Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-22-1972 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING CO~DIISSION MINUTES TIME: Monday, 22 May 1972 - 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION The meeting was called to order by Chairman Lively at 7:30 P.M. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bacon, Belanger, Lively, Marshall, Martin, Metcalf, and Smith. B. MINUTES Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the reading of the minutes of the 8 May 1972 meeting be waived and they be approved as distributed with the following change: page 3. .under C. UP-212. paragraph 3. .line 2. .delete the word "miscellaneous"; motion carried with Conm~issioner Metcalf abstaining. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. UP-211 - John P. McLaughlin, Via Regina - Request to Allow ~o (2) Building Sites on Less than the Site Area Required under Ordinance 3E-8 - Contihued from 8 May 1972 Chairman Lively reopened the hearihg at 7:35 P.M.. The Secretary read a connnunication' received from Mr. Norman W. Koepernik of 21810 Via Regina requesting thai this Use Permit be carefully considered since there is a pro-rata reimbursement policy which the City of Saratoga imposed on five (5) Via Regina property ovahers as a condition of building site approval ' according to the agreement anyone requesting a building permit was to reimburse all the owners their pro-rata share of the cost of widening Via Regina. .. The Secretary explained that the PUblic Works Department is researching this matter and will resolve same befor~ this property receives building-site approval. Connnissioner Metcalf stated that Mr. Koepernik's letter explains the situation very well and an answer should be ~on~ardcd to him explaining the series of events that will take place. : Chairman Lively stated that the letter can be answered by the 'Secretary and it can be explained that the matte~ is under study by the Public Works Depart- ment and that the problem will be resolved under. building-site-approval appli~-. cation. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 outlining the action taken by the Technical Advisory Committee and the P.P.C. Hillside Sub- committee relative to this matter. Chairman Lively briefly outlined the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 recommend- ing that the subject Use Permit be approved. Commissioner Marshall recormmended that in condition 1. .the word "simultaneously" be added at the end of line 1. .after the word "parcels". -1- Planning Commission Minutes - 22 May 1972 .- Continued II. A. UP-211 - Continued Commissioner Smith moved, secondeid by Commissioner Bacon, to close the hearing relative to UP-211 at 7:4'5 P.M.; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Connnissioner Bacon, that the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 be adopted, as amended, and the subject Use Per- mit to allow two (2) building-sit:es on less than the site area required under Ordinance 3E-8 be<approved subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. B. UP-212 -.I.O.0.F., Fruitvale AvenUe - Requ.~st for Use Permit to Allow Modernization of Present Facilities - Continued from 8 May 1972 ~e public hearing relative to UP:*212 was reopened at 7:46 P.M. The Assistant Planner read the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 recommending that the subject request for Use Permit be approved. Commissioner Metcalf stated that it is the off-hand opinion of the Design Review Committee that the plans so far submitted by the applicant are totally unsatisfactory. Commissioner Marshall explained that it was not the desire of the applicant 'to ob'tain Design Review Approval with the plans available at this time since these plans were only to be used to show the floor-plan utilization. Mr. R. Conklin, Superintendent of'I.O.O.F., was present and ~ated that the plan that is now available for review was submitted to show the lay-out of and future use of the facility. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Conm~issioner Marshall, to close the hearing relative to UP-212 at 7:52 P.M.; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by commissioner Marshall, that the Staff Report dated 22 May, 1972 be adopted and the subject Use Permit to allow ~odernization of the present facilities be approved on the basis the findings required by Section 16.6 of Zoning Ordinance NS-3 can be made subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried with Com~iss'ioner Smith abstaining because of his membership in I.O.O.F. C. UP-213 - St. Nicholas Orthodox Church, Elva Avenue - RequeSt for Use Permit to Allow Remodeling and Modernization of Present Church Facilitj. es Chairman Lively opened the hearing relative to' UP-213 at 7:53 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notice of Hearing was mailed. He further stated that the subject request to allowSremodeling of the present church facilities and the applicant has submitted r~nderings and a site-development plan showing the proposed changes. Rev'. George Benigsen, Pastor of St. Nicholas Orthodox Church, was present and stated that this expa~asion' ma{nly involves the sanctuary area. Commissioner Smith stated there iS a questfon'Of whether or not a variance'appli- cation is necessary in connection!with this request since the remodeling will cause an encroachment of the.setback and if that happens this facility will no: longer be legal-non-conforming. ~e Assistant Planner explained that a lO-foot setback will be maintained. Commissioner Metcalf recommended that'a change in the front-yard setback requirement be allowed, but the side yard be made to comply with the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner ~rshall stated that he did visit. this site and learned that the applicant proposed to cover a rather unsightly creek and/or ditch to provide additional parking. The creek bank is unattractive and covering it would be an improvement. i2- Planning Commission Minutes - 22 May 1972 ~ Continued II. C. UP-213 - Continued The Assistant Planner explained that by. covering the subject creek the applicant would be able to provide a lot more parking spacas where almost none exist at present. Conmnissioner Bacon inquired if th~ additional parking would bring this facility into conformance with the Zoning Ordinance requirements. ~e Assistant Planner answered that it would not, but it would improve the situation that now exists. The Secretary, in answer to an in~uiry from Chairman Lively, stated that there are no fixed or unfixed seaks in this church since the entire service is conducted with everyone in a standing position. It w~s the general consensus of the Con~ission that the proposed remodeling and modernization of this facility indicates that the Use Petit should be granted and the variance application not be required since the area to be added is so insignificant. Mrs. Lois Cockshaw of 20995 Canyoi~ View Drive stated that she does not object to the small extension as ~roposed by this applicant. This church has been at this location for ove~ twenty (20) years without meeting all the zoning requirements and it is: a small congregation that has a lot to offer the coneunity. Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 8:06 P.M., directed UP-213 continued to the next regular meeting, and referred the matter to the Subdivision Co~ittee for study and a report. D. V-377 - John P. McLaughlin, Via R~gina - Request for Variance to Allow Reduction in Lot Frontage; Requirement - Continued from 8 May 1972 ~ai~an Live].y reopened the public hearing relative to V-377 at 8:07 P.M. ~e Secretary read the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 reconmending that the subject request for variance. be denied since it is possible for the applicant to create a corridor lot out of the subject parcel thus eliminat- ing the need for a variance on the frontage of this property.. ~e applicant was present and inquired what exactly is meant by a "corridor " lot". " The Secretary explained that a "c~rridor lot" is one that has fee title right-of-way that is excluded fro'm the area of the parcel and must be 20-feet wide and 50-feet in depth. , No one else present wished to coEent. Co~issioner Bacon moved, secondeH by Co~issioner Marshall, to close the public hearing relative to V-377 at 8:12 P.M.; motion carried unanimosly. Comnissioner Martin moved, .seconded by Co~issiOner Belanger, that the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 bel adopted and the~.e~_est for variance to allow reduction in lot frontage requirements be~nicd on the basis the findingsrequired under Section 17~.6 of Zoning Ordinance NS-3 cannot be made; motion carried unanimously, ~. E. C-155 - Saratoga Foothills Dev. COrp. ,' Big Basin Way - Request for ~angc of Zoning from "C-V" (Vis~tor.-~o~ercial) to "R-M-3,000" (Multi- Family Residential) Chairman Lively opened the publiclhearing relative to C-155 at 8:14 P.M. The Secretary stated the Notice of Hearing was mailed. and published and then briefly reviewed this application'. A co~unication filed in opposition to the proposed change of zoning filed by Dr.' R. K. %~ompson of 20860 Big Basin Way was read by the Secretary. -3- Planning Con~mission Minutes - 22 May 1972 - Continued II. E. C-155 - Continued Mr. Jerry Lohr, President of Saratoga Foothills Development Corp., was present and stated that 1) he is'. interested in doing a good job of building in Saratoga 2) as this property was being studied serious consideration was given to its development as a combined coma~ercial- residential complex 3) after further study it was concluded that creating a conm~ercial development at the front portion of this property and a residential area at the rear of the property would be unsuitable 4) a connnercial development would draw business away from the existing downtown shops and further compli.catc an existing parking shortage 5) this property lends itself more to residential use rather than commercial and 6) Mr. A1 Dempsey is the o~..~er o..f the property and is present at this time to answer any questions the .Connnission might wish to ask of him Commissioner Smith stated that a residential zoning for this property would be more desirable than a commercial zoning. Commissioner Metcalf suggested that this matter be continued off the agenda until after the General Pl~.n Review and that this matter be one i~em considered under the General! Plan Review. Chairman Lively noted that the Geheral Plan keview will probably not be finished until late in the Fall o~ 1972. He further noted that develop- ment of this property as "R-M" (Multi-Residential) would actually be upgrading the area. Connnissioner Martin pointed out t!~at developing this entire piece of property as "R-M" would be a change in use and density. The Secretary explained that the "R-M" use would be compatible with the surrounding zoning. Commissioner Smith explained that this property is surrounded on three sides by "R-M" developments; therefore, "R-M" zoning for the subject parcel would be consistent with adjacent properties. Coma~issioner Smith further stated that under recent legislation changes in the General Plan must be referred to the City Council since the Planning Conmission cannot change the General Plan Map and the Zoning Map unless the governing body of the City finds the necessary "consistencies". The City Council will meet to discuss what is meant by the word "consistent" as] it relates to Zoning and General Plan Maps. Chairman Lively closed the public hearing for the evening at 8:38 P.M. directed C-155 continued to the next regular meeting and referred the matter to the Subdivision Committee for study and to the City Council for their jurisdiction. F. C-156 - Saratoga Foothills Dev. C?rp. ,. Saratoga Avenue - Request for Change of Zoning from "A" (Agrictl~ltural) to "R-M-3.,000" (Multi-Family Residential) Chairman Lively opened the hearing relative to C-156 at 8:39 P.M. The-Secretary state'd the Notice of Hearing was mailed.and published. He then read a Statement of Reason filed by the 'applicant~ a coma~unication filed by John and Gladys Pavlovic .of 18944 Mellon Drive in opposition to C-156, and a coxranunication submitted in favor of the proposed changer of zoning by William Wyant. · Mr. Jerry Lohr explained that wha~ is actually planned for this property is a retirement-condominium facility and at the present time the City does not have an ordinance to allow such a development, but he understands that the drafting of such an ordinance is tinderway. He further stated that 1) a number of sites were considered for this type of development and it was determined that the subject proper. ty would be most suitable for a retire- ment fa6ility 2) the development 'of these properties would provide funds for parks in this area 3) a regular "R-I" (Single-Family Residential) development in this area would be ~almost an island alone 4) the property is bordered on only one side by "R-i" and a service station., the Campbell Cage Company, and a school on the ~other three sides 5) both of the present property ox,.,n~ers, Mr. Teresi and Mro Smith, would l'i~ to retain their prescott homes on the property and live in ,them after the property is developed and 6) the neighbors are in favor of ithis development. Planning Commission Minutes - 22 May 1972 Continued II. F. C-156 - Continued Mr. Teresi was present and submit.ed a petition in favor of the proposed change of zoning and containing sLgnatures of 85% to 90% of the property o~ers in the area. tie then stated that the proposed facility would eliminate a lot of undesirable conditions existing at the back of the property i.e. sub-standard rentalSunits, house-trailers, etc., ~ich have created various problems over a period of time. Chairman Lively read the petition'submitted by Mr. Teresi and noted that no mention is made as to ~at the, actual change of zoning will really involve and only makes reference ~o a retirement facility. He questioned whether the people signing the petition were aware of ~at the real pro- posal entails. Co~m~issioner Smith stated that when the Subdivision Committee met with the applicant and the property o~ersz the proposed Retirement Facility Ordinance was discussed and it was recommended at that time that this application be held in abeyance until after the ~eneral Plan Review for 1972 is completed or until the Retirement Ordinance. is completed. At that time the applica- tion could be processed in an orderly way rather than processing the appli- cation as a request for "R-M-3,000" (Multi-Family Residential) where the City would have only limited control. Commissioner Smith recommended that the matter be continued off the a~cnda until after the Retirement Facility Ordinance has been reviewed and cgmpleted. Mr. Fred Stiles, 18990 Saratoga Gien Place, stated 1) he was present to represent Saratoga Woods Homeo~.zne~s Association 2) the matter to Retire- ment Housing should be put off until the time of the General Plan Review 3) the property at the corner of ~aratoga Avenue and Cox Avenue was originally designated for Reti=ement Housing - what became of that pro- posal? 4) the petition that was: circulated and submitted to the Planning Commission should be recirculatedZ with the proper~information included and 5) the initial reaction of tie ttomeo~.~ers Group is that the Retire- 'ment Facility at the proposed loc~tion would not be appropriate since it would not be in keeping with the general character of the area. Mr. Jerry Lohr stated that the petition is not really misleading since the proposal is for a Retirement Facility; however, since no ordinance exists to allow this use it was necessary to file an application for change of zoning to "R-M-3,000". Chairman Lively pointed out that the current zoning of the property is "R-l-10,000" (Single-Family Residential) and he is not convinced the people would have signed the petition if they were m~are that the density under the proposed change of zoning woul~ be three (3) times greater than what is currently allowed. Mr. Jerry Lohr stated that the people who signed the petition are, in effect, saying they are in favor of Retirement Housing. Chairman 'Lively stated the petitign could be accepted if it is understood · that it was filed in favor of Retirement Housing and not necessarily in favor of C-156. Commissioner Metcalf advised that~ the Planning Comn~ssion is not confronted with a request for Retirement Housing at this time, but rather a request for change of zoning. Commissioner Marshall explained that the applicant did meet with the Sub- division Con~mittee and was informed that a Retirement ttousing Facility would.be considered by the PlanniHg Commission. Planning Commission Minutes - 22 May 1972 ~ Continued II. F. C-156 - Continued Chairman Lively closed the hearing for the evening at 9:02 P.M., referred C-156 to the Subdivision Committea and General Plan Con~nittee, and directed the matter continued off the agenda until the Planning Commission has adopted' a Retirement Housing Ordinance orl an amendment to Zoning Ordinance NS-3 and until the 1972 General Plan Review is completed. III. BUILDING SI%BZS AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SD-952 - AVCO .Conm~unity Development, Inc., Cox Avenue and Sea Gull Way - Subdivision Approval - 67 Lots - Continued from 8 May 1972 Commissioner Smith recomraenlded that SD-952 be continued to the next regular meeting .to allow time for further! study. Chai'rman Lively so directed. B. SDR-963 - James J. Asher, Kittridge Road - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot - Continued from 8 May '~972 Commissioner Smith recoxranended that SDR-963 be continued in order to allow time to work out Health Department requirements. Chairman Lively directed SDR-963 continued to the next regular meeting. C. SDR-967 - Abel M..Carreia, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Building Site Approval - ! Lot - Continued from 8 May 1972 Commissioner Smith explained that' the applicant has divided the proposed building into two (2) parts. Commissioner Bacon explained that there is a 10~foot setback on the south side of this property and the applicant could place the parking-lot at the front of, the property on the north side. Com~nissioner Belanger explained that the north side has already been landscaped. Chairman Lively explained that this property is rectangular in shape and the setbacks are the same on either side; therefore, the parking could be placed right up to the property l~ine on the north side. Mr. Arch Menard, architect for th':e applicant, stated that 1) on the 'north side of this property there is a .20-foot recorded utility easement 2) the adjacent property o~.~ers have ind'icated they would prefer the parking to be located at the fence-line 3) .concurrent development of the adja'cent property would be a tremendous achievement 4) this lot has "great depth for the amount of frontage available ~5) every effort has been made to clean-Up this property and 6) all the suggestions of the Subdivision Committee and Design Review Connnittee have been' met. Conunissioner Metcalf recom~mended that Condition "O" of the Building Site Comnittee Report relative to SDR-.967 be amended to read as follows: "O. Existing stock pile of fill material to be placed and compacted under! supervision of Soils Engineer." Chairman Lively reco~mnended that ;condition "Q" be added to the subject report as follows: ... "Q. Provide 'bicycle ro'ute and improved pathway or trail along Sarato~zga-Sunnyvale Road. Observe Note on Sheet #1 o'f the dra~zings." Planning Commission Minutes - 22 May 1972 ~ Continued ' III. C. SDR-967 - Continued° Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by COmmissioner Bacon, that the Building Site Cormnittee Report dated 22 May 1972 relative to SDR-967 be adopted, as amended, and that, the tentative map (Exhibit "A-I", r_filed 22 May 1972) be approved subject to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. D. SD-969 - Osterlund Enterprises, Allendale Avenue - Subdivision Approval - ]6 Lots - Continued from 8 May 1972 Cormnissioner Smith recommended that SD-969 be continued to the next regular meeting to allow time for the applicant to submit a revised map° Chairman Lively so directed. E. SD-970 - Arthur j. Palermo~ . Pik~ Road Building Site Approval - 1 Lot · Commissioner Smith e~cplained tha~t the Subdivision Conh~ittee met with the applicant and ~.t was brought outz that the a~plicant objects to the $4,000. fee which has been assessed to e~eryone building on Pike Road. ~lqne appli- cant feels he should not be required to pay this fee since he is already residing here and has a home on pike Road. Mr. George Tobin, applicant's attorney, stated that 1) this application should be dropped fro:n the Planning Commission agenda and referred to the Building Department for a buildi{~g permit 2) this is not a new building site in. the true sense since it has been utilized as a home for many years 3) the rule relative to 50% or more improvements on an existing building is not fair since it would limit the improvements on this lot to $20,000; however, some other lot could conceivably make $100,000. worth of improve- ments depending on the appraised.value of the building 4) the Building Code states only that in the event a person makes improvements which exceed 50% then the entire structure has to fulfill requirements of the· Building Code; therefore, the condition relative to the $4,000 road improve- ment cannot be applied in this c~se and 5) there have been changes made in State Laws which would prohibit ~uch a requirement and the City of Saratoga has not updated their ordinances. to comply. ~]~e Secretary explained that when remodeling or expanding an existing structure over 50% the Subdivision Ordinance requires that an applica- · tion for building-site approval Be filed. Commissioner Marshall explained that the applicant feels that the $4°,000. fee for road improvements. should not apply to his building site since he is a resident of long standing a~d would not be adding to any existing traffic on this road. Conm~ission.'er Marshall stated that he agreed with tile applicant in this case; however, tile City Council must make the final decision relative to this matter~ The Secretary, in answer to an in. quiry from Chairman Lively, stated that the City Attorney has been consulted relative to this matter and it is his opinion that building-site approval is required for the proposed structure. Commissioner Smith ·explained tha~ the condition requiring a $4,000. bond for the widening of Pike Road must be included on this buildingssite appli- cation since all other new lots on Pike Road have been conditioned in the same way. The Secretary explained that 1) :~it is to the best public interest of safety, health, and welfare to pEovide a minimum-access road to this property 2) it is· stated in the .Subdivision Ordinance that every build- ing. site must front on a public (:or the equivalent) minimum-access road 3) even if the required improvements are met this applicant will not front on a fully-improved minim~m-access road and 4) Mr. Bieber, who was, also, required to improve Pike Road does not front on a minimum- access road. -7- Planning Commission Minutes - 22 May 1972.- Continued III. E. SDR-970 - Continued.. Commissioner Smith stated that the Building Site Comanittee Report dated 22 May 1972 relative to SDR-970 can be approved by the Planning Co~n~ission with the honditions as stated in the report and the applicant can make a request to the City Council for rcconsideration of those conditions. Commissioner Metcalf pointed out. that this application is in effect an application for a new residence. Chairman Lively reconm~ended that the note in the said Building Site Connnittee Report be changed to Condition "Q".and changed to read as follows: "Q. Unimproved patt'n~'ay for pedestrian/equestrian proposed to run along south side of Pike Road. Fronting on Palermo property. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded by Con~nissioner Marshall, that the Building Site Cb~a~ittee Report dated 22 May 1972 relative to SDR-970 be adopted., as amended, and that' the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 11 May 1972) be approved subject to the 'conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. F. SDR-971 - Carlton Tropila ~lq~ree Oaks Way - Building Site Approval - 1 Lot Commissioner Smith explained that this application is for renewal of a previously-approved lot located on Three Oaks Way. Coxmnissioner Marshall stated that the contours and grades for this lot as shox.zn on the tentative map are inaccurate. When parcel "C" of this property was developed the grading was not in accord with the plan and it has not been corrected. ~ Chairman Lively directed SDR-9711 continued to the next regular meeting and referred the matter to the Subdivision Comanittee for further study. IV. DESIGN P~EVIEW A. A-373 - Alfred F. Dumas, Inc. (AVCO Comnunity Development, Inc.), Prospect Road - Final Design Revi'ew - Addition of Swinm~ing Pool and Cabana in Coxmnon Area · Commissioner Smith' stated that the Planning Commission should give this applicant some direction relative to the hours of operation. Commissioner Belanger suggested tbat the hoxneo~..n~ers in this development should be allowed to establish their o~.m reasonable hours of operation. Cormnissioner Marshall stated he .agreed that since this would be an internal recreation-area the o~-ners should establish their o~;n~ hours of operation. Connnissioner Martin stated that if the normal City Laws were not adhered to the neighbors would and could complain. Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Con~2nissioner Bacon, that the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 b'e adopted and that Final Design Approval be granted for A-373, Alfred F. DUmas, Inc., for addition'of a swixmning pool and cabana as sho'~n on Exhibits "H", "I", and "j" subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. B. A-393 - Abel Carreia, Sara[:oga-Sunnyvale Road - Final Design Review - Commercial Building - Continued from 8 May 1972 Chairman Lively noted that the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 relative to A-393 recoFm~.ends that Final Design Approval be granted for a commercial building. Planning Cormmission Minutes ~ 22 May 1972 ~ Continued IV. B. A-393 - Continued Commissioner Metcalf reco~mnended that condition "b" of the Staff Report be amended ._t.o read as follows: "b. Plant intensive landscaping along south property line between new Building and residences fronting On Sea Gull Way. z Submit final landscape plan for Final .Design Review." Chairman Lively recommended that, condition "c" of the Staff Report be amended to read as follows: "c. Provide solid wal.1 or fence six (6) feet in height as measured from ~he finished grade along south property-line that abuts r. esidentially-zoned properties." Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Commissioner Bacon, that the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 be adopted, as amended, and that Final Design Approval be granted for A~393, Abel Carreia, for a commercial building as shown on Exhibits "B", "C", "D", and "E" and subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. Co A-394 - St. Nicholas Orthodox ChUrch, Elva Avenue - Preliminary Design Review - Remodeling. Church Facilities C~hairman Lively directed A-394 continued to the next 'regular. meeting to allow time for the Planning Conm~{ssion to take action on UP-213 which is directly related to this applica[ion. D. A-395 - Charla Ann Broken, Canyon View Drive - Preliminary Design Review - Single-Family Residence Chairman Lively noted that the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 relative to A-395 recon~nends that Final Design Approval be granted for this single-family residence. Commissioner Metcalf moved, seconded by Cor~missioner Belanger, that the Staff Report dated 22 May 1972 b& adopted and that Preliminary Design Review be granted for A-395, Charla AnnzBrown, for a single-family residence as sho~n on Exhibit "A" subject to the conditions stated in said report; motion carried unanimously. V. CITY COUNCIL KEPORT Cormnissioner Bacon gave a brief sungnaVy of items reviewed and action taken at the City Council meeting of 17 May 1972, with emphasis on items of particular interest to the Commission. Planning Policy - Hillside Sub-Comn~ittee Connnissioner Metcalf stated that he did attend the meeting of the Planning Policy Hillside Sub-Committee where they voted to approve the request of Mr. and Mrs. McLaughlin of Via Regina', to subdivide their property located in the Monte Bello Ridge Mountain Study Area. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Abel Carreia, Saratoga Sunnyvale Road - Request to Add Certain USes to the List of Permitted or Conditional 'Uses in the "C-V" (Visitor-Cormmercial) Zoning District - Continued from 8 May ].972 The Secretary e}~plained that be did consult with the City AttOrney to determine if Mr. McFarland (client interested in renting a portion of thi's applicant's building) could transfer from his present location and legally establish himself under a permitted use in this applicant's commercial building. -9- Planning Cormmission Minutes - 22 May 1972 -z Continued VI. A. Abel Carreia - Continued "' The Secretary further= stated that in the opinion of the City Attorney even though, Mr. McFarland is operating legally where he is presently located does not mean that the same use will -be automatically added to the list of permitted or conditional uses in the "C-V" (Visitor- Commercial) Zoning District where.the applicant's property is located. Mr. McFarland was issued a ·Business License as a Consulting Engineer; however, he operates a T.V. Mobile Base Station and this use is not necessarily allowed in a "C~V" (Visitor-Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner B..e. langer inquired if in fact Mr. McF_arland is operating illegally? The Secretary explained that technically Mr. McFarland is operating legally; however, there is no permitted use to allow the T.V. Mobile Base Station. : Mr. McFarland was present and stated that at the time his Business License was issued the need for a CATV station in the City of Saratoga had not been initiated; ho~.~ever, now that need does exist.' Conm~issioner Marshall stated that, there appeared to be at least three (3) uses being proposed by Mr. McParland 1) prodt, ction, screening, and editing 2) Consulting Engineer Services and 3) CATV and mobile T.V. Chairman Lively stated that Mr. MCFarland's situation was peculiar in that it was part "P-A" (Professio~al-AdministrZqtive), .but, also, involves electronic repair, laboratory and:radio-T.V. Shop. %]~e matter could be scheduled for public hearing to d~termine if these uses should be allowed in the "C-V" (Visitor-Commercial):.Zoning District or the matter could be continued and given consideration:under the General Plan Review. Commissioner Marshall recomanendedlthat since the uses are all related to one another, perhaps, tile best thing would be to add them to the uses allowed in the "C-V" Zoning District. Chairman Lively directed the matt~-r be referred to the Subdivision Connnitte and requested that the Cormnittee decide on an appropriate title for this use. B. Policy Procedure - Memos Chairman Lively stated the. Planning Con~nission Minutes of 22 May 1972 reflect the feeling of the Com~nis~ion relative to this matter and any' future minority-memos directed to: the City Council shotlid be forvarded by one of the methods described in said minutes. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. SDR-955 - Angelina Arata~ Maud Avenue - Request for Reconsideration The' Secretary explained that this' applicant has requested reconsideration of his buil&ing-site approval conditions relative to road improvements and further requests that this matter" be continued to the next regular meeting to allow time to meet with the Subdivision Coimlittee. Chairman Lively so directed. B. General Plan Review - Memo from Planning Director Chairman Lively made reference to a memo from the Planning Director to the Chairman of the Planning Connnissi~n. relative to the General Plan Review and outlining the approximate schedule for the 1972 General Plan Review. The Secretary stated that the schedule could be adjusted to hold the Study Session relative to the General Plan at the regular meeting of the Planning Commission. -10- Plannin8 Commission Minutes - 22 May 1972 L Continued VII. B. General Plan Review - Continued Chairman Lively directed 1) the'; Study Sessions to be held at the regular ·Planning Conm~ission meetings on 12 June and 26 June 1972 and and 2) the Secretary to arrange~ for the appropriate publicity.. He then stated that eventually the proper Citizens Co~mnittees will have to be appointed to study specific problems relative to the Major General Plan Review for 1973 · VIII. CO~RrNICATIONS A. WI~ITTEN Victory Baptist Church - Cox Avenue The Secretary read a communication received from the Victory Baptist Church located at 18755 Cox Avenue requesting that "churches" be added "C N" ~··as 'a conditional use to the - .. (Neighborhood-Coma~ercial) Zoning District. Chairman Lively referred this matter to the Subdivision Connnittee for further study. B. ORAL Chairman Lively acknowledged, wi.th pleasure, the presence of Councilman Kraals and Mrs. Wilberding of the! Good Government Group. He, also, thanked Mrs. Wilberding for the coffee s.~rved at recess. IX. ADJOUPdq~NT .. · Chairman Lively adjourned the meeting at 10:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Stanley M. W~lker, Secretary Saratoga t lannn~g Commission j