Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Francis, are we ready?

I'm ready when you are.

Good to go. Welcome. I would like to call the Planning Commission meeting to order and ask that we rise for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I would now I would now like to ask the staff to explain the meeting process and then do the roll call.

Pursuant to Saratoga City Council's remote public participation policy, Members of the public may participate in this meeting in person at the location listed on the agenda or via remote attendance using the Zoom information listed on the agenda. Public attendees participating by Zoom are automatically muted and are not viewable on camera. I will now call the roll. Commissioner Sreedharan, absent. Commissioner Hassan? Here. Commissioner Brownlee? Here. Commissioner Zhang?

Present.

Commissioner Jim Aron?

Present.

Vice chair Lee? Here. Chair Kauser?

Here. Thank you. You. Oral communications on non agendized items. Any member of the public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda. This law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding oral communications. Do we have any cards for oral communications? Francis, do you have anyone online?

Nobody for non agendized items, Chair Kauser.

Thank you. Moving on to approval of minutes. Do we have any corrections or a motion?

I move that we approve the amendments as submitted.

I'll second.

Thank you. We have a move and a second. Can we have roll call, please?

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.

Report on appeal rights. Any interested person to any decision on this agenda may file an appeal application with the city clerk within fifteen calendar days of the decision. Public hearing. Applicants and or their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. All interested persons may appear and be heard during this meeting regarding the items on this agenda.

If items on this agenda are challenged in court, members of the public may be limited to raising only issues raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at or prior to the close of the public hearing. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicants and or their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. With that, we move to the first item on the agenda, 2.1, application, VAR25-six. Can we have the staff report, please?

Good evening, commissioners. The project site is located at 19099 Harley Drive and is approximately 21,222 square foot within the R 115000 zoning district. In January 2024, planning staff approved two unit development application to construct a 4,596 square foot one story single family residence with an attached 796 square foot accessory dwelling unit. The project is currently under construction. Per Saratoga municipal code, a new residential construction is required to underground existing overhead electrical service lines.

On this site, the existing PG and E lines are located at the rare within a 10 foot public utility easement. However, the underground installation would require trenching directly through the critical zones of the trees. There are three protected trees, two holy oaks, and one coarse redwood causing significant root damage. The project arborist and the city arborist recommends an overhead service drop routed through the tree canopies to avoid root damage. The applicant is requesting a variance from the requirement to underground the existing overhead electrical line as part of the construction of a new one story single family residence and instead retain the existing overhead electrical service line.

No additional protected trees are proposed for removal beyond the five previously removed for the project. Staff sorry. These are the required findings that the commission must make to approve the variants. More details on these findings are also included in the staff report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution Number 20 Six-four approving the request for variants subject to conditions of approval.

That concludes staff presentation. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for staff on this item?

Yeah. On the diagram you showed an alternative path it looked like. It went through the center of the backyard. It's sort of I don't know if it's really an alternative path, but there's a line showing just to the right of the trees. Was that considered as an opportunity for undergrounding?

I guess no because the PG and E power line is on the left hand side of the project site, And that is the closest direction. And there's an existing overhead line. So they would like to maintain that.

Thank you.

Any other questions? Seeing none, I would like to invite the applicant to please come and make opening statements. You would have ten minutes to present. Do we have the applicant present? No comments? Okay. Thank you. Moving on to public hearing. Opening for public comments. Do we have any cards on this item?

Frances, do we have anyone online?

Francesca No, we do not.

Okay. Seeing none, and presuming they don't want to make closing comments either, bringing it back to the Commission for discussion. Yes.

I guess I would just say that based on the diagrams and the information in the staff report thanks for the presentation as well it looks like we can make all the findings that it makes sense to have it be an overhead line because trying to trench it through those trees would do detrimental damage to them. And so I can make the findings in this case.

Like to make a motion?

Yeah. Would like to make a motion to adopt or approve the staff's recommendation.

Do I have a second? Thank you, Zaheer. Roll call, please.

Commissioner Hassan? Aye. Commissioner Brownling?

Aye.

Commissioner Zeng? Aye. Commissioner Jermerad?

Aye.

Vice Chair Lee? Aye. Chair Kauser? Yes. Motion passes unanimously. And thank you, Sahithi. This was her first Planning Commission presentation, and she did a great job. Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to item number 2.2, which is amendment of the municipal code by to the village design standards. As I live within 500 feet of this the village, I am gonna recuse myself and turn it over to vice chair. Okay. So they'll

do the staff report. The staff. Yeah. The

items.

Alright. Are we ready to proceed? Next on agenda item is application. Oh, sorry. Yes.

Application ZOA26-one amendment of Saratoga Municipal Code by adding article 15 to 16. And very, very long articles need to be added. So please go ahead.

Thank you and good evening. I'm going to introduce this item and then turn it over to Wise Consulting for the presentation. First I want to thank Lisa Wise Consulting, the public officials, public stakeholders, residents, business owners and other involved parties who have been involved in this process over the last year. Whether you filled out a questionnaire, participated in an interview, attended the workshop, attended one of the two study sessions, or you're just listening in, we do appreciate your feedback. I want to acknowledge that everyone receives information differently.

While we try to keep interested individuals informed, when we fall short we recalibrate and try again. So I provided some URLs on this slide for how to stay informed. And an email will be going out to the Notify Me email list tomorrow as well as the 28 individuals who have provided their individual email to me. If you if you do not get an email and you're on the notify me list, please let me know Thursday evening. And with that, I wanna turn it over to Monica. Thank you.

Thank you, Cindy. Good evening council members. I'm Monica Sidlick, senior associate with Lisa Wise Consulting. I'm joined by my colleague Jessica Schillingerian. We're very happy to be here to present to you the hearing draft of the objective design standards for the Saratoga Village.

So you know, we've been working LWC has been working with the city of Saratoga for a few years. This is our third project effort with the city of Saratoga. And all the work we've done with the city is really part of our core services as a firm. We have been working on objective design standards, housing elements, zoning code updates targeted and comprehensive throughout the state and the country for about twenty years. And we've really had a wonderful experience working with the city staff on all of these projects.

And we'll just do a little bit. I'll do a few slides to review the project background for this particular project. And then go through the proposed objective design standards, with which I know we've already spoken. You're all familiar. And we've spoken about a few times over the course of this project.

So starting with back in 2022, we began working with Saratoga to implement what was at that time its new housing element. We developed objective design standards for multifamily and mixed use development throughout the city and some other targeted zoning updates needed. We had public study sessions and adopted those in the 2024. Next, we developed objective design standards for single family. Single family development primarily.

And this was just an effort to implement some other programs in the housing element. Right? So we initiated that in 2024, some public outreach, and adopted about a year ago. And then a year ago, we initiated this project, a village design standards, which is specifically to implement other housing element policies. And we've conducted a series of outreach events.

And we're last here in November at a public study session. And we're here with a hearing draft to show you how the current hearing draft responds to what we heard in November. So brief introduction about the housing element program that we are here to respond to. Program 3.3-three, preserve the character of the Saratoga village. So we just jumped into learning about the village and understanding the existing regulatory framework and guidelines framework for development in the village.

So specifically, the policy called for us to take the village design guidelines document, which are guidelines, so they're recommendations and not requirements, and turn them into objective design standards. So this project preserves and reinforces the village character, acknowledges existing patterns of development. We listened to the community. We looked at the existing regulatory framework. And essentially listened to the community to turn those into standards.

This project, it's worth noting, does not modify land uses, what's allowed, what requires a CUP versus by right. It does not do that. It doesn't modify existing development standards that are by zone, right, the basics of development, which is height, setbacks, density. It doesn't look at parking ratios, how much parking is required per unit or square feet of commercial. And it doesn't address historic designations.

So we worked on, we started with the guidelines document together with staff and community input. And we developed a set of code amendments. These are primarily found in the draft, a new draft article which was inserted where there was room and where it sort of made sense to put it in 1562. And then in order to make sure that these standards are adequately implemented and found by and accessible to and consistent with other standards, there was occasion to make minor modifications to other parts of the code. Those are the ones in orange.

But the bulk of what we're presenting will be in Article 52, if adopted. At a glance, quickly, what we've done over the past year, a lot of working meetings with the city staff. Documentation of our analysis and recommendations. We released an online community questionnaire. We held an in person community workshop.

We had a joint study session followed by more working meetings. We developed the administrative draft last summer, worked with staff to develop a public review draft. We talked about that in November. And we're back here with the hearing draft. So as we know, whereas previously, in previous efforts, we looked at the whole city, Really we're just focusing now on the village in the red box here, the heart of the city.

And described in the guidelines from 1992, last updated a handful of years ago. So looking closely at the village, it's the area outlined in red. The boundary of the village was not up for discussion as part of this project. That boundary was already set in the guidelines document. This figure shows the zoning districts that are within that boundary and some some important things.

Right? The creek, some historic structures, Blaney Plaza. We took a long hard look at existing built form, and we learned from it. And we understood what makes we made our best attempt to understand what makes the village the village. What are the existing patterns we see? What defines the character of these buildings? What can we learn from them? And we became familiar with these buildings. We looked carefully, thank you, at at the guidelines document, which was our essentially our marching orders for this project. And I know you're familiar with this document.

Generally speaking, we looked at chapters, I think, two through six to address them in the design standards. And we just understood how the document works, how it's laid out, the guidelines, how they're framed, what they draw on from looking at existing development. And all of these can be found in the proposed guidelines. And we took them all seriously understanding these, they're referred to by three digit numerals. And we tracked them and did our best to turn them into objective standards.

Okay. Community outreach was an essential part of this project. We started with stakeholder interviews in March. We talked to 13 people with knowledge about and interest in development in the village. And we looked for a consensus.

And we asked a lot of questions and a lot of follow-up questions. And and we understood that design should reflect the existing historic character, that people wanted to see activity and energy in the village, had a lot of input about uses. We identified where there's some mixed input. And specifically asked the stakeholders about relative importance of different design elements to get a sense of where do the stakeholders priorities lie. And that was very helpful in developing the standards.

I mentioned earlier we had an online questionnaire open for about six weeks or so. We had two forty one responses. And same here. We identified where there was a general consensus. And then we took a very close look at where there was some mixed input so that we could dig into that a bit deeper.

But we understood that there was, strong feelings about screening, about, quality of facades, about quality of of storefronts, and and materials. And then some specific details when it comes to style and transitions. We got a lot of varied input. We held an in person community workshop in May where we introduced a couple of activities. So we had an activity here about street level design.

And we heard what was on people's minds, what was important when it came to the features of storefront. We asked specifically about style and materials and details to try to inform our understanding of what what gives the village its character. And we had an activity about building massing with some sections across the village to understand how many levels are existing buildings. How does that, what does that look like with respect to the changing terrain? And what do we want to see going forward?

And we had some really good discussions about height and step backs and how community members would like to see the buildings stepped back or shaved off on sides. All of the input was very helpful in testing out standards and drafting the first draft of the standards. An ad hoc committee was convened to give pointed input on specific elements that were especially important to decision makers. So from that we got some specific direction about building colors, about signage, particularly in the rear of buildings, about views and stepping back upper stories of buildings and which stories and by how much, about does every elevation of a building require the same level of detail, And about specific details and design. Design what we're calling palettes or features of particular architectural styles.

So all of that put together, we developed recommended code amendments. So I'll go through them quickly. First, we'll talk about specific changes from the draft that we discussed in November to the draft that we're looking at today. So there was a list of some minor, some more significant. But generally speaking, we emphasized the proposed fifteen sixty two that all standards elsewhere in the code still apply.

Notably, the standard that requires commercial uses at the ground level. So we're not conflicting with that. We're not overruling that. That stands. And we just added something that reminds readers that that still applies.

We added a map with parking districts to support standards related to required paseos and rear entries. We modified the color, allowed color ranges in response to feedback at the study session. We modified an architectural, one of the four architectural palettes to remove some of the more contemporary features. We added a standard about requiring a boundary survey when the property line location is unclear or not necessarily at the back of sidewalk. We added some standards to be more specific about required outdoor seating when outdoor dining is provided in a parklet.

And we added a reference to the fire prevention standards in the WUI area. And a few more. And they all can be found in the draft before you tonight. And so I'll go through it quickly now. The purpose, I think it's largely unchanged.

It lays out what we're intending to do the standards in 1562. Building massing, we start with the big moves, right? So for street facing elevations, any story above the second must be stepped back. And we have additional step back requirements in the CH1 abutting a low density residential. Some standards for building articulation in the CH1 and CH2, which is the majority of the village, right?

So we establish essentially modules, maximum lengths of street facing facades without articulation. And we specify that long buildings must require a direct passage to any parking that's provided in the rear. March degree design is required. We sort of became more got a little more specific about standards for ground floor commercial. Acoustic measures.

That's a reference to another part of the code. False facades, standards about when terra cotta is, when it's used, what it must also what that building must also demonstrate. I'm gonna make sure this is the right skip one. Right. Okay.

So we have four what we're calling architectural details palettes that are reflective of the historic character that we observed and discussed with the community. So this is palette A. And we identify its sort of hallmarks, what makes it look the way it does. And the idea is that if you choose this palette, you must comply with certain of these elements. And this is identified.

This is spelled out in draft code section. Architectural palette B looks a bit different, a little more modern. We see this in the village. And should an applicant choose to propose a building reflective of this style, it's got to sort of go all in. Right? We want to avoid pastiche and support building integrity, integrity of design. Palette C looks a bit different. We've got stucco, we've got tile roofs, we've got recessed windows, and we call that all out on this diagram. And architectural palette D will also look familiar to you. Right?

It's got a range of elements that give it a particular look. Specific standards about frontages and design elements on building frontages. So standards about awnings, overhangs, features. It it must include one of a list of features that that give a character essentially. We limit blank walls.

Slightly different standards for R1. Right? There's not a whole lot of that in the village, but a little bit. Entries. So this part of the section refers back to 1558, which is entry design for multifamily mixed use throughout the city.

But it includes a couple of standards that are specific to the village to really make sure that we're consistent with the dimensions we're seeing in the village that make the buildings feel like they do. We looked at rear entrances. This is of course unique to village where there's parking districts in the rear. So we want the rear of the buildings to be inviting. And so we introduced a set of standards for building design along those districts.

Few specific details about windows and transparency. To make sure the buildings are active or transparent or that you get a sense of whether this is a residential space or commercial space and to make the ensure that the windows are high quality. So a range of standards here. And you get a sense of what's behind it too. So the commercial ground floor frontages are not a mystery, but they communicate to the pedestrian what's happening and are essentially inviting to pedestrians.

We looked closely at the awnings to identify patterns and what's appropriate going forward. How do we ensure consistency of design proposals going forward with the existing character? And then we got specific about building materials and colors, a bit of back and forth with some questions with the city about how specific do we want to get with colors and how do we want to require applicants to identify colors. We're numerical here, right? And then narrowed in on the values and the ranges that you see here.

Then we looked at the site design, the design of setback areas, and open spaces, and introduced standards to make sure that the open spaces are not leftover spaces. Right? They're well designed, they're usable, and that they contribute to an active and engaging and comfortable public realm. More standards about open spaces, ensuring that they're accessible, that they look like open spaces and they won't be confused with driveways. And that they're appropriately sized that they will be used and active.

A few more standards about courtyards. And these are sort of keyed with some of the building placement standards, which is to say if a building is they're sort of related to setbacks and should a building be set back x number of feet, then the space must be usable or improved or landscaped. So there's some cross references there. And then standards for alright, for how these spaces feel. A few standards for screening of outdoor areas that we'd rather not see to make sure that it's not too onerous on the commercial operators and ensures a comfortable and beautiful pedestrian realm.

Okay, supporting amendments. I mentioned we've got minor amendments elsewhere in the code, outside of 1562, but in sections that you've already got. So a few definitions of terms that are introduced newly to the code. Some language in sections of the code where it is warranted to ensure that applicants know that these standards apply to their projects should that project be in the village. Fifteen thirty in your code is the signs chapter, and there's a section in there for the village sign district.

So we went straight to that signs chapter to make modifications to make sure that the standards support signs that we discussed with the community and the staff that are reflective of the character that we want to see in the village. So just a few minor amendments throughout that village sign district section. The biggest addition was adding a graphic for awning sign text. Minor amendments to the design review section for multi family and ministerial consideration for qualifying projects to be consistent with state law. And also fifteen fifty eight, which was the first section that we worked on a couple of years ago with you all.

And making sure that not complying with the design standards doesn't necessarily make you non conforming. And that is my, perhaps not so brief, overview of the amendments before you. And I'll turn it back over to Cindy to talk a little bit about next steps.

Thank you. So given some concern about public outreach, our staff's revised recommendation is to open the public hearing this evening for public comment and a robust commission discussion and provide recommendations to staff that you can see in another draft to come back to you on February 25. That's two weeks from today. So we're asking that you continue this item to February 25 for additional public outreach. And we will provide that public outreach between now and February 25.

Please sign up for the Saratoga Source if you don't already sign up for that. Notify me. You can send me an individual email or go to the city website. We have updates on our city website. As I mentioned, continuing the public hearing to February 25, finalizing the Planning Commission recommendation at that meeting, and then moving on to the City Council meeting on March 18.

Another public hearing, another opportunity to provide public input, and providing additional outreach between February 26, the day after the Planning Commission meeting, and March 18. So I can't advance the next slide, but thank you, Monica. So thank you again. And I've listed the URLs on how to stay informed including the dedicated website for this project, how to sign up for Notify Me. You wanna subscribe to the Village Design Standards by going to the Connect section of our website and signing up for Notify Me, signing up for the Saratoga Source which comes out on Fridays.

And if you aren't already on the email list, look for an email tomorrow. If not, send me an email and I'll add you to our distribution list. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Monica and Cindy. Are there any questions from our commissioners to our consultant and staff? Yes. Yeah, go ahead.

Do you want the I'm not quite sure of the process you're going to use. Do want to hear public hearing? I had some questions around the suggestions or asks that we had at the last study session that I didn't see incorporated into this draft. Wanted to talk about those. And then I had some questions just about mixing words and graphics. It didn't seem to align for me. It appropriate to do that now or would you I like me to do that

think we can do it now and then we'll open up to public comments.

Yeah. If you have specific questions, now is a good time to ask those. Yes.

So first off, we had in the last study session we talked about having the residential privacy addressed in these standards. I didn't see where that had been addressed. Can you help me, show me where that is?

So residential privacy is addressed in our residential standards, which are outside of the village but still applicable to the r one district within the village boundary. So we have objective design standards regarding privacy in our single family design code section that addresses privacy.

When I read the things that the Planning Commission must do to make findings I didn't see a reference to the residential or any other design standards. I missed it obviously. Can you show me where that is?

So we have, let me go to the proposed ordinance. So we have various sections in so under applicability, for example, it talks about design standards of various articles in the city code, including the single family design standards.

I was looking primarily at one of the last slides that you'd showed which said that in order to approve a project the Planning Commission must make the findings that it meets just the village standards. Do the village standards reference the fact that that has to meet the residential standards. I didn't I missed that.

So this I'm looking at the slides. Are you talking about the supporting amendment slide? Monica, can you open go back to the supporting amendment slide? Is was this the slide that you were referring to?

No. Probably the one after that. It said that in order it had to do with the city what this what the planning commission had to do to make its findings. It's one of your last slides. Yeah, it was the one actually the one that you just had, the previous slide. Yeah. Fifteen forty six. Any project has to meet the objective design standards of this section fifteen sixty two. So does fifteen sixty two say that it also has to meet the residential design standards? I didn't find it in fifteen sixty two.

So what fifteen sixty two says is that properties located in the residential zone must comply with the residential standards found elsewhere in the city code, which would include findings.

Okay. So that it's but that's only if the property was designated in our zone. So for along the along Saratoga not Saratoga, yeah, Saratoga Avenue going Big Basin Way, those will be all commercial those won't be our designations. Those will all be mixed use or they won't be ours. So they would be are there any privacy constraints on those buildings along Big Basin Way?

So this slide is just a summary. But we do have supporting amendments. Let me go to that section now.

We don't need to necessarily do it now. But so one of the things that for me to approve it on two weeks, I would like staff, if you would please, to just show me how those, the privacy of those residential units is going to be taken care of. And and I you you can do it later. Show me how it all cross references.

If if I may, under applicability, I think it's b three of what is exhibit a. And that's the village standards. Right? Fifteen sixty So it references I think the standards you're looking for, I think, are the privacy standards in fifteen fifty eight. Fifteen fifty eight is all all multifamily mixed use. And there's privacy, there are privacy standards in there that we worked out a few years ago, right? So, B3 mentions applicable, there's applicable standards, design standards in 1558. So that may be what you're searching for.

Yeah. So in order to redo a building along Big Basin Way, the upper stories will be subject to the residential standards? Okay. That's what I couldn't find what you just described. Thank you.

The other question I had, if you go back a little bit, my understanding was that one of the original sections in this, thing, with respect to the building massing standards, it says the upper story setbacks any story above the second story and any story other than the Ground Floor, meaning the second story that's over 12 feet in height, has to be stepped back a minimum of six feet from the floor below. And that's correct. I mean, that's you're you're gonna require that?

So this was discussed at the study session? Yeah. There was some there was a recommendation by the ad hoc committee to require the setback to be equal to the height of the story. But that was discussed at the study session and it was the consensus was that we would it would be a six foot setback and that we would remove the reference to third story so as not to Right. Encourage third stories.

Right. And and if it goes four stories or higher, what they would apply to. Okay. So then I come to some of the figures that you showed me tonight, and all the ones in the thing. They don't show third story setbacks.

Monica, do you want to take that one?

Yeah. Well, that's very intentional. We we previously did show third story setbacks. But the the consensus was among city decision makers is we don't even want to show a third story. Let's just put it in writing that if it's there, has to be stepped back. But we don't want to show it so as not to accidentally encourage it or But you're give a

puzzling me. Your diagrams show a third story. So

I'm looking at

Well, go back in your presentation.

Okay.

And And also in the, I'll give you the figure citations in the document as well if you want.

Okay. So the one got

keep going back. Keep going back. There you go. Here you went by one.

Is there two?

That second story's over 12 foot. It's not set back. Go forward one,

two. Oh, these.

Okay. The third story's not set back?

You're right. It's not.

Okay. I find that very misleading. So I'd like to ask staff make the figures match the words. Thank you. Those are my questions.

Thank you. We will work on that for the next hearing.

Thank you, Cindy.

Thank you. Any other questions? I do have one. So upon reading the public comments, I found this one is from Alex and Annette and Marilyn from the Surgical Historical Foundation about adding an item for repair if in to the instance of needed repair. And I think the recommendation is to add item or code and to keep to keep the historical buildings in good repair.

So I do have a suggestion on how to work that into the draft ordinance and I can share that when we get to the discussion point.

Can share it now.

Yeah, let's share

it Let me

go to share.

So do you see this on

your

screen? The red letters?

Yes.

Okay. And I apologize that I think the Zoom callers can see this but the audience members can't see this. But right now we have at the end of the draft code language, there's a Section F and I'll read what it says. Maintenance. Whenever screening or landscaping is required, the owner or occupant of the property shall keep and maintain such screening and landscaping in good condition and repair.

To address this comment, Planning if Commission makes this recommendation, we can have that sentence be number one. So maintenance whenever screening, that language would be number one. And then a new number two would say compliance with thirteen-25.030, duty to keep in good repair is required. Rather than repeat what's already in the code, we are referencing the city code and saying it's required.

I see. It doesn't matter. We don't need to call out if it's designated for designated historical landmark or not. This is for any buildings. Is that right?

It's so 1325 is in our heritage preservation ordinance. So it is speaking to properties that are on the Historical Resource Inventory.

I see. So it is covered here. It should be covered.

My suggestion is that we refer to that code section.

Yes.

So it would be covered.

Awesome. Thank you. You're welcome. Any other questions? If not, I think we are now open to public remarks. Are any speakers from public? No. I do have a hand raised online. Ping?

Anyone in audience would like to speak?

Please accept the prompt to speak.

Good evening, planning commission. This is Marilyn. Can you hear me

okay? Yes.

K. I I have two quick remarks. On the issue that Cindy was just talking about where she goes back and references just homes on the requiring homes on the heritage preservation inventory, I think that that should be applicable to all buildings in the village because I think all buildings in the village should be kept up in in in good repair, not just the things on the historic inventory. That's one comment. And the other thing, getting back to the other planning commission's remarks about the building articulation and detail palettes, I think it is confusing saying showing three stories there.

And as I recall in the community community meetings and the ad hoc, we actually kinda want to stay away from modern looking buildings. And you added that Pallet B, which is a very modern looking building. And I think that should be up for a little bit more discussion. And since the requirement in the village is a 35 foot height limit, it's a little confusing showing something that is more than 35 feet here. So since the current code is 35 feet, I know we're not mentioning it anywhere else, but that's why we wanted to stay away from anything that referred to 35 a third a third story because it's pretty much impossible to do that in a 35 foot height limit.

Those are my two remarks. Thank you.

Thank you, Marilyn. Any other speakers?

I have no other hands raised online.

Okay. Thank you, Francis. That will conclude public comment on this item. And then next one is, are there any other comments or discussions from this? From commissioners. Go ahead.

I just wanted to share my thoughts from what I heard. So thanks so much for the presentation today. I know that we've been working on it for several years and it's gone through some iterations. And so I just wanted to call out for myself or for others hearing the ways in which you've incorporated the village design guidelines plus the community feedback into these objective design standards. And I found it really helpful to hear about them.

So having to do with scale and massing, you know, adding that stories change in the language was really helpful. And then calling out the step backs that were going to apply to those different stories. And then having those be changed or adjusted for edges of buildings that are abutting R1. That was all really, really helpful. I didn't have the same reaction to the architectural palettes because I understand the confusion that they are three story and so showing step backs on them would be helpful.

But I was using it for the architectural palette piece of what we want to maintain. And so, found those really helpful to be categorized into design collections palettes that people can try to make sure they have continuity in their design. That's how I interpreted it, was the styling and design. The frontage features for the facades, it was really helpful to hear about those called out. Similarly, consistent designs for the awnings and sidewalk seating.

I know we've had lots of discussion on the colors. And so it was really helpful to see again more specific palettes and what allowed colors there are. I think in a previous meeting Commissioner Girmarat had talked about sound. And it was really nice to see acoustic incorporated into the standards. That was very helpful. And then similarly the screenings for refuse and equipment. And then there's so many, like, being on the Commission, I've learned so much more about all of the different types of signs that are possible and the locations of them. So just seeing all the detail on all of the different signs and having the standards for those was really helpful. This language on maintenance of the buildings and keeping them in good repair sounds useful. So just across all of the categories that we heard about tonight, was really, really helpful detail.

I think the comments about changing some of the images just to be clearer and more consistent will be helpful. But again, some people would just interpret them for the architectural style piece of it. And then I guess one question was I wasn't sure if we had any desire or conversation around murals, artwork, whether there's standards from other cities or whether that's important to incorporate or so that was something on my mind that came up when we were looking at the design standards was anything having to do with artwork on walls.

Those are my thoughts. Since you mentioned palettes, I I would like the Planning Commission to weigh in on whether or not we wanna keep palette b with the understanding that the third story would be corrected. Because it did come up from the ad hoc committee. And while I believe there was a consensus of the study session that it be kept in, I think it's good to just bring it back up for discussion at our Planning Commission meeting.

Could you put it back on the is it possible to put it back on?

So this is Palette B.

Yeah. Okay. So

continue with your discussion. I just wanted to add that as a discussion item. Thank you.

Yeah. Go ahead.

I have a small questions about the design. So we'll talk about the standards and the style of the design. But do we have any limitation to the to the language of the sign? So are we are we allowed to have, like, the different languages instead of English? Like, we have a Chinese, Japanese for certain restaurants and merchants. I don't see anything mentioned here in the the standards. Thank you.

So language for signs, that would be that would fall under all signage. And so if the Planning Commission wants to take a look at our sign ordinance, they could add that to their work plan item this evening and we we can discuss that.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, go ahead.

Just want to check on the last public comment we had. Is there a 30 some odd foot limitation on the building height in this district? I didn't think there was.

So again, that refers back to our commercial standards which are applicable. So I'll pull that up while you guys are discussing.

Yeah, I just wanted clarification for myself. None of these buildings can be over 36 feet or whatever it was. Yeah. Thank you. And then I'll just comment while I've got the floor.

I don't mind architectural details of palette b. I think that towns that I've seen that really look interesting are ones that have sun mix in them. And I don't expect that, I mean, I expect that what will happen in our village is that we'll end up with a mix of everything. And I find, just personally, I think Saratoga reminds me a lot of New England villages. I've spent a lot of time in the fall going through those.

And a lot of those have mix of what, I'm gonna, my opinion, old and new. And I think it adds a lot. So that's just a personal comment as opposed to any necessary direction.

If may jump in and respond to the question about murals. In fifteen sixty two E two, we limit blank walls. And the elements that we list a number of elements that if you've got this, then it's not a blank wall. Right? And one of those is murals along with patterns of insets, projections, offsets, recessed windows.

So we do note that as something to keep a wall from being blank. That said, we are not regulating public art in this.

Thanks so much for the clarification. Thanks.

Yeah, my Mr. Gerberos, just, I okay. So I have an answer for you when we're all done with the discussion. Thanks.

Oh, yeah. Just just one follow-up on that. I mean, even right now in village, you know, on the 4th Street and Big Bissing Way, there are flowers, decorations on the wall already. Yeah. Go ahead.

I think staff had asked for direction from us on the palettes, and I just wanted to agree with Commissioner Gomerard's questions on the set of palettes that should be acceptable or available to people.

Alright. I'm sorry? Go ahead.

Do you have an opinion on patent B?

Yeah. We're good.

Okay.

Okay. I think we are concluding. Other discussion

items from the Planning Commission? Okay. I did wanna answer Commissioner Germerod's question. So this is in section fifteen nineteen point zero five zero gs as in girl. And what it says is height of structures. The maximum height of any structure in any CH district shall be 35 feet and three stories.

Thank you. You. Good discussion. Any further questions?

I will add, so the member of the public asked that the duty to keep in good repair be applied to all buildings downtown. And if that's the Planning Commission's direction, staff can work on that language and bring it back

to you in two weeks.

What do you all think?

I guess I would just ask, you know, what are your thoughts on that? Are there distinctions between building types that you'd want to make or not? Like, what are your thoughts on the difference between the current language versus the change?

So, we would modify it to apply to all buildings. I it is good standard. We do want our village to look nice. You know, we have a vacant Yeah. Storefront ordinance and so this would go further to make sure our village looks nice.

Yeah. I think we agree. Okay. All right. I think this will conclude our item number two.

And we want to continue this to a date certain, February 25.

Yes. That is a special it's a special planning commission meeting.

Yes.

Do you need a motion you from need us? A motion? I make a motion we continue this item until February 26.

Twenty fifth.

Twenty fifth. Thank you. Thank you so much. Okay.

Do we need a second or a vote? Yes. Any second?

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you.

Now we move into new business, which is Planning Commission Work Plan, and I'll turn it over to staff.

So I do not have a PowerPoint presentation, but in your packet you have a draft work plan. It includes taking another look at the tree regulations. So in addition to what the Planning Commission recommended a month or two ago, taking another look at the review of the tree regulations including tree species in the city's hillsides, WUI areas and fire hazard zones. We're also seeking Planning Commission feedback on whether tree replacement payment into the safety funds should be required when the trees are removed in the Amber Resistant Zone or properties located in the WUI and you have a public comment on that. And we'll get in more into the details in two weeks on this item because we really wanna get some specific feedback as we develop that ordinance.

And then we're also seeking direction on the regulations that should be implemented for development projects versus a simple tree removal request because the recently adopted tree replacement requirements are explicitly limited to development projects. And so we'll talk more about that in two weeks. The other item on the draft work plan is a housing law compliance audit. So staff is working with the city attorney's office to review the city's compliance with state housing law and they're comparing the city code to state statutes and we're working with the city attorney's office and we anticipate bringing something to the Planning Commission in the spring. Following on that, every year the state legislature makes changes and these sometimes go beyond housing.

And so if there are changes that affect the land use then we will bring that to the Planning Commission and the City Council. And as you know, every year we do minor code amendments just to clean up the code, make it more user friendly, get rid of any inconsistencies, if there's any typos or we correct that. And then we've also staff has also been working with the city attorney's office on standard conditions of approval. So once those are finalized through the city attorney's office, we'll bring those to you as an informational item so you can see the type of conditions of approval that we're putting on projects, including Planning Commission projects and ministerial or administrative projects. And then of course you're gonna continue your work on things that you're already you know, doing, your typical work plan, appeals of administrative design review decisions.

You'll be looking this year, we'll probably be bringing some builders or many tentative maps to the Planning Commission for review. A lot of those builders or many projects are going through the environmental review process right now and some of those are wrapping up the environmental review so you'll be seeing those in the next couple of months. And then structures in the multifamily zones, the mixed use zones, the commercial districts, those come to the Planning Commission. Conditional use permits and variances, tentative subdivision maps such as builders remedy, and any general plan text and map of limits. In addition to text amendments that staff brings forward, an applicant can also ask to change the general plan or the zoning code and that would come to you for a recommendation to the City Council.

And then finally, again this is just draft and we are open to taking something off the list, adding something to the list, modifying the list. And so I'd like to open it up to questions and then public comment.

Questions?

Questions and comments or just questions?

Questions and then turning it over to public comment.

Just questions for now. No questions.

No questions.

Okay. So

I don't see any public. Anyone online who wants to comment on our work plan?

No hands raised.

Thank you. So now you can have your

comments. I thought the discussion that we were having about communications and the work that you've done so far, trying to get it interactive so people can do it and stuff like that. I'd like to see that conversation continued because I think there were a number of us that wanted to see if we couldn't push that a little bit further along in the sense of making it easier for people to see what's happening in their neighborhood by way of getting push notifications and stuff like that. But just as a general thing to work on, I think that improving communications of what's going on for people would be helpful for us to address.

Any other suggestions? Any other suggestions?

I have questions. So you just mentioned about the Bitter's Remedy project. I think we have multiple beauty remedy project is going on. So I just, myself, I think I would like to have some kind of updates, see what actually is going on, right? Because all those projects really have impact to our city and to our city's character. So is that possible on our planning commission meeting, we can have a very small section, just have a little brief update, see how those projects actually going and

How often do you want to recommend that?

Well, whenever yeah. I don't know how often because I don't know the progress of each project.

So I think when they're ready, they do come to commission. Right?

You do?

The builders are remaining so if if the builders are remaining, I believe they all have tentative maps. When they have a tentative map, that does come to the Planning Commission. So regardless of the that they are going through the streamline state laws, if it's a tentative map, it will be coming before you. Okay.

So are you looking to see you just want an overall update is what you're asking for?

Yes, especially big projects like a multiple units sites. I'll see a couple of them.

Do the staff have any recommendation when you think it would be appropriate to update the Planning Commission every quarter?

This is just an idea, Cindy. So we have a pretty robust Builders' Remedy page. Perhaps we could Yeah. Have a future other business new biz or other business item to just kinda go through that page. There's 22 projects. So we could take some time and just go over the facts of the project. We can't talk about the

merits. Sure.

Yeah. But we can just indicate the facts. You know, it it's important for you folks to know projects. And, you know, every day, Cindy and her team, we answer questions. They answer questions at the counter about Builders' Remedy projects on the phone and email. And so the more folks know the projects, you you're kind of our advocates from from a land use perspective so you can answer questions that the public can come to you. So maybe that's a future topic we can add to an agenda just to go over that website and, you know, go over the facts of the projects.

Thank you. Paul?

I'll just make a comment, Sami. I found the update a couple months ago, Brian. You just said, gee, we've got, I can't remember. You said, we had this many projects, you know, this many were, I'm going call it big, but, you know, and this many are just single family that are going through. And, of the big ones, this many, they're roughly in this state.

We're waiting for the environmental impact. I mean, to the point, I wouldn't mind it, I'm gonna say even monthly, but just when I'm talking about a me, it can be really short and sweet. But but that's the kind of information I need in my neighborhood meetings. You know, I'm not gonna get into the details with people, but if we're just be able to tell, hey, they really wanna know, are we getting a whole bunch more of them? Are they leveled off? Are they dropping? Is it you know, just so just high level I'm I'm speaking for myself only. For me, I would really appreciate. Sure. A high level sixty second Yeah. Elevator speech.

Yeah. The way we look at it, if if you can talk to your neighbors in your community about these projects that might save them a trip coming to city hall. We love seeing our Saratoga residents, but the more people know, the better. So yeah, that's definitely something we will do this upcoming work plan year.

If I'm hearing you right, you're saying maybe as part of the director's report that one of the things that they can say is sixty seconds of Build A Remedy Project update?

Yeah, that would be nice.

What's hot and what's not.

Thank you. Do we have to do anything with, you know, HTC having approved? Are they coming back to look at what we're doing? Is this something that the Commission needs to be concerned, be looking at part of the plan?

So HCV has been sending out letters to all cities regarding ADU laws, and that is something that the city attorney's office is looking at. So a HCV is really focused on ADUs, and they're focused on housing, zoning, rezoning for housing which we've done. So I, you know, I think we're in good standing with HCV. And when we receive a technical advisory from HCV, we act on it.

So is there at some point they come and check to see if you're, you know, what we promised, if it's in the pipeline or not? Or do they do an audit or how does how does it work? I'm I'm we're only in the second year of the eight year, right? Or third year?

2023 is actually when

we were supposed to start.

Oh. Yeah. Sorry. So we are in

January.

Third fourth year?

It's twenty sixth. So

Okay. Fourth On

March 18, the city council will receive a progress report on how we're doing with our housing element. So we'll report on planning entitlements and building permits issued in 2025. It's based on the calendar year, so it'll go through 2025. And that will also include a report on where we are with all of our housing element programs.

Okay.

And we can provide that to the Planning Commission as well.

Paul? Yes, please. Okay. Any other go ahead, Bing.

Yes. So I think you mentioned, Cindy, about our next commission meeting to talk about tree ordinance. May I suggest I think this has been discussed maybe several years ago. So we have some exceptions, some trees that are highly flammable and high risk, trees like eucalyptus and monterey pine, which is already in our cities, ordinance that you can just notify the city and you can remove those. It's kind of exception.

And I know that some other neighboring cities have some additional similar particular pine trees, which are non native and highly flammable and easy to catch fire. Can we ask our arbors to do some research around in the surrounding cities, like in the same similar environment like our hillside and see what are other trees that are also dangerous for the community?

Yes. So she'll be at the February 25 meeting and I'll ask her to take a look what other cities are dealing with that.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

So what was in our report attachment for this item will be discussed in February 25. Like I remember reading something about trees within five feet of the house can be cut. Is that correct?

So the the Planning Commission and the City Council looked at tree standards in the what was the zone zero. We we were on zone zero, they were on the fire ember resistance zone. So those were adopted by the city council. Right. So this

is going further and looking at other tree species, maybe what other cities are doing. So in zone zero, it does not include the help me remember. Does zone zero include the whole city or just the WUI areas?

I'd have to pull up the code that was adopted.

Because I know we talked about having some things be across the board, but then we were talking about zones, all the zones as it became, changed the language, the fire.

I think it is citywide, but I want to double check on that.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, suggestions? Okay. None, I guess we move on to anything else for that? Or we move on to directors item?

Before I turn it over to Brian, I do want to let the public know and let the Planning Commission know that we have received two we've been notified by residents of two fraudulent emails, and I'm hearing that this is happening in other cities. And the fraudulent it looks like someone or some several someones are tracking Planning Commission meetings and they're emailing the homeowner and saying and they're using, you know, like a false from saying it's from the planning commission or from city staff saying, you know, you owe us more money, you can wire the money into this account. And so I just wanna let the planning commission know and the public know, we do not send invoices requesting a wire transfer. If you receive an email asking for that or that looks fraudulent, please reach out to city staff in the Planning Department and we'll take a look at it and make sure that it's legitimate. So please do not wire money if it, you know, just do your due diligence on that.

Thank you.

I didn't know. Yeah. Good to know. Good to know.

Lots of fraudulent stuff going on. Well

thank you. First off I'd like to thank the Planning Commission again for meeting two times this month. We have some items that are important, so I appreciate your dedication to come see us again in two weeks. Thanks for the public for coming in person and online. I I just wanted to to point something out that the village design standards in our housing element were actually due in February 2025.

And so Cindy started in January 2025, and I I wanted to applaud her efforts. She has she's hit the ground running with so many projects, and this is just another big big lift. And so I wanted to thank you, Cindy, for everything you've done with this. We're almost there. What is critical, though, is that our next meeting, that we do have a recommendation from the Planning Commission on the design standards.

It's important to get this through to the council and whatever the council does. But from the Planning Commissioner's perspective, we do have that request to to make a recommendation of of some sorts, whatever you choose. It's important for us to maintain our promise to HCD of fulfilling these housing element policies and programs. And that's all I wanted to share about that. I just thank you for everything. Cindy, thank you. We've had a lot of projects this year. House Family Vineyards, SRC. SRC was before you, I think. Mhmm.

Yeah. But but she's kind of leading the implementation of SRC. We have a consultant helping with that which is a lot of lot of work. And so and then 22 builders revenue projects. So grateful for her to be here with us. And thank you so much for all of you do. And I hope you're excited for your playing commissioner's training in March. I think that'll be really fun. And you know what? I do wanna kind of hear from the commissioners when you do come back to talk about your experiences. Train the trainers, is what they say in the corporate world? Thank you so much.

Thank you.

And I'll see you at the academy as well. I'm going to staff support.

Cool. So, who all are going? Oh, nice. Yay. Good job. I went two years ago or three years ago, maybe. Moving on to commission items. Anything we wanna share? Well, wish everybody a happy Valentine's Day. The year of the horse. Happy

new year.

Happy new year. Sweet. We adjourned the meeting with that.