04/30/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III review step would address in part maximum floor area and the maximum `, development area. A discussion followed on how this site analysis would be included in the process. Would it be optional? Optional with incentive of fast tracking a project? Required for all new residences and major additions? Required for all projects? It was also discussed who would conduct this review: staff? Site Development Committee? Planning Commission at Site Development? the formal Planning Commission? Councilmember Johnson left the meeting at 6:30 p.m. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously by all members present to direct staff to implement a site analysis policy for a temporary period of sixty days on all projects and to review this policy at the end of the temporary period. 2.2. REBUILDING AND BUILDING OUT The City Planner referred to four aspects of the issue of rebuilding and building out: 1) remodel/new construction; 2) preserving non-conformities; 3) maximum build-out; and 4) neighborhood compatibity. Under the first aspect building fees were addressed and the levels of modifications which included zoning and site development permits. Concerning preserving non-conformities, the City Planner noted that currently owners may retain, repair and rebuild in same form in perpetuity; however, no expansion is allowed. Portola Valley has the same regulations as the Town. In Woodside if the property is destroyed to more than 60% it must be brought into conformity. In Saratoga and several other cities if a property is destroyed to more than 50% it must be brought into conformity. It was suggested that the Town look at not retaining the same form if it is a deliberate remodel as opposed to 'an act of God'. Regarding maximum build-out, in Town the amount is based on slope/density with additions granted by variance. In Woodside a flat square footage was allowed on a lot based on lot size plus 2,000 square feet if the lot is 1 1/2 times the minimum size and in Portola Valley a flat square footage was allowed on a lot based on the lot size. Discussions took place concerning site development not approving projects that had not allowed for any outdoor area. Regarding the neighborhood compatibility issue, the Planning Director noted that in the Town this was addressed under the Conditional Devlopment Permit Process. Areas of concern here and in other towns included: notification of neighbors; bulk, mass and materials in relation to neighboring homes; and preservation and access of views. April 30, 1990 2