look marvelous and that the applicant should consider keeping it the same color. Chair Barry agreed that this will be charming and that the design is appropriate and nice. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jackman, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission approved DR-01-043 to allow an addition to a home at 20461 Walnut Avenue, with the amendment to Condition 5 regarding the west windows on the second floor. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Kurasch ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that there is a 15-day appeal period. Chair Barry pointed out that she noticed a lot of different front setbacks along Walnut. Director Tom Sullivan said that in some cities, it is required that front setbacks be staggered. *** DIRECTOR ITEMS Planning Commission Mission Statement: Director Sullivan provided a second draft of the Commission’s mission statement for review. Commissioner Roupe said that this is a big improvement and that he liked it. Commissioner Garakani said that it looks good. Chair Barry said that Commissioner Kurasch had wanted to use the term “shared.” Other than that, she is happy with the draft. Commissioner Roupe asked whether goals and objectives will be developed down the road. Director Sullivan said that this finishes the exercise for now. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 14 Commissioner Hunter said that many people do not know what the Planning Commission does or how it is appointed. Director Sullivan said that he has prepared a document for the City Clerk to distribute. Promised to provide a copy to the Commission. Chair Barry asked about the status of the Trail Access. Director Sullivan said that he met with Mr. Durland and that work on the Trail Access is proceeding. Commissioner Hunter advised that the Heritage Preservation Commission is sponsoring “A walk through the mustard.” The date is Sunday, February 10, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. and will begin at the Warner Hutton House. Director Sullivan asked for a voice vote on the mission statement. Motion: By consensus, the Commission adopted the mission statement for the Planning Commission. (6-0-1; Commissioner Kurasch was absent) COMMISSION ITEMS Planning Commission Subcommittees Ms. Lata Vasudevan, Planner: • Provided a brief overview on the Basement Policies Subcommittee, led by Commissioner Jackman. • Said that the basic issues included the definition of a light well, clarification of the current definition of a basement. • Read the draft definition of a light well into the record. Commissioner Roupe said that it is important to determine the desirable horizontal distance from the base to grade. Commissioner Garakani said that lots of the basements that come before the Commission include living space. Said why not give these rooms light by limiting to four feet. Director Sullivan pointed out that the current restriction is three feet or else the basement must be counted as floor area and becomes a floor instead of a basement. Chair Barry suggested that basements can help the City achieve its Fair Housing Allotment by creating garden level units as BMR units. Director Sullivan said that the City will need to adopt a rewritten Secondary Dwelling Ordinance by July 2002 as part of the Housing Element Update. Commissioner Jackman suggested leaving the subject of BMR units in the Housing Element instead of within the Basement Guidelines. Said that she wants simple guidelines. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 15 Commissioner Garakani said that basements are an enhancement for the whole community and represent a proper use of land. Commissioner Jackman: • Cautioned that basements can also lead to density problems. • Added that another provision of their draft policies is the requirement that a basement fit beneath the footprint of the main structure and be located no more than 10 feet from any adjacent property line. Commissioner Roupe asked if basement space can be included beneath an attached garage. Commissioner Jackman replied yes. Commissioner Roupe suggested a modification that no excavation occur within six feet of an adjacent property. Director Sullivan said that a Geotechnical Report can be required. Planner Lata Vasudevan clarified that a 10 foot minimum is proposed because sometimes setback requirements are less than 10 feet. Commissioner Garakani questioned the restriction to 10 feet as long as a Geotechnical Report says that it can be safely done. Commissioner Jackman asked staff for the smallest setback. Director Sullivan replied six feet. Commissioner Garakani pointed out that basements cost more than twice as much to construct as above ground construction. Commissioner Hunter stated that basements are really smart and wonderful to have. They represent an intelligent use of land. Commissioner Roupe said that there is no reason to object to basement space under a cabana. Commissioner Jackman suggested eliminating Requirement No. 5. Commissioner Zutshi asked if there would be different standards for Hillside District basements. Director Sullivan said that at one of his previous cities, there was an impact fee imposed for hauling excessive cut from a site, beyond an established amount, to cover the cost of wear and tear on City roadways. Commissioner Roupe suggested a requirement to designate where the cut is going. Director Sullivan said that it is the policy to prescribe what route has to be used for removal of cut at least through the City’s jurisdiction. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2002 Page 16 Commissioner Garakani proposed incentives for energy efficient homes. Commissioner Jackman pointed out that basement space is actually the most energy efficient space in a house. Chair Barry said that encouraging active solar is a good idea. She commended Commissioner Jackman and Lata Vasudevan for their work on these basement guidelines. Commissioner Roupe asked for clarification on the Joint Planning Commission/Council Session. Director Sullivan advised that the date is Tuesday, January 22nd. Commissioner Hunter advised that she will be out of town and cannot attend. Chair Barry advised that she will be out for the February 13th Planning Commission meeting. COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communication Items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Chair Barry adjourned the meeting at 9:55 p.m. to the next regular meeting set for Wednesday, January 23, 2002, to begin at 7 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk