Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-26-2001 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Barry called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Garakani, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi Absent: Commissioners Hunter and Jackman Staff: Director Tom Sullivan, Associate Planner John Livingstone, Planner Allison Knapp and Planner Christy Oosterhous APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Regular Meeting of September 12, 2001. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Kurasch, the regular Planning Commission minutes of September 12, 2001, were approved as submitted. AYES:Garakani, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter and Jackman ABSTAIN; Barry ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on September 20, 2001. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET Director Sullivan advised that technical corrections to Items 3 and 5 would be provided during the respective staff reports. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no consent calendar items. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 1 DR-01-013, V-01-013 & AS-01-001 (397-43-001 & 003) – JAIN, 18630 Allendale: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new single-story 6,850 square foot residence and sport court. The Variance is to construct the sport court within the side yard setback. Maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The 93,175 (net) square foot lot is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (KNAPP) (CONTINUED FROM 9/12/01) At this time, Commissioner Kurasch recused herself from consideration of this item as she received a copy of the public hearing notice for this project. She left the dais to sit in the audience. Ms. Allison Knapp, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Began her report by changing a number on page four of the staff report depicting the first floor square footage within a table as being 5,842 square feet and striking the incorrect figure of 5,689. The grand total of 6,850 is in fact correct. • Explained that this home is considered a single-story structure per the rules of the UBC despite the proposed roof deck space and the 26-foot height. In order for the roof deck to count as a second story, there would have to be a roof overhead. However, staff is indeed recommending denial of the proposed roof deck. • Pointed out that Code prevents more than one woodburning fireplace. This home will not have more than one. Commissioner Roupe asked staff how it would interpret issues such as limitations on woodburning fireplaces in the future. Director Sullivan advised that if a project is compliant as proposed, issues such as allowable woodburning versus gas fireplaces will not be addressed nor will specific Municipal Codes be stated within the Conditions of Approval. If, however, there is a problem with the proposal, those issues will be clarified through appropriate Conditions. Ms. Allison Knapp, Planner, continued with her presentation: • Advised that there is a question about the proposal for a six-foot masonry wall as outlined on page 11 of the staff report. • Said that the applicants have met with two neighbors who had concerns about noise impacts from the tennis court. As a result, an agreement was reached to install the six-foot masonry wall. • Said that staff is recommending approval of this residence without the deck feature. Staff finds that there is not enough privacy and that the deck is not architecturally compatible. Staff suggests that the applicant be instructed to bring revised plans back to the Community Development Director, eliminating the stairs to the deck area and reducing the height of the structure by a couple of feet. • Reminded that this parcel was split in 1998 with a separate parcel situated right in front of this subject parcel. A lot line adjustment is currently underway to remerge the lots. • Pointed out that the Variance to allow the tennis court is needed in order to protect trees and the creek. Staff is in support of this Variance to allow the sport court. Commissioner Zutshi inquired if the deck area is counted in the total FAR. Ms. Allison Knapp replied yes. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 3 Commissioner Roupe expressed concern that within the staff report (page 5) an evergreen vine is proposed along the tennis court wall while on page 17 the more vague term of evergreen landscaping is mentioned. Suggested that if the vine is what is desired, that fact should be clearly stated in the Resolution. Ms. Allison Knapp advised that she was deliberately vague so as not to exclude better options, such as a shrub, should all parties find some other type of evergreen vegetation preferable to a vine. Chair Barry asked if this needs to be part of the approval. Ms. Allison Knapp replied yes. Chair Barry extended her appreciation to staff, the applicant and neighbors for meeting together to work out issues. Advised that the Planning Commission advocates such meetings and is looking to institute a policy requiring such interactions early into a development application. Mr. Jim Morelan, Project Architect: • Advised that the property owners are present, as are the general contractor and neighbors. • Pointed out an error on Page 13, reading 15 feet east of the property line when it should read 10 feet. • Stated that they accept all Conditions of Approval and that he is available for any questions from the Commission. • Provided an alternative plan for the deck feature, which would reduce the deck to 10 feet by 11 feet, six inches, tucked into the roof on three sides with the fourth side bounded by a patio door. • Advised that the purpose of this deck space is to look out at views of the mountains or the moonlight. There is no living spaces or views sheds impacted by this deck. It is well concealed and this alternative proposal is a good compromise to any concerns, • Asked the Commission to reconsider this alternative and allow them to retain a roof deck space. Chair Barry asked for the color board. Mr. Jim Morelan advised that the color board was submitted to the Planning Department. Added that they propose a basic clay tile roof with a white stucco exterior. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:15 p.m. Ms. Martha J. Costa, 18603 Ravenwood Drive, Saratoga: • Expressed concern over potential noise from the tennis court. • Said that she believes the proposed masonry fence will help alleviate noise from the tennis court. Commissioner Roupe disagreed, stating that the wall is an inviting backboard for hitting tennis balls and could actually increase noise impacts. However, putting screening vegetation in front of the wall would prevent those impacts. Commissioner Garakani agreed that vegetation would be the best solution and stated that the tennis court would most likely be used occasionally rather than daily. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 4 Commissioner Zutshi said that while on the site visit she could hear the traffic from Allendale and added that any noise from tennis would be less intrusive than the existing noise from traffic. Chair Barry agreed that there is experience with sound walls actually making things worse rather than better. Said that tree screening seems to be much more effective at muffling noise. Ms. Martha J. Costa agreed that she would be happy to consider landscape screening. Commissioner Roupe suggested that this detail be worked out further with staff, the applicant and neighbors. Mr. James Laflin, left side neighbor: • Said that his only concern has been the proposed tennis court and that seems to be okay at this point. • Said that it is important to he and his wife that nothing is done to screen the sun onto their property as they cultivate irises and roses and they need the sun. • Asked that dust control be provided during construction as his wife suffers from allergies that would be impacted from excessive dust. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Laflin if he is in support of the 10-foot high tennis court fence. Mr. James Laflin said yes. Commissioner Roupe said that the fence could be reduced to six feet instead and that a condition can be added that prohibits screening vines on the shared property line. Mr. James Laflin said that he has no problem with the fence height as long as the sun gets through to his yard. Mr. Jim Morelan: • Agreed that it might be best not to utilize a masonry wall and said that they are open to planting additional landscaping as necessary. • Added that plans are already in place to install four redwood trees immediately behind the tennis court. • Said that while the owner prefers a 10-foot fence for the tennis court, they are willing to eliminate any vines on the fence adjacent to the Laflins’property. This is a good compromise. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:35 p.m. Commissioner Zutshi said that it appears that there is no opposition to the roof deck from the neighbors and that she can support the compromise design. Commissioner Roupe agreed that the modified deck design is sensitive to the neighbors and that he will support it as long as it is not obtrusive. Commissioner Garakani: • Asked that the applicant plant trees in the line of site to assure the neighbor’s privacy. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 5 • Suggested that for the tennis court a six-foot fence with netting above to catch tennis balls could be installed. • Added that the masonry wall could be placed in front of the existing wall at the property line. Commissioner Roupe said that the applicant should work these details out with staff. Added that a Condition of Approval should be incorporated that states that efforts should be made to mitigate noise impacts from the tennis court. Chair Barry said that an administrative approval can be required to finalize the details of the fencing for the tennis court. Director Sullivan pointed out that the issue of deck and privacy issues are included in the staff review. Chair Barry declared that she is not crazy about cement tile roof material, finding it to be monotone and monochromatic as well as pretty bright in color. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that the color copy of the roofing sample is not an accurate color representation. Chair Barry said that she would still rather see a Condition requiring a more subdued roof tile color or one with more variation in color. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, the Planning Commission approved V-01-013 with the added condition that the applicant, staff and neighbors work together on the issue of deadening sound to the rear and that screening not have evergreen vines that block sun on the adjacent property. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter and Jackman ABSTAIN; Kurasch Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, the Planning Commission approved DR-01-013 and AS-01-001 to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property located at 18630 Allendale with the added conditions: • The terrace structure be modified as presented by the Architect; • That landscaping along the line of site be considered and installed; • That water trucks be used to control dust during construction; and • That the roof tiles be change to a more subdued color and/or a material with more variation in color. T • That the applicant, staff and neighbors work together on the issue of deadening sound to the rear and that screening not have evergreen vines that block sun on the adjacent (Laflin) property. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter and Jackman ABSTAIN; Kurasch Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 6 Chair Barry advised that there is a 15-day appeal period before this action is final. Commissioner Kurasch returned to the dais following the completion of Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:47 p.m. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 2 SD-99-003(A) & GPA-00-001(A) (APN’s 517-13-018, 517-13-19, 517-12-001) SOBRATO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, 14800 Bohlman Road (site of the former Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur): Request to amend Condition No 24 (fence enclosure and grading issues) of Resolution SD-99-003, to adopt Resolution GPA-00-00(A) formalizing the previous recommendation that the City Council amend the General Plan Land Use Map designation from Quasi-Public Facilities to Very Low Density Residential and to replace the Conditions of Approval (No. 39a-j, 40 and 41) in the City Geologist Section of Resolution No. SD-99-003 with updated language from the City Geologist. (SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: • Pointed out that the language in the adopted Resolutions for this project tied hands, requiring a 10- foot pedestrian easement for a total of 25 feet. It is requested that the pedestrian portion of this easement be removed from the required easement. Said that this pedestrian easement is from a public street to a private courtyard and is therefore not appropriate. There is no place to go other than onto private property. In this case, it makes sense not to require that pedestrian access. • Said that the City Geologist’s Conditions are now ready to be added. • Said that staff is proposing language for Condition 24 (Grading and Fence Enclosure) that lets the applicant know the target for grading. • Informed that Council would consider the Final Map and General Plan Amendments soon and that the Sobrato house is pending future Planning Commission review. Commissioner Kurasch stated that tightening up the requirements was the intent of the Planning Commission actions. Said that the functional area can be fenced while the rest of the area is to be left unfenced. Director Sullivan agreed and pointed out that the fenced area is just the pool area. However, this area is larger that the allowable 4,000 square feet. Added that the grounds immediately around the house are not fenced in. While this area is not subject to scenic easement, a vast majority of the property is in the scenic easement. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:54 p.m. Mr. John Sobrato, Applicant, said that he is available for any questions. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:55 p.m. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 7 Commissioner Kurasch said that a pedestrian easement provides a way to connect but that she is willing to accept the elimination of that requirement. Added that she is pleased and thankful that the intent of the Commission is being met. Chair Barry concurred with Commissioner Kurasch and stated that the protection of the scenic easement is vital. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, the Commission approved SD-00-003(A) and GPA-00-001(A) in relation to property located at 14800 Bohlman Road. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi. NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter and Jackman ABSTAIN: None *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 3 DR-01-026 & BSE-01-027 (397-24-017) – Sparacino, 14320 Lutheria Way: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new single-story 3,442 square foot residence, 936 square foot attached four-car garage and 1,568 square foot basement. The maximum height of the residence would be 20 feet. The 20,690 square foot lot is located in the R-1-20,000 zone district. (OOSTERHOUS) Ms. Christy Oosterhous, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Provided clarification to the staff report in that the setbacks both meet and exceed required setbacks. • Advised that the Design Review application is for the construction of a 4,378 square foot, one- story residence with a four-car garage, basement and a maximum height of 20 feet. The project site is 21,000 square feet and located within the R-1-20,000 zone. • Described the building materials as gray plaster finish, carriage style garage door, white windows, black accents for the front door. • Informed that the project meets all Design Review findings and staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Zutshi expressed concern regarding the FAR. Ms. Christy Oosterhous pointed out that the FAR totals 3,442 plus the garage. Added that the building footprint is different from FAR. Chair Barry asked for clarification that the 4,378 square foot total is accurate. Ms. Christy Oosterhous replied yes. Commissioner Garakani asked about the bay window. Director Sullivan advised that if there is no foundation below a bay window, that area is not counted within the square footage. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 8 Commissioner Roupe pointed out that light wells are counted in square footage and asked staff about the fireplaces included on the plans, pointing out that it is not noted whether they are wood or gas. Ms. Christy Oosterhous advised that there will be one wood and two gas fireplaces. Commissioner Roupe asked staff to condition only one woodburing fireplace. Ms. Christy Oosterhous reminded that Ordinance will only permit one woodburning fireplace and assured that the plans will clearly label the one woodburning and two gas fireplaces. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:05 p.m. Mr. Chris Spaulding, Architect: • Clarified that there will be but one woodburning fireplace and two gas. Commissioner Garakani pointed out that there appears to be but one chimney. Mr. Chris Spaulding said that there will be one decorative chimney for the gas fireplace in the living room. The gas fireplace in the master bedroom will have a direct vent. Admitted that he had left the chimney for the woodburning fireplace in the family room off of his plans in error. Commissioner Kurasch asked to see the materials board. Mr. Chris Spaulding said that the plaster would be a medium-dark but warm gray, with white trim and black accents on the front door. The roofing will be composition shingle in charcoal gray. Commissioner Garakani asked if any discussions have been held with the neighbors. Mr. Chris Spaulding replied no. Chair Barry asked Mr. Spaulding if there is any particularly reason why efforts were not made to interact with the neighbors. Mr. Spaulding replied that with single-story residences there are usually no privacy or shadow issues and that they do not expect that this home will bother anyone. Director Sullivan pointed out that this project is just a couple of feet too tall to be approved through an Administrative Review. Commissioner Roupe asked why it could not be approved through an Administrative Review. Director Sullivan replied that the 20-foot height was 2-foot higher than the 18-foot height that can be approved through an Administrative Review. Mr. Chris Spaulding: • Said that he had shown drawings of the home at both 18 and 20-foot heights. His client preferred the appearance of the residence at a 20-foot height and was willing to go through the necessary Planning Commission review process in order to obtain approvals for that design. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 9 • Questioned Condition 3. • Pointed out that typically only the site survey needs to be stamped by a civil engineer and not the house plans. Director Sullivan agreed that this Condition could be adjusted appropriately. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:14 p.m. Commissioner Roupe: • Said that he expects the one woodburning fireplace to be designated on the plans. • Declared that in no way is any fencing beyond that allowed under Ordinance approved for this site. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Garakani, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission granted a Design Review approval to allow the construction of a new 3,442 square residence, 936 square foot attached four-car garage and 1,568 square foot basement on property located at 14320 Lutheria Way, with the clarification that only one woodburning fireplace is permitted and that fact should be depicted on the plans. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi. NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter and Jackman ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that there is a 15-day appeal period before this action is final. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 4 UP-01-011 (398-12-019) PROLIFIC OVEN BAKERY & COFFEE HOUSE, 18832 Cox Avenue: Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to allow interior and exterior seating to allow the onsite consumption of food at the existing establishment. The site is located in the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) Mr. John Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Informed that the applicant seeks approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the on-site consumption of food at an existing bakery with the installation of 26 seats inside and 26 seats outside to accommodate the on-site consumption of food. • Advised that this change creates a restaurant use (in-house consumption) versus a retail use (sold for off-site consumption). • Said that the proposed furnishings will be wrought iron. • Stated that the parking provided at the Quito Village Shopping Center is more than required for straight retail and that plenty of parking is available to accommodate this proposal. • Pointed out that this change will create a greater presence and increase foot traffic and will serve as a compliment to the center’s appearance. • Stated that staff is recommending approval. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 10 Commissioner Kurasch asked what arrangements will be made to bus tables and whether trash receptacles will be provided. Mr. John Livingstone advised that there is a Condition to keep trash and spills off of the concrete. Commissioner Roupe: • Stressed the need to ensure the maintenance of the outdoor area, including regular power washing of the concrete. • Said that it is important to have a strong Condition of Approval requiring this maintenance and to monitor carefully. Director Sullivan agreed and pointed out that Code Enforcement is now fully staffed and one of their tasks is to monitor and enforce these types of Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Kurasch asked if staff had received any objections to this proposal. Mr. John Livingstone replied no. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 8:24 p.m. Mr. Rick Anderson, 390 La Questa Drive, Santa Cruz: • Identified himself as a representative for the business owner and made himself available for any questions. Commissioner Zutshi stated her concern that the number of tables outdoors seems excessive and that they might not fit in the space available. Asked Mr. Anderson how much area per table is required to allow adequate circulation. Mr. Rick Anderson said that the drawing is out of scale but that if the proposed number of tables do not function and appears too congested, they can take one out. Commissioner Kurasch asked about pedestrian access. Mr. Rick Anderson assured that there is sufficient pedestrian access around the exterior seating area. Chair Barry sought clarification that the Commission is to approve the specific number of tables allowed. Director Sullivan suggested that the Commission approve a “not to exceed” number of tables. If necessary, the applicants can install fewer. Commissioner Zutshi asked if the doors open outwards and if so whether the tables proposed for near the doors might be in the way of the doors’ operation. Mr. Rick Anderson said that the doors do open outward. Pointed out that the table near the door is a smaller two person table. Commissioner Kurasch asked if the existing planter would need to be relocated. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 11 Mr. Rick Anderson replied yes. Commissioner Garakani said that it would be possible to move the planter elsewhere on site. Commissioner Zutshi said that she liked the furniture and that it looks nice, especially the smaller tables that seat two. Chair Barry wondered if the Commission should suggest no tables by the door. Commissioner Zutshi pointed out that the owner will have the liability and if they feel it is safe to place a table by the door they should be allowed to do so. Mr. Rick Anderson said that they believe placing a table near the door will be safe. Commissioner Roupe asked if there is already a Use Permit for this restaurant use already under way. Mr. Rick Anderson replied that they hope to obtain the necessary approval this evening. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Anderson how long they have operated without the necessary permit. Mr. Rick Anderson replied a few moths, adding that they had not believed the change in use would be a problem. Once the owner was contacted and told of the need for a Use Permit, he applied immediately. Director Sullivan advised that the business was undergoing Code Enforcement for sandwich board signs when it was determined that the use had changed in such a way as to necessitate a Use Permit. Commissioner Roupe stressed the importance of enforcing Codes. Mr. Rick Anderson agreed and stated that there was a bakery in this location prior to Mr. Chan and they had erroneously assumed that it would be no problem. Assured that they did not deliberately break City rules. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 8:30 p.m. Commissioner Roupe said that he supports a “not to exceed” limitation on tables but that he does not want to specify the specific location of the tables. Asked staff for direction on how to structure the approval. Director Sullivan said that the Commission should simply pick the number of tables, which will serve as the basis for enforcement. Commissioner Kurasch: • Stated that she is comfortable with 26 seats indoors but that she is more comfortable with 22 seats outdoors with no more than 7 tables, 4 large and 3 small. • Declared that assumptions are dangerous in business and that she hopes others heed the rules. • Added that the rules are important for owners and for the safety of the public. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 12 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Kurasch, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission granted a Conditional Use Permit to allow interior and exterior seating for onsite consumption of food at the Prolific Oven Bakery & Coffee House on property located at 18832 Cox Avenue with indoor seating not to exceed 26 and outdoor seating not to exceed 22. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi. NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter and Jackman ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that there is a 15-day appeal period before this action is final. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 5 DR-01-029 (503-26-040) – COUCH, 14440 Esterlee Avenue: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new two-story 2,691 square foot residence, 600 square foot attached two-car garage and a 1,377 square foot basement. The maximum height of the residence would be 24 feet. The 12,448 square foot lot is located in the R-1-10,000 zone district. (OOSTERHOUS) Ms. Christy Oosterhous, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the application is for a Design Review approval to allow construction of a 3,290 square foot, two-story residence including a two-story garage, basement and 24-foot maximum height. • Stated that proposed materials include sage horizontal wood siding with light green fish scale shingles and white trim. The architectural style is Prairie style. • Informed that staff had two concerns view sheds and privacy. However, staff has determined that view sheds are not adversely impacted. In fact, the adjacent property owner is in support of this application and finds that the proposal will not adversely impact his property. Therefore, staff is recommending approval with the added Condition of Approval that existing playground equipment and hot tub are brought into compliance with Ordinance prior to obtaining Building permits. Commissioner Kurasch said that the staff report states that there are privacy issue concerns and that staff did not find that the project complies with all policies. Questioned staff’s recommendation for approval this evening. Ms. Christy Oosterhous advised that the site visit clarified some issues as did hearing from the neighbor who is satisfied that there are no privacy impacts. Advised that the applicant’s installation of balloons helped assess the lack of impact. All unanswered questions were laid to rest at the site visit, allowing staff to recommend approval. Commissioner Kurasch asked if the driveway wrapping around is a requirement of Fire for turnaround purposes. Ms. Christy Oosterhous said she would defer to the architect on that matter. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 13 Commissioner Roupe pointed out that the fireplaces are not identified as wood versus gas. Ms. Christy Oosterhous said that she is happy to require that the fireplaces be properly labeled on the plans. Chair Barry asked about the neighbor to the rear of this site. Ms. Christy Oosterhous advised that Mr. Jacklyn is the property owner that the balcony would face and he provided no comments in opposition. Commissioner Kurasch asked when daylighted living space is counted within the basement area. Ms. Christy Oosterhous replied that the garage itself is not basement space. By Code definition, the basement cannot exceed two feet vertical distance above grade. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5 at 8:45 p.m. Mr. Lou Dorcich, Project Architect: • Stated that the applicants live on site in a home that is less than 1,000 square feet with garage. • Added that they now plan to replace this smaller home with a new home. Added that they chose a two-story, with garage out of public view, to maximize the yard area. • Advised that the architectural style is a Cottage Design period style. They have broken up the two- story elements into small mass with lots of details. The home will be homey and less massive, a counterpart to the typical Mediterranean style. • Said that the second story is set well back from the first floor. There are no vertical walls in the design. • Advised that they have worked to protect the privacy of the neighbors to the east and north. On the East Side, the second story begins where the front door is right now on the existing home. • Declared that they believe this home will provide a positive asset to the community and meet the needs of the owners. • Clarified that the driveway is not an access for the Fire Department. • Agreed that each city has a different definition of what counts as a basement. In this proposal, no basement space is over two feet over the existing grade and therefore conforms to the City’s guidelines. The basement is accessed from the interior from a main stairwell with stairs on the West Side for egress from the basement as required for safety. Commissioner Kurasch said that the master bath juts out over the garage in a bump out with nothing below it. Asked why this feature is necessary and why it is not supported. Mr. Lou Dorcich replied that supporting that area below would be in excess of allowable FAR. Commissioner Kurasch said that this area looks as if it is floating. Mr. Lou Dorcich said that the drawing is not clear. Added that he intends to change the gable roof and provide a clipped hip over that area which will improve the shadow line and soften the appearance of that bump out. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 14 Commissioner Kurasch said that she is not concerned about the roof line but rather with the fact that there is nothing underneath. Mr. Lou Dorcich advised that the bump out space ranges for 30-inches to five feet. Chair Barry asked Mr. Dorcich if anyone had climbed up to see the views onto other properties. Mr. Lou Dorcich: • Admitted that no on had but that they had walked around the site. • Pointed out that these owners have lived on site for four years. • Added that the site was created with no legal access. The City had to be petitioned for vacation of some right-of-way. • Assured that this home will not impact the neighbors and that the property owners need a two-story structure to get the necessary square footage and still leave adequate open space. Commissioner Roupe said that the uses for the bump out could actually be included within the structure. Mr. Lou Dorcich disagreed and said that the space used for the master bath has some symmetry with the rest of the house. The bump out space is about 150 square feet. If space was developed below this bump out space, the garage would be increased by 150 square feet, space that is not necessary for the garage and exceeding allowable FAR. Commissioner Roupe said that it appears that the master bedroom and bath are both rather large and the space in the bump out can be absorbed within those spaces and incorporated within the footprint. Mr. Lou Dorcich said that he can reduce the bump out. Commissioner Kurasch suggested no more than 65 square feet or 15 feet by 4 feet. Mr. Lou Dorcich asked if the Commission is proposing a flat wall or simple dormer. Commissioner Roupe replied simple dormer. Commissioner Kurasch said that the bump out seems overblown and contrived. Mr. Lou Dorcich said that he could work on that detail. Director Sullivan agreed that staff would work with the applicant and architect to solve this issue. Mr. Lou Dorcich said that he would like to ask the owner, Mr. Couch, to speak to the issue of due diligence for the neighbors. Mr. Mike Couch, 14440 Esterlee Avenue, Saratoga: • Reminded that he distributed a memo earlier in the evening. • Assured that there are no issues pending with his neighbor Mr. Jacklyn. • Advised that there are no perspectives from the east window to the adjacent property. Only the roofline is visible. The south side looks out to the green belt area. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 15 • Said that there are no issues from the second floor. • Added that he has spent a year designing a house to meet Code. • Pointed out that the bump out feature has been used effectively on other Dorcich designed projects. • Asked that the Commissioners look at those other projects before asking them to change the proposal. • Said that this feature allows an additional 60 square feet. This pie-shaped lot has been difficult to design a home to fit. Commissioner Roupe stated that the balloons gave a good sense of this project’s visual impact and commended Mr. Couch for his innovative method. Said that this process might be useful in future applications to avoid the high cost of installing story poles. In fact, this may set a precedent. Commissioner Garakani inquired where Mr. Couch obtained these balloons that lasted so long. Mr. Mike Couch replied that there is a special spray used to retain the life of balloons. Advised that he worked with a Campbell-based company, Balloon-a-tics. Chair Barry asked Mr. Couch if he would be willing to provide something in writing to staff regarding how he implemented his balloon display. Mr. Mike Couch said that he would do so. Mr. Ken Schulz, 15001 Esterlee, Saratoga: • Stated that this home will be beautiful and that he supports its construction. • Said that he hoped to see additional evergreen landscaping. • Said that he wants to be sure that water runoff is directed to the creek. • Suggested that lowering the grade by one or two feet might be good if it does not prove too costly to do this. Mr. Lou Dorcich: • Stated that grading is carefully orchestrated issue and hauling away fill is considered a public nuisance. Additionally, lowering the grade would also lower the house in front, which is something they do not want to do. • Suggested that additional landscaping would be a preferable solution to Mr. Schulz’s concerns. Commissioner Garakani asked where water runoff would drain. Mr. Lou Dorcich replied the creek. Commissioner Garakani asked what materials would be used for the driveway. Mr. Lou Dorcich replied concrete or asphalt. Commissioner Roupe said that the standard for runoff water is that it be retained on site. Mr. Lou Dorcich replied that water would be retained on site but directed out toward the creek. An energy dissipater will be installed. Water will be spread out into the soil. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 16 Commissioner Roupe said that he would defer oversight of water drainage to staff. Director Sullivan: • Said that a project is more difficult with topography. • Added that projects are designed to hold water on site and that pipes will be installed to protect neighbors from any overflow. Chair Barry asked if pervious materials could be used for the driveway. Mr. Lou Dorcich said that turf block is the only potential pervious material and that it has a mixed history of success. Director Sullivan informed that there are new materials now available including flat blocks with pavers. Commissioner Roupe said that since this project is being developed at maximum square footage for the site, it would be nice to ask the applicant to work with staff in considering any viable pervious material for the driveway. Director Sullivan cautioned that using such materials in the sloping areas would be difficult but in flatter areas such as the turnaround it might be possible. Commissioner Roupe stressed his encouragement that the applicants work this matter out with staff. Mr. Lou Dorcich said that he would do so. Commissioner Garakani said that he had no issue on the pop out. Chair Barry said that the house on La Paloma had one and she liked the way it looked. Commissioner Kurasch said that she could not recall the depth of the pop out in that house but said the proposed one for this house looks like it is perched. Commissioner Zutshi said that she likes the concept of the pop out, that it gives the house character. Said that she was sure that the architect would ensure that there is structural integrity to support this feature. Director Sullivan suggested that corbels and beams can be incorporated. Chair Barry asked if this pop out is larger than the one on La Paloma. Mr. Lou Dorcich replied that this is a double pop out while the one on the La Paloma house was a single pop out. Agreed that he could incorporate corbels if necessary in order to soften this pop out but added that he would like to keep it cantilevered as some point to break up the wall element. Commissioner Kurasch said that the house is quite large and at maximum square footage. Suggested the use of a single dormer instead of the proposed double. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 17 Chair Barry asked how much square footage this could reduce. Commissioner Kurasch: • Replied about 70 square feet and it would be more aesthetic. • Added that it would not be hard to absorb that reduced space within the house. • Said that it is not unusual for the Commission to require a project to be scaled back and that the Commission has done so before. • Said that there are already lots of detail. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5 at 9:25 p.m. Commissioner Zutshi said she could support the compromise with the single dormer pop out. Chair Barry asked if the square footage is an issue. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that it is at the maximum allowable. Chair Barry agreed that this is a big house for this site and is a big structure. Commissioner Roupe agreed but said that the architect and applicant have worked hard and come up with a reasonable proposal that is sensitive to the guidelines. They have done a good job with a difficult site. Said that he likes the idea of a single dormer pop out, which will provide good articulation to a blank wall. Said he could live with that modification to the proposal. Commissioner Kurasch stated that she still finds it to be big. Commissioner Roupe said that it is also important that the applicant be sensitive to the request for evergreen landscaping, particularly to the east in Mr. Schultz’s direction. This should be included as a Condition of Approval. Chair Barry pointed out that this project is in better shape to be approved tonight than it was at the site visit yesterday. Advised that she wasn’t going to approve the project without neighbor input and that she is okay with the compromise reached. Restated the two added conditions being the reduction of the pop out and the addition of evergreen landscaping to the satisfaction of staff. Additionally, the hot tub and playground equipment must be brought into compliance with Ordinance regulations. Commissioner Roupe said that the fireplace designation must be marked on the plans. Commissioner Kurasch said that she is in favor of the parking area and turnaround being permeable as possible. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Kurasch, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission granted a Design Review approval (DR-01-09/BSE-01-029) to allow the construction of a new residence on property located at 14440 Esterlee Avenue with the additions to the Conditions as follows: • Change the east elevation to a single dormer pop out (working with staff); Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 18 • Install evergreen landscaping to the east elevation to screen the full height of the new structure; and • Utilize permeable materials on the parking area and turnaround as possible. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi. NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter and Jackman ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that there is a 15-day appeal period before this action is final. DIRECTOR ITEMS Director Sullivan gave the following updates: • Advised that last week Council gave a brief review of the Housing Element and authorized its submittal for preliminary review by the HCD without changes. • Identified a student in the audience, Peter, who is attending this meeting to meet the requirements of his Government Class. • Commended the Commission on its completion of a five item agenda this evening by 9:30 p.m. COMMISSION ITEMS Appointment to Public Safety Committee Chair Barry asked Commissioner Garakani to serve on a newly-formed Public Safety Committee, which includes representatives from the community and is chaired by Council member Nick Street. Commissioner Garakani accepted this appointment as long as meetings did not occur on Monday mornings when he has a conflict. Recognition Dinner Chair Barry reminded the Commission of the pending Recognition Dinner set for Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 6:30 p.m. at the Country Club. Barbecue Weekend with Council Chair Barry reminded the Commissioners to review their calendars for available Saturdays in October and November in order to schedule a Barbecue with Council. The information should be forwarded to the Mayor (and/or through staff). Information from City Attorney re Commissioner Endorsements of Candidates Chair Barry advised that she had asked the City Attorney for guidance on whether members of the Commission can support candidates. A memo is pending from the City Attorney with the reply. Advised that she has learned that it does not represent a conflict of interest to support a candidate. It would be a conflict of interest to contribute to an entity that might come before the Planning Commission. Said that Commissioners can endorse candidates but not on behalf of the Commission but rather just as individuals. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 19 Brookview Homeowners Association Newsletter Chair Barry advised that she had received a copy of the Brookview Homeowners Association newsletter and that the HOA has moved forward to investigate the issue of a single-story overlay district. Pointed out that Los Altos has recently adopted such a district. What was required was a petition signed by half the impacted property owners. If that is achieved, the matter is put to a vote (sometimes requiring a Special Election) that must obtain a 70 percent vote to be successful. Director Sullivan cautioned that the rules are different from city to city. Advised that he has met with the Brookview HOA. They will attempt to secure a petition that will be submitted to the Planning Commission. The Commission can consider adoption of a Resolution of Intent. Commissioner Kurasch asked for a copy of the HOA newsletter. Chair Barry promised to distribute the copies. Definition of Rear Setbacks as They Apply to Single Story versus Two-Story Buildings Commissioner Roupe asked staff to investigate and provide clarification on Ordinance requirements for setbacks on single-story versus two-story buildings. Said that there appears to be a strict interpretation, past interpretation and future interpretation which should be clarified. Director Sullivan agreed that the language of the Design Ordinance doesn’t address second story setbacks being less than single story. Said that there are different ways to go forward. Said that it is not recommended to have a loose interpretation of the Ordinance. It would be better to change the language of the Ordinance to be clearer. The Commission will need to adopt a Resolution of Intent. Chair Barry suggested that this item be scheduled on a future agenda when all seven Commissioners are present. Director Sullivan said that the Commission has discussed this matter as far as Brown Act requirements will allow this evening. The matter will need to be scheduled in order to discuss the possibility of adopting a Resolution of Intent at a future meeting. Commissioner Kurasch said that she disagrees with the idea of an automatic setback requirement for a second story. Neighborhood Involvement in Development Review Commissioner Garakani asked for a status report on the draft memo outlining how to implement neighbor involvement in development review. Director Sullivan assured Commissioner Garakani that this item is on the work plan and pending. Study Groups Staff Assignments Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of September 26, 2001 Page 20 Commissioner Roupe asked if the staff assignments are pending for the miscellaneous Planning Commission Study Groups. Director Sullivan said that these assignments would be made shortly. COMMUNICATIONS City Council Minutes from Regular Meeting of July 18, 2001. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Chair Barry adjourned the meeting at 9:55 p.m. to the next regular meeting set for Wednesday, October 10, 2001, to begin at 7 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk