HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-1980-Land Development CommitteeLAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MINUTES
TIME December. 4, 1980 - 10:00 a.m.
,PLACE.: Crisp Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, Ca
TYPE:. 'Regular Meeting
I ROUTINE ORGANIZATION .
A. Roll Call
Committee Members Present: R. S. Robinson and Commissioner Laden
Staff. Members Present: K. Kerdus, D. Trinidad and R. Harison
B. Minutes
It was moved and seconded to waive the reading of the minutes of
November 20, 1980 and approve as distributed. The motion was
carried unanimously.
II. PUBLIC, HEARINGS
A. SDR- 1480 - P &.S,Construction Company, Negative Declaration
B. SDR -1480 - P & S Construction Company, Pierce Road, 'Tentative
Building Site Approval - 2 Lots
Staff explained that this is a proposed lot split in the R -1- 1.2,500
zoning district on Pierce Road, and that the one existing residence
was proposed for removal. The major concerns on the lot split were
the removal of the large trees for. placement of an access road to
the rear lot., a ve "ry flat-site which indicated .need,-for careful
review and approval of the drainage plan, and "the neighborhood
concern for construction of a two -story residence on-the rear lot.
Additionally,. Staff pointed out the. possibility for a joint drive-
way to.save' the large trees,on the site,.
The public hearing was opened at 10:15 a.m.
Mr. Michael Pestana, of P. &.S Construction, indicated that.he did
not intend to build any two - stories on the lot and was de-si,rous of
accommodating the. neighborhood. Mr: Robinson stated that'he.di.d
not like the to's,ee the r-emoval of an adequate housing unit in
order to place more expensive housing on a site. Mr. Jerry Serene,
of Ashley Court, stated that he was not against the proposal; how-
ever, he was interested in finding out how close the proposed homes
would be to his house and whether or not the.new pine trees and
redwood trees to-the rear of the lot would. be saved. Mr. Pestana
indicated that he intended to save those trees.. Mr., Serene also
stated that he had never had a.drainage problem and was very con -
cerned about picking up such .a problem with this development.
Commissioner L'ado-ii stated .,that a. dra- inage,'plan .was required to be
reviewed and approved prior to issuance"of' any per "mits. Mr. Serene
questioned whether there was a warranty on this, and Commissioner
Laden responded that.-any final war.xanty:. would,.,be through legal
processes however ,, he ' City 'intended to., insure that he was not
impacted by drainage problems. Mr. Trinidad stated-that the on-
.site drainage was a. difficult ,problem, ,and that .it...woul.d have to
be resolved. prior: t:6-,,final. approval. Mr. ".:: Robinson indicated that
he would like to see that plan prior to tentative approval. Mr.
Harison explained to Mr. Serene that, by State law, he was pro -
tected from drainage problems caused by new impervious surface
on adjacent lots.
Diane Pachari, of Jepson Court, also expressed concern about the
LDC-Minutes Meeting
of 12/4/80
SDR -14.80 .(cont.)
Page 2
drainage; the potential two -story structures, and the removal
of-.the `trees. Mr. Lund, the. adj acent property owner, indicated
that he felt that the removal of one or two trees would not be
a significant impact on the neighborhood. Mrs. Janet Volk, owner
of the property., indicated that she had had a problem with the
tree roots going -into the septic tank and the foundation, and she
felt they should be removed. Mrs. Serene then questioned whether
or no.t the site would be placed on sewer, and Staff indicated
that it would be.
The Committee then expressed "that they would`'l.ike`to see a drainage
plan that showed that this development would not cause a, problem
for the neighbors and io`.i}lave 'the` applicants' look into a joint
driveway with Mr. Lund. 'Mr- Pesta'na again I indicated that he would
be building no two - stories on the site. The LDC.requested,Staff
to notify the neighbors 'of the-- pgxt hearing, -on this item. It was
directed that this item will: be continued to the meeting on Decem-
ber 18, 1.980 or the meeting on January i, 1981.
III. MISCELLANEOUS
A. 14075 Saratoga Avenue,. - Larry Fine,. Request for a Modificat=ion to
a Site Development,Plan for an Addition
Staff explained that Mr. Fine was wanting to expand the existing
house on a .lot with a slope that exceeded 100. Therefore, he was
now requesting a modification to his Site Development Plan. Staff
had reviewed the site and did not have any major concerns with
the modifications.. It was pointed out that the.addi.tion would
creat.e.additional second -story space, which is allowed by the Two -
Story Ordinance on lots with slopes over 100. It was then noted
that more than one house existed on the lot, and a discussion
ensued over whether, at,this point, the LDC should request removal.
of the kitchens. Staff stated that that had not been done on
previous requests for modifications.
Mr. Fine went into a lengthy discussion of his proposed addition
and the existing,structures on the site. It was moved, and seconded
.to approve the Modification of the Site Development Plan for the
addition. The motion was :carried unanimously.
B. SDR -1334 Robert Sny der, Tentative Building Site Approval - 2 Lots,
Request for a Second One -Year Extension
The applicant was present.for thi.s discussion. The LDC reviewed
the previous c.ond'itions-, and it was moved and seconded to approve
the request for a second one -year extension for SDR - 1334. The
motion was carried unanimously.
IV... ADJOURNMENT
It was moved and seconded to; adjourn the meeting. The motion was
carried unanimously.
Respect -fully submitted,
KA Ke dus/'-
Secreta.
KKcd