Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-14-2001 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Acting Chair Kurasch called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Garakani, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi Absent: Commissioner Barry and Jackman Staff: Director Tom Sullivan and Planner Lata Vasudevan APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Regular Meeting of October 24, 2001. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the regular Planning Commission minutes of October 24, 2001, were approved with the following addition to page 8 … Asked if the Geologic Report and development of driveway improvements is are compatible with the Hillside Specific Plan. AYES:Garakani, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: None 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 November 8, 2001. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET Director Sullivan advised that any technical corrections would be provided during each respective staff report. CONSENT CALENDAR SD-95-007.4 (503-82-006) – RODEO CREEK HOLLOW – PHASE II – K2M ASSOCIATES, LLC, Paramount Court: Request for a two-year time extension to Phase II of a previously approved Tentative Map. (OOSTERHOUS) Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 2 Commissioner Roupe asked for verification that an extension had previously been granted and that this second extension would be the last allowed. Director Sullivan advised that per State Law this would be the last permitted extension of this approval. Commissioner Roupe asked if there is any required rational for the granting of an extension. Director Sullivan replied no and suggested that the Commission take minute action approving this extension. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the Planning Commission granted a two-year extension to SD-95-007.4 for property on Paramount Court. AYES:Garakani, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: None *** Commissioner Roupe suggested hearing Item No. 5 first since the recommendation is for continuation. Acting Chair Kurasch announced that Non-Public Hearing Item No. 5 would be taken out of order. NON-PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 5 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 located within the jurisdiction of Santa Clara County and is pre-zoned Hillside Residential. The County requires the project to be consistent with the City of Saratoga’s General Plan. (LIVINGSTONE) (CONTINUED FROM 10/24/01) (Request for continuance to January 9, 2002) Director Tom Sullivan provided the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicants have requested a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of January 9, 2002. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission continued consideration of Item No. 5 (Garrod Farms, 22600 Mount Eden Road) to its meeting of January 9, 2002. AYES:Garakani, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Hunter acknowledged the students from Saratoga High School who are in attendance at this evening’s meeting. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 3 *** PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 2 DR-01-036 (397-18-048) – BRAMLETT, 14920 Farwell Avenue: Request for Design Review approval to remodel and expand an existing single-story 3,375 square foot residence and construct a new 875 square foot second story. The proposed 4,752 square foot residence would be 26 feet in height. The site is 28,229 square feet and is located in the R-1-40,000 zone district. (VASUDEVAN) Ms. Lata Vasudevan, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicants seek approval for an 875 square foot second story addition with a maximum height of 26 feet. • Informed that the property consists of 28,229 square feet. • Described the materials as including beige smooth plaster with gray accents, a wood shingle roof on a California ranch style home that will be similar to the existing home. • Stated that a non-conforming wrought iron fence exists on the property that is between six and seven feet in height. Ordinance permits no more than a six-foot high fence and limits the height to three feet for the front of the property. The maximum allowable height with an electronic gate is five feet. • Advised that staff is proposing an added condition of approval that this non-conforming wrought iron fence be brought into compliance with Ordinance regulations prior to issuance of building permits for this addition/remodel. • Stated that the project meets the required findings for approval and that staff is recommending approval. • Said that the applicant/owner is in the audience. Commissioner Roupe: • Stated that upon the site visit, he is concerned about ensuring the protection of the live oak trees in the front. • Pointed out that the Arborist has called this out as a serious concern in his report. • Asked staff if these concerns have been addressed with the conditions of approval. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied yes. Acting Chair Kurasch opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:12 p.m. Mr. Gary Schloh, Project Architect: • Thanked staff and reminded the Commission that he was before them about two years ago with a proposal for this same property. Their project is now smaller with a second story addition and the remodel of the existing house. • Said that while they seek approval for a maximum height of 26 feet, he did not believe the home would reach 26 feet in height. • Declared that the fencing issue comes as a surprise. • Distributed photographs depicting other fencing in the nearby area, including the adjacent property and one across and down the street. These fences are between seven and nine feet in height. • Added that they are hoping to keep this existing fence as it represents a safety feature for the children of this household since the property is located close to Highway 9. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 4 • Pointed out that this is not a proposal for a new house. • Said that in his experience with remodels and additions, non-conforming conditions can usually be kept as long as they are not made worse. • Said that he is available for questions. Commissioner Roupe: • Said that the fence can be six feet in height if located further back on the property. • Expressed his appreciation to Mr. Schloh for bringing in photos of other fencing installations and asked when this fence was installed on the subject property. Mr. Gary Schloh said that it appears to have been installed approximately in 1986 although there are no permit records on microfilm to substantiate the installation. Acting Chair Kurasch asked Director Sullivan for direction. Director Sullivan suggested that this issue is a policy decision for the Commission to make. Added that when a substantial addition is under consideration, the opportunity is there for the Commission to bring non-conforming issues into compliance or it can determine that the addition is not a significant one and therefore requiring conformance is not required. Acting Chair Kurasch asked staff if a Variance was approved for this fencing installation. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that there is no record that this fence was considered by the City at all for any types of approval. Added that typically, there is no fence approval required for wood or wrought iron fences six feet or less in height. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Schloh how long the current owners have owned this home and whether it was before 1986. Mr. Gary Schloh replied that the Bramletts have owned the home since that time. Commissioner Garakani asked Mr. Schloh if they are prepared to honor the conditions for the protection of the oak trees, including the requirement to remove the turf currently in place beneath the trees. Mr. Gary Schloh replied that the turf has been in place for a number of years and that oaks tend to acclimate to their surroundings. Pointed out that they are not in bad health. Commissioner Roupe cautioned that if this project receives approval, the conditions of approval would mandate that the turf located below these trees must be removed. Director Sullivan pointed out that Condition 8 is clear and to the point on that issue. Commissioner Roupe stated that this is not an item for discussion but rather a requirement of approval. Acting Chair Kurasch opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:26 p.m. and, as there were no parties present who wished to address the Commission, she immediately closed the hearing. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 5 Commissioner Zutshi pointed out an area on the plans that does not specify use. Ms. Lata Vasudevan replied that this space is for storage and has been counted with the total square footage. Commissioner Roupe: • Stated that as this is a substantial modification to this home he feels justified in requiring the modification of the non-conforming fence. • Stated that the conditions of the Arborist’s report must be honored. • Said that this project will be a nice addition to the community. Commissioner Hunter agreed with Commissioner Roupe’s comments. She advised that while she too has grass beneath a large oak tree on her property, she must defer to the recommendations made by the Arborist. Commissioner Garakani: • Said that since this is basically a remodel and there are at least two other non-conforming fences in this area, he does not find it necessary to require the removal of the fence. • Suggested that this fence be painted black so that it is less visible. Commissioner Zutshi said that she is fine with the project as proposed. Acting Chair Kurasch: • Said that she supports the application as proposed but that this request offers the City the opportunity to correct past mistakes so she prefers to see the fence lowered so as to be conforming. • Added that she is not willing to second guess the Arborist’s report and so she agrees with the remedies for the oak trees. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, the Planning Commission approved DR-01-036 to allow a remodel and expansion of an existing home on property located at 14920 Farwell Avenue with the added condition that the existing non-conforming fence be brought into conformance with Ordinance requirements: AYES:Garakani, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: None Acting Chair Kurasch advised that there is a 15-day appeal period before this action is final. *** PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 3 DR-01-028 (397-17-033) – JALAN, 19805 Versailles Way: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new single-story 6,037 square foot residence and demolish an existing 4,217 square foot home. The proposed height is 25.5 feet. The lot is 40,060 square feet in area and is located within the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (SULLIVAN) Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 6 Director Tom Sullivan, presented the staff report as follows: • Provided technical corrections to the table to reflect maximum coverage for this specific lot configuration to be 6,020 rather than the 7,200 listed. Therefore, this project will have to be trimmed by 17 square feet. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that there is a typographical error on Page A-1 of the plans. The square footage is depicted as 6,037 in one spot and 6,137 in another. Director Tom Sullivan: • Said that he would defer to the architect to clarify which number is accurate. • Added that all setbacks have been met and/or exceeded. • Pointed out that all conditions imposed by the Commission on the home across the street have been added to this project. • Said that the 4,217 square foot home will be demolished and a new 6,037 square foot home constructed. • Advised that the applicants had invited the neighbors to a meeting. Several letters were received from the neighbors. One suggested moving the home further back from the street. No problems were raised about the home’s design. Commissioner Roupe pointed out an error to page 6 of the report for a setback that reads 43 feet that must be larger to make sense. Director Tom Sullivan replied that this number should actually read 83 feet. Acting Chair Kurasch asked Director Sullivan how far the portico is from Versailles Way. Director Tom Sullivan replied 49 feet. Acting Chair Kurasch asked how far the rest of the house is from Versailles Way. Director Tom Sullivan replied an additional 16 feet. Acting Chair Kurasch asked how far the house is set back from the house next door. Director Tom Sullivan advised that he has spoken with this neighbor and they are asking for screening landscaping and to have the pool equipment relocated, which is not a problem with the applicant. Acting Chair Kurasch questioned why a landscaping plan is not available. Director Tom Sullivan reminded that this project pre-dates that requirement. Acting Chair Kurasch opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 7:41p.m. Mr. Greg Kawahara, Project Architect: • Reminded the Commission that they approved another house he designed across the street from this site. At that time he was given two directions from the Commission. One was to work with staff to Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 7 ensure that this house is different from the first one. The second requirement was to work with the neighbors. • Advised that he met with Director Sullivan to review materials. The wainscoting on this home will be natural stone (limestone). • Added that they conducted an Open House for the neighbors on September 8th at which two adjacent neighbors attended. Two issues were raised. The placement of the pool equipment shed and windows facing their yard. • Advised that they are willing to move the pool equipment shed as well as adding landscaping to hide any windows from the adjacent property. • Added that on September 11th, they met with two other neighbors across the street. One asked them to rotate the placement of the pool. • Said that on October 27th they had an Open House with notices sent to the neighbors. Two adjacent neighbors showed up. • Said that on November 4th one neighbor asked them to move the house back on the site. • Stated that they can reduce the 6,037 square feet to 6,015 square feet easily. • Informed that they had a surveyor measure the height of homes in the immediate area. Their structure will actually be 24 feet, 2 inches high from the grade at the front door to the highest ridge. This is because the street is higher than the house. • Added that as seen from Versailles Way, this house will be two feet lower at the ridge than the house next door and 5.5 feet lower than the house across the street. • Pointed out that the architectural styles are diverse on this street and made himself available for questions. Commissioner Zutshi asked for clarification for a space depicted on the plans. Mr. Greg Kawahara advised that this is an elevator. Commissioner Zutshi asked if the additional roof ridge is necessary and, if so, whether the elevator could be relocated elsewhere. Mr. Greg Kawahara advised that he has broken up the roof ridge per the City’s guidelines and that the roof over the elevator also ties in with the roof over the playroom. Commissioner Roupe advised Commissioner Zutshi that the plans are depicting a footprint. Director Tom Sullivan added that every time the façade is moved back, they get a new hip. Commissioner Zutshi asked the height of the front door. Mr. Greg Kawahara replied 9 feet, 9 inches. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that per the plans and rendering, the portico appears to stand out and seems to be a bit bigger than required per a functional point of view. Asked if there is any functional reason for this height. Mr. Greg Kawahara replied that the height is intended to bring attention to this architectural feature. Commissioner Roupe said that this portico is ostentatious. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 8 Mr. Greg Kawahara pointed out that this house has but one arch while a house across the street has five arches. Added that the house next door has a two-story front entry feature. Acting Chair Kurasch asked for the height from natural grade. Mr. Greg Kawahara advised that they had to get the height from a surveyor. Acting Chair Kurasch asked Director Sullivan if the Commission has had this problem before. Director Tom Sullivan advised that it is easier to establish the grade from vacant land that from land with something on it. He advised that 25 feet, 6 inches is the best estimate. Commissioner Roupe asked if this height is compatible with adjacent properties. Acting Chair Kurasch asked if there is a conflict with the tree when considering moving the house back. Mr. Greg Kawahara said that this decision would be up to the Arborist. Commissioner Roupe said that it appears that there is about five feet of space available to back up the structure without encroaching on the tree, subject to the Arborist’s agreement. Asked Mr. Kawahara if he is willing to defer this decision to the Arborist’s counsel. Mr. Greg Kawahara replied yes. Acting Chair Kurasch suggested adding a condition requiring a completed landscape plan for the front. Added that screening for the side landscaping should be determined in cooperation with the neighbor. Mr. Paul Doble, Project Builder: • Stated that they have no problem with preparing a landscaping plan. Mr. Greg Kawahara said that if the plan must rely on neighbor consent the project could be delayed. Commissioner Roupe said that the intent is not to require the neighbor’s approval but rather to require staff review and approval. Acting Chair Kurasch asked staff how this issue is typically handled. Director Tom Sullivan advised that staff will require that additional screening be negotiated with the neighbors and that per the Conditions of Approval, mature replacement trees will be required. Acting Chair Kurasch asked how many neighbors met. Mr. Greg Kawahara replied two neighbors met face-to-face with them. Commissioner Garakani suggested installing a retaining wall with landscaping to solve the need for screening. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 9 Mr. Paul Doble said that they might be able to add a 2.5-foot berm if the neighbor supports that idea. Acting Chair Kurasch said that the portico might not tie into the neighborhood. Asked if this feature could either be redesigned or eliminated. Mr. Greg Kawahara advised that they would not want to outright eliminate the portico but could consider reducing its size, making it rectangular instead of square. Commissioner Roupe suggested that the height of the portico be dropped. Mr. Greg Kawahara said that it would be possible to drop it by about a foot. Director Sullivan said that it might be possible to change the gable to a hip roof on the portico. Ms. Yvonne Pillai, 19800 Versailles Way, Saratoga: • Said that she lives across the street and that her husband submitted a letter. • Added that this house will be closer to the street and obscure their view of trees. Commissioner Garakani asked Ms. Pillai if added trees in the front would be helpful. Ms. Yvonne Pillai replied yes. Ms. Catherine Lin, 19779 Versailles Way, Saratoga: • Said that she would like to see the pool shed relocated closer to the pool due to noise concerns. • Added that the owner has agreed to do so but she wants to be sure it occurs. • Said that her property is to the east of this site and that bedroom windows will face her backyard while the existing house has only a bathroom window. • Recommended screening landscaping to ensure privacy. Commissioner Garakani asked Ms. Lin how she would feel about a six foot fence that appears to be eight feet from her property, which would be the case since the grade of her property is lower than her own property grade. Ms. Catherine Lin said that perhaps lattice could be installed but that first she would want to see if her other neighbors would be willing too. She does not want to have lattice solely on one of her four shared fence sides. Added that she would prefer landscape screening to lattice. Commissioner Hunter suggested some sort of vine to provide screening. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that actually the new window will be smaller than the existing window. Mr. Greg Kawahara clarified that there will be one large window for the bedroom and two small frosted glass windows for two bathrooms on this elevation. However the windows are eight feet off the floor therefore offering no privacy impacts. Mr. Raj Jalan, Applicant and Property Owner, 19805 Versailles Way, Saratoga: • Said that the portico is a feature he requested. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 10 • Added that while he is willing to reduce the width and height of the portico he wants to retain the gable roof on the portico. Acting Chair Kurasch closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:24 p.m. Commissioner Zutshi: • Stated that it appears the neighbor’s privacy concerns have been taken care of. • Advised that she has a problem with the entrance’s 10-foot high door. • Added that if the door is lowered, the roof can also be lowered. Acting Chair Kurasch asked Director Sullivan for the height of the portico roof. Director Tom Sullivan replied 20 feet. Commissioner Roupe said that he supports moving the structure back from the front property line by five feet, with the approval of the Arborist. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that the feeder roots are located 30-inches beyond the drip line. With the condition of approval to obtain the Arborist’s approval for moving this structure back, this requirement works. Commissioner Hunter: • Said that she thought moving the house would adversely impact the tree and therefore she supports leaving it where it is. • Added that she has no problems with the house but finds the portico to be too big and intrusive. She would like to see its height reduced. • Pointed out that the owner and neighbor seem willing to work together on landscape screening. Acting Chair Kurasch pointed out that the mitigation for the tree includes the requirement to remove existing fill per the Arborist’s report. Commissioner Garakani: • Said that it was unfortunate that some smaller trees cannot be saved under the Ordinance. • Suggested a flat roof on the portico. • Said that he expects the final house to closely resemble what is depicted on the rendering. Acting Chair Kurasch: • Said that this project is over the top. • Stated that she does not like the portico and would like to see it eliminated outright but that minimally it must be reduced from the current 20 foot height in order to bring it more into scale with what is appropriate to the neighborhood. • Pointed out that she does not like overly big houses. • Expressed her faith that staff will approve a landscape plan that meets the screening needs. • Said that she found the multiple roofs to be busy. • Agreed that the pool equipment issue has been settled. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 11 Director Tom Sullivan said that the pool equipment still appears in the wrong place on the plans and that a condition of approval should be added to ensure its relocation to the west side of the property, closer to the pool. Commissioner Garakani said that he likes the fact that the garage is not facing the street. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission made a motion to approve DR-01-028 to allow a new single- story residence on property located at 19805 Versailles Way with the added conditions that: 1. The portico be lowered and reduced in dimension: 2. That screening landscaping be provided along the east side of the property; 3. That the pool equipment be moved to the west side of the property, closer to the pool; 4. That a detailed landscape/irrigation plan be submitted to the Community Development Director for final approval. Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, the motion was amended to include the requirement to move the house back from the front property line, subject to the consent of the Arborist that to do so would not endanger the tree, and taking into consideration post and beam construction of necessary to assure the health of the tree. The first vote on the Amendment to the original Motion was: AYES:Garakani, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: Hunter ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: None The second vote on the overall Motion for Approval was: AYES:Garakani, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: None ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: None *** Acting Chair Kurasch called for a break at 8:42 p.m. Acting Chair Kurasch reconvened the meeting at 8:54 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING – ITEM NO. 4 DR-00-056 & V-00-022 (517-13-018/019) –SOBRATO 14800 Bohlman Road: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 6,281 square foot residence, a 755 square foot garage, 1,512 square foot open pavilion (162 square feet enclosed) and a 4,598 square foot basement on a vacant lot. As an alternative, the applicant is requesting Variance approval to exceed the allowable floor area permitted by code. The Variance would allow the pavilion to be fully enclosed and 751 square feet of open Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 12 vaulted ceiling in excess of 15 feet ceiling height. The site is 6.19 acres and located within an R-1- 40,000 zone district. (SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the Design Review is for a 6,281 square foot single-family residence with a 755 square foot garage, a 1,512 square foot open pavilion and 4,598 square feet of basement space. • Added that a Variance is required to exceed the allowable floor area. • Described the property as consisting of 6.19 acres within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. • Pointed out that this parcel is part of the Sobrato Subdivision for which Council granted final map approval. • Stated that Code establishes maximum floor area ratios based on zoning districts and regardless of the actual size of a parcel. While there is no penalty for height of structure, the vaulted ceiling space above 15 feet in height is counted as additional floor area. The intent of this provision is to reduce bulk and mass of a project. Commissioner Roupe asked what the maximum allowable square footage is for this site. Director Tom Sullivan: • Replied 7,200 square feet is the maximum under the R-1-40,000 zoning. • Advised that the Commission must make two findings in support of the Variance to allow the full enclosure of the pavilion/pool house and the vaulted area being left open above 15 feet. Commissioner Roupe asked if fencing or grading require Variances on this site. Director Tom Sullivan: • Replied no. • Advised that those issues are development standards and not Variance issues. • Provided the three findings required for support of the Variances: • Is there a special circumstance? The parcel is larger than normal and half the property represents a scenic easement. Additionally, there are 1,000 trees on the property. • Are special privileges being granted? There are other houses where the floor area ratio has been exceeded to allow pool houses. • Is the Variance a detriment to the public? Per the applicant, no. • Pointed out that usually a Variance is needed because a lot is too small, whereas this lot is quite large. • Informed that staff does not believe that the necessary findings can be made. • Discussed the house design. The home is a shingle type design that was designed to appear as if the house has been constructed at different stages over time. • Advised that the required findings in support of the Design Review request can be made in the affirmative. • Said that a substantial amount of grading is required, much of it for a road that has been designed in such a way in order to save as many trees as possible. Additional grading is for the pool and the basement as well as around the house. A great deal of thought went into the grading design. • Advised that the delineation of the scenic easement is depicted on the exhibit behind the Commissioners. It represents half to site. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 13 • Added that the Commission asked for a fencing plan. The proposed fencing connects buildings and a substantial amount of fencing encloses the pool area. The only enclosed area is the pool and terrace area. • Advised that staff recommends approval of the Design Review while it has no recommendation on the Variances. Commissioner Zutshi asked for the maximum allowable floor area on a three-acre lot. Director Tom Sullivan replied that he did not have that figure available. Said that they must consider one parcel at a time and not an entire subdivision. Added that this lot cannot be further subdivided. Commissioner Garakani asked if there are any trails easements. Director Tom Sullivan replied no. Commissioner Roupe asked if grading for a property is approved at the time of recordation of the map. Director Sullivan replied no. He added that the work underway on the property is not a part of this development but rather for access to the culvert project by the Water Company. Acting Chair Kurasch asked if the Public Works conditions are included. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Acting Chair Kurasch: • Mentioned the hold harmless condition for the project based upon being constructed on a slope. • Pointed out that there is no variance needed for retaining walls. • Asked if there are any conditions for a no build zone on the scenic easement. Director Tom Sullivan advised that these are depicted on the Subdivision and Final Maps. Acting Chair Kurasch asked where the cut for the basement would be exported. Director Tom Sullivan said he was uncertain. Acting Chair Kurasch asked for calculations on impervious coverage. Director Sullivan replied that this figure is 26.5 percent of lot coverage including the driveway, which is not in excess of maximum allowable. Commissioner Hunter said that she would have to recuse herself. She left the dais to sit in the audience at about 9:22 p.m. Acting Chair Kurasch opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 9:23 p.m. Mr. John Sobrato, Applicant: • Said that he would limit his remarks to two key areas, grading/fencing and floor area ratio. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 14 • Regarding grading and fencing, he reminded the Commission that a letter from his Civil Engineer was provided in their packets. • Pointed out that a vast amount of the required grading is for the driveway and basement, which will impact a small portion of this site. • Reminded that they will save 1,000 trees, with only 40 to be removed. • Advised that they have 11-foot ceilings in the basement. This height is intended to give quality to a basement space without windows. There will be no visible impact from this basement. • Pointed out that 93 percent of the property is unfenced. The only fenced area is around the pool, which will be completely fenced in. • Said that while he understands the need to have limits on floor area ratios, the same rules should not apply for all size properties. • Stated that he and his wife are very involved in community and charitable activities and their home will be used for entertaining for those pursuits. • Added that he would be willing to record a deed restriction assuring that the pavilion space would not be used as habitable space. • Said that they have meet all requirements of the City and takes exception to the FAR. • Informed that he has met with his neighbors and obtained their support. • Added that his parcel is quite large and encircled by a lot of trees. • Said that the finding for special circumstance can be made due to the larger size of his property. Pointed out that he has agreed to a 3.5-acre scenic easement, which has been recorded. • Said that the finding for special privilege can be disproved since neighbors in the area have received variances in order to enclose pool houses. This therefore is not a special privilege. In fact, not allowing him to do so would be inconsistent with past approvals. • Said that other local cities to not have a cap on the FAR once lots go beyond a certain size. • Said that there is a deed restriction that would prevent him from further subdividing this property. This parcel will remain 6.5 acres in perpetuity, • Assured that the culvert grading is being done under permit with the Public Works department. • Answered Commissioner Kurasch’s question about what is done with cut dirt by saying it is sold. He added that sometimes it is used for freeway projects. Other times it is used for sites that need fill. Still other times, dirt is used at the dump as part of the process to build layers. • Said that he did not believe that there is a limit to the impervious coverage on this site. Director Tom Sullivan corrected him by saying the limit is 35 percent. Mr. John Sobrato advised that he had to have the story poles brought onto his property by chopper. Commissioner Roupe advised Mr. Sobrato that neighbors are saying that work is occurring on his property at night. Mr. John Sobrato said that he could not imagine what is occurring since the culvert work was completed in three days and none of that work took place at night. Said that he had the Arborist recheck the site to assure everyone that there is no deviation. Commissioner Garakani asked Director Sullivan if the issue is excessive FAR. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 15 Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Sobrato if he would be willing to record a deed restriction on the pavilion space. Director Tom Sullivan advised that any structure not open on three sides is counted as FAR. The Commission will have to take what the Ordinance says and weigh special circumstances. Commissioner Garakani asked if the pavilion would be enclosed by glass. Mr. John Sobrato replied yes. The pavilion would be enclosed by sliding doors. Acting Chair Kurasch declared that 4,600 cubic feet of grading for the basement is a lot and she questioned the need for such a high ceiling in the basement. Asked Mr. Sobrato for his justification. Mr. John Sobrato replied that this basement space is not simply the storage space of the past but rather is living space. Said that basements are actually encouraged because this below ground space has no visible impact. Therefore, what’s the harm. Reminded that the cut will be used elsewhere in an approved way. Acting Chair Kurasch said that while she agrees there would be no visible impact, there is an impact on the environment. Said that there are other choices to meet the FAR limits. Mr. John Sobrato agreed and said that if the Commission does not approve his requests he will skim back on the design but that he sees no benefit in the Commission asking him to do that. Acting Chair Kurasch closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No 4 at 9:44 p.m. Acting Chair Kurasch reopened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 9:45 p.m. Ms. Jill Hunter: • Said that she is surprised that there are no neighbors present tonight. • Said that she has concerns about the number of trucks moving dirt of the property, which will be disruptive and questioned how long this project will take. • Agreed that the house design is beautiful and that she appreciates what the Sobratos do for the community, being a parent of a Santa Clara student. Commissioner Garakani asked Ms. Hunter how much less the impact would be if the house is 7,000 square feet. Ms. Jill Hunter said that she is not concerned just about this house but also with the whole development. Pointed out that the nuns who previously owned this site did not adversely impact the area. Said that while she realizes change does happen, she has mixed feelings and feels that big changes will occur in the area as a result of this development. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that there is a recorded approval for nine parcels. Commissioner Garakani said that development of these approved parcels is going to happen. Mr. John Sobrato: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 16 • Said that he is sympathetic to the concerns of the neighbors and wants to get in and get out quickly with the grading aspect in order to minimize the disruption to the area. • Suggested adding a condition that requires the continuous operation of the grading process so as to be completed in as short a time frame as is possible. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that Code limits the hours of operation for this task. Mr. John Sobrato pointed out that trucks will have to be covered and that approved truck routes will have to be established. Added that he will be sensitive to the neighborhood but that this is a significant development project in scope. Commissioner Zutshi asked Mr. Sobrato for an estimate of how long his project will take. Mr. John Sobrato said that he would be selling the other lots, following the construction of the street improvements. His own home will commence construction by April 15th and will take about a year and a half to complete. Acting Chair Kurasch reclosed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 9:52 p.m. Commissioner Zutshi said that she has no problem with the house due to the size of the 6.5-acre lot. It is not unusual to have a 5,000 square foot house on a one-acre lot. This is a fine and beautiful house. Commissioner Roupe: • Said that this house is beautifully designed and will be a great addition to the community. • Stated that he was not sure how to make the necessary affirmative findings. While the vaulted ceiling is easy to accept, he has trouble with the pavilion enclosure. • Added that he is unclear about how other cabanas have been approved in the past. Commissioner Zutshi suggested simply using shutters to enclose the pavilion. Commissioner Roupe questioned if sliding doors really equal walls. Agreed that plantation shutters could also serve as a means of enclosing the pavilion. Director Tom Sullivan cautioned that if the Commission finds that the shutters/glass doors do not represent an enclosure in this circumstance, that becomes a standard that would have be used elsewhere too. Acting Chair Kurasch stated that the Commission’s role is to define what legally can be applied equally and fairly for all property owners. Stated that an enclosure equals floor area. Director Tom Sullivan said that the Design Review could be approved without necessitating the Variance. However, the pavilion would have to be constructed without walls, opened on three sides, and either the vaulted ceiling would have to be reduced or the home’s square footage reduced. Acting Chair Kurasch added that the pavilion could still be enclosed if the house is scaled back in size. Commissioner Garakani stated that the large scenic easement could be considered the basis for the Variance. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 17 Acting Chair Kurasch disagreed and stated that this scenic easement was given freely by the applicant before he came before the Commission for consideration of this application. Said that she agrees with staff’s analysis. Commissioner Roupe said that he could find special circumstance due to the scenic easement as long as the pavilion is not used as habitable space. This meets the intent of Code. Added that he could make this same judgement in the future under the same circumstances. Acting Chair Kurasch asked Director Sullivan why staff cannot support this Variance. Director Tom Sullivan said one reason is simply that he is very hard-nosed about Variances. The Ordinances set the guidelines. Commissioner Zutshi pointed out that if this property had been created as three lots, more square footage would be allowed. This large lot is special. Commissioner Garakani stated that this property is not easily accessed and there are no neighbor impacts. Acting Chair Kurasch questioned how this special circumstance could be applied to other properties. Commissioner Garakani said that the scenic easement and consideration of this property as a “community” house. Acting Chair Kurasch said that she would respectfully disagree with that thought process. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission approved DR-00-056 to allow the construction of a new residence on property located at 14800 Bohlman Road as proposed: AYES:Garakani, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: Kurasch ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: Hunter This motion passed. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Zutshi, the Planning Commission approved V-00-022(vaulted ceiling) to allow a vaulted ceiling in excess of 15 feet in height, and the associated square footage attributed to that vaulted ceiling, in conjunction with the construction of a new residence on property located at 14800 Bohlman Road, with the findings: • This approval is not granting a special privilege since other vaulted ceilings have been approved; and • A finding for special circumstances can be made because of the large size of the property and the fact that it does not impinge on neighbors: AYES:Garakani, Roupe and Zutshi NOES: Kurasch Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 18 ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: Hunter This motion passed. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission recommended approved V-00-022(enclosed pavilion) to allow the enclosure of a pool pavilion with the added conditions that: • A deed restriction be recorded that this space be non-habitable; • All enclosing elements be designed so as to present as open appearing a structure as is possible Based upon the following findings: • This approval is not granting a special privilege since other enclosed pool structures have been approved in the past and could be granted in the future; and • A finding for special circumstances can be made because of the large size of the property and the fact that this space will be deed restricted as non-habitable: AYES:Garakani and Roupe NOES: Kurasch and Zutshi ABSENT: Barry and Jackman ABSTAIN: Hunter This motion failed. Director Tom Sullivan restated that the Variance for the vaulted ceiling has been approved while the Variance for the enclosed pool pavilion has been denied. Acting Chair Kurasch advised that there is a 15-day appeal period. DIRECTOR ITEMS Planners Institute: Director Tom Sullivan advised that he has helped develop the program for the next Planners Institute set for March 20-22, 2002, in Monterey. He added that a traveling mini-institute is proposed for about five locations throughout the State. He informed that the Annual Institute would most likely return to rotating between Monterey and locations in Southern California. Advised that the City budgets for the Commissioners to attend this Conference. Housing Element Director Tom Sullivan advised that on Tuesday, November 13, 2001, he was meeting at the State HCD office going over the preliminary comments on the City’s Housing Element update. The Update is about 85 percent completed and appears to be on schedule for completion by the December 2001 deadline. COMMISSION ITEMS Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 2001 Page 19 Historic Preservation Commission Request to Participate on Planning Commission Subcommittees Director Sullivan advised that members of the HPC would like to be included in the activities of the PC Subcommittees. He added that it would be a benefit to everyone to have this interaction and that he will send a sign up list for their review and consideration. Confirmation of Special Meeting Availability on November 28, 2001 Director Sullivan sought confirmation from the Commissioners on availability for a special meeting to review the addition to St. Andrew’s Church School, which is extensive. This special meeting will include a site visit and workshop. The proposed time is 5 p.m. on Tuesday, November 28, 2001, just prior to the regular Planning Commission meeting. Alternately, the Commission can meet in December. It would be possible to have dinner provided. Commissioner Roupe stated that he would not be available as he would still be on Thanksgiving travel. Commissioner Zutshi asked when this project will come before the Commission for public hearing. Director Sullivan replied that it would be some time early next year as it has not yet been scheduled. Library Site Commissioner Zutshi encouraged the Commissioners to look at the library site, as she is concerned about the condition of a tree on the property. Director Sullivan said that he would dispatch staff to review the condition of this tree. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communication items. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS Commissioner Roupe complimented staff on the new chairs. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Acting Chair Kurasch adjourned the meeting at 10:28 p.m. to a special meeting set for Wednesday, November 28, 2001, to begin at 5 p.m. at St. Andrew’s Church School. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk