Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-09-1967 Planning Commission Minutes SUMMARY OF MINUTES CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION TIME: MOnday, 9 October 1967, 7:30 P.M. PLACE: City,Council Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present:Commissioners Crisp, ·Johnson, Kasner, McFall, Norton, O'Rorke and ·Smith. Absent: None B. MINUTES Commissioner McFall moved, seconded·by Commissioner Smith, that the reading of the minutes of the 25 September 1967 meeting be waived and that they be approved as distributed to the Commission subject to the following addition: page 5. . between paragraphs 1 and 2 add "Commissioner Johnson advfsed that the applicant· was notified that he was in violation'of the .Zoning Ordinance on 1 August 1967, but did not submit an application for a Use Permit until 11 September 1967."; motion carried unanimously. : II. PUBLIC tF~RINGS A. UP-91 - William J. King, Panorama Drive - Review of Complaince with Conditions - Continued from 25 September 1967 'The Chairman re-opened the hearing on UP-91 at 7:34 P.M. The Secretary star-. ed that an anonymous letter had been submitted relative to this Use Permit. Chairman Norton, with the consensus· of the Planning CommiSsion, directed that this communication not be submitted as part of the official record. ~. King was present but offered no further comments. The Secretary in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton explained that the location of the slaughter house (mentioned by Mr. King at the last meeting). had not been determined. The Secretary read the Staff Report of 9 October 1~67, recommending, with concurrence of the Subdivision Committee that thi'~'Use Permit be re-instated. Chairman Norton stated that he had been opposed to an indefinite postponement but did feel that UP-91 should be revoked and no new application be accepted for consideration prior to December of 1967. -l- Planning Comn~ission Minutes 9 October 1967 - Continued II. A. UP-91 - Continued Commissioner Crisp explained that if UP-91 were revoked a new appli- cation could not be accepted for one (1) year as stated on pages 62 and 63 of Ordinance NS-3. .. Chairman Norton suggested that perhaps some appropriate amendment should be made to Ordinance NS-3 relative to revocation of Use Permits. After discussion, Commissi'oner Smith moved, seconded by Cornmiss'loner Kasner, to close the hearing relative to UP-91; motion carried unani- mously and the hearing was closed at 7:40 P.M. "- Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Staff Report of 9 October 1967, relative to UP-91, be adopted and the Use Permit be re-instated to allow the keeping of one (1) horse only; motion carried unanimously. '.B. KOSICH AND ASSOCIATES - Nick Vukasovich, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road·- Informal. Hearing - Request to Add Banks and Stock Brokerages to the List of Uses Permitted Under the C-S (Commercial Service)TZoning District - Continued from 25 September 1967· Commissioner McFall 1) stated that the applicant had not submitted the information requested by the Subdivision Committee and 2)'recommended that this matter be continued until subject information is received.' Commissioner McFall, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, explained that the Subd{vision Committee is interested only in g~tting some evidence indicating that the applicant planned to proceed with '. a projec~ of some type. Chairman Norton indicated that approval of the requested uses would aid, eventually, in up-grading this area. The applicant was not. present and no one in the audience wished to comment.. Commissioner Johnson stated that perhaps prospective buyers were not interested in this property unless the requested uses were approved. Chairman Norton stated that he did not feel these uses should be·denied. Commissioner Smith explained that the Subdivision Commit·tee had simply requested the applicant to submit a letter of intent from a bonafide tenant. Conm~issioner Kasner explained that, he felt, that the Subdivision Committee by requesting the lette~ of intent would eliminate the possibility of just anyone taking advantage of the proposed uses. After discussion, Chairman Norton directed (since this has not been a controversial matter) that the subject request be continued, indefinitely, off the agenda as recommended by the Subdivisiod Committee until such time as the applicant submits the requested information. C. V-307 - Frank L. Small, Sobey Road - Request for Variance in Connection with Side Yard Setback Requirements - Continued from 25 September ].967 The public hearing on V-307 was resumed at 7·:46 P.M. The Secretary read communications received from 1) Dr. Virgil Voss, filed in opposition to the proposed Variance and 2) H..R. Harvey, filed in support of V-307. -2- Planning Commissioner Minutes - 9 October 1967 - Continued # II. C~' V-307 - Continued The applicant was present, but Offered no further comments. No one.else wished to speak~ Commissioner Johnson read the Staff Report of 9 October 1967 recommending that the subject request be denied. At 7:52 P.M. Commissioner Smith moved, ~seconded by Commissioner Kasner, that the public" hearing be closed; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Johnson moved,. seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the Staff Report of 9 October .1967, relative to V-307, be adopted and the request for Variance be denied since the findings required by Section 17.6 of Ordinance NS-3 cannot be made; motion carried unanimously. D. V-308 - Dr.. Joseph Townsend, Bank Mill Road - Request for Variance in. Connection with Side and Front Yard Setback Requirements - Continued from 25 September 1967 The public hearing on V-308 re-commenced at 7:53 P.M. The Secretary stated that new plans had been submitted relativ~ to V-308 requesting' a Variance of lesser dimensions. Commissioner Crisp informed the Commission'that these plans had not been reviewed by the Variance Committee and recommended that V-308 be continued to allow time to do so. Mr. PiCa, applicant's architect,.was present and 1) explained that he missed the appointment with the Variance Committee on Saturday, 30 September 1967 due to a misunderstanding re time and 2) requested that another meet- ing be scheduled with the Variance'Committee. Commissioner Crisp stated that there was no need to visit the site again since Commissioner Kasner and he.had already made an on-site inspection of the property. .' After further discussion, the Variance Committee arranged to meet with the applicant at the City Offices on Saturday, 14 October. 1967. No one else present wished to comment. The Secretary read a communication received from the Architectural Control Committee that reviewed proposed building sites 'in this area, signed by ~ R. L. Mathis, and filed in support of the subject Variance. Chairman Norton at.7:.58 P.M. closed t'he hearing for the evening and directed V-308 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Variance Committee for study and a report at that time. E. UP-140 - Richard C. Angus, Monte Vista Drive - Request for Use Permit for .the Keepin8 of One (1) Horse - Continued from 25 September 1967 The continued hearing for UP-140 was re-opened at 7:59 P.M. The Secretary. read a communication received from Mr. & ~s. John McInerny, 19175 Monte Vista Drive, filed in support of the subject application. The applicant was present but offered no further comments. No one else present wished to speak. -3- planning Commission Minutes - 9 October ].967 -. Continued II. E. UP-140 - Continued The Secretary read the Staff Report of 9 October 1967, recommending that this Use Permit be approved subject to the conditions stated in said report. At 8:03 P.M., Commissioner' Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Crisp, that the public hearing on UP-140 be terminated; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith, that the Staff Report of 9 October 1967 be adopted and the Use Permit be granted subject to the following conditions: 1) Only one (1) horse shall be kept on the property. 2) Compliance with all applicable conditions of Zoning Ordinance NS-3; motion carried unanimously. F. C-109 - Harry Margolis, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Request for Change of Zoning from "R-l-15,000" (Single Family Residential) to "' "P-A" ~professional-Administrative) The Chairman opened the hearing for C-109 at 8:04 P.M. The Secretary stated that the Notices of Hearing had been mailed and published and then read'l) a petition containing five (5) signatures 2)' a petition containing seventeen (17) signatures 3) a petition containing fourteen (14) signatures and 4) a letter submitted by Richard Bennett all filed in opposition to the proposed Change of Zoning. Mr. Albert J. Ruffo, attorney for the applicant, was present and stated that 1) he was pleased to have the opportunity to appear before the Planning Commission 2) this request is for a Conditional USe Permit to allow a professional-Administrative Office 3) the property in ques- tion is located on the.'westerly side of.Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 4) the 12,000 square feet of site area required by the Ordinance is available if the entire property is utilized; however, the applicant prefers to apply for a Variance rather than involve the entire site 5) the applicant makes' this request for a precise purpose and if a Use Permit is granted the property could be used for no other purpose and would; therefore, create a much less undesirable situa'tion if it were under these circumstances 6) the make-up of the lot is quite hilly and is bordered by R-M to the North, R-1 to the South and West, Condition C-S (Neale's Hollow) and R-M to the East 7) there is no over-lapping of zones in this area 8) the · Commercial Uses in the area were mentionedtoshow that they did exist in the vicinity. 9) the owner of the property occupied by Mr. b~rgolis is Mr. ~lter Seagraves ~no, also~ owns the residence' to the south of the subject property 10) ~. b~rgolis and the neighboring tenant (McGinnis) share a common driveway 11) ~. Margolis has occupied this residence since 1951 and presently has a ten (10) year lease on it with (9)'years remaining 12) Mr. Margolis allowed this structure to be built at'his- cost and at the time of. the expiration of the lease the cabana and pool will revert to the landlord 13) the pictures he submitted showed the improvements made on the property 14) it was difficult to identify 'the residence on the property because of foilage and'hilly topography 15) ~.. Margolis specializes in Estate Planning, Tax Laws and International Taxes 16)'the clients affiliated with Mr. ~rgolis are not frequent visitors at his home-office since'most business is conducted via phone or written -4- Planning Con~mission Minutes 9 October 1967 - Continued II. F. C-109 - Continued communications 17) this law practice is unique in that two (2) to · four (4). months of the year are spent abroad by Mr. ~rgolis for business purposes 18) people from IBM do come to his'place from time to time to service the machines in the office area 19) the applicant was not listed in the yellow pages of the phone directory;· ... therefore, does not expect any local clients 20) ~s. McGinnis just recently complained that clients were coming to her door by mistake because they could not find the 1.~rgolis complex.· Chairman Norton inquired if this complaint might not suggest a volume of people coming to the Ma-rgolis home. Mr. Ruffo answered that it did not indicate that at all but it did cause un-necessary disturbances and a small sign would take care of this situation. He then stated that 1) when ~. Margolis started his law practice in Saratoga in 1951 he employed one (1) or two (2) secretaries and a law student who did research work for him 2) he practiced law at the same location for fifteen (15) years before the cabana was'constructed 3) when the law offices of Ruffo and Associates were set up in their present location no phones were installed into the library-Conference rooms but"then. theyz.~found.they-.~· were running back and forth all the time so a phone had to be installea and this was the · case with Mr. M~rgolis and his cabana- residence set up. Chairman Norton advised that if the practice is thriving then the home premises are no longer adequate. b~. Ruffo advised that 1) b~-. b~rgolis had suggested that a time limit of nine (9).years be set on this (Use Permit) if granted since he feels that nine (9) years would be the most time he would be in practice 2) the .. .Use Permit would terminate if he should die and would not be transferrable to anyone else 3) cars could be adquately parked in two areas available for the parking of four (4) cars and an area in front of the property could (if necessary) be opened for parking 4) ~. F~rgolis contacted some of his neighbors and they were unaware that he had a law practice at the subject property 5) a. law practice could hardly be considered disturbing to anyone· 6) the granting of the Use Permit would not violate City policy since Use Permits have been granted before 7) the factor involved is that this would be spot zoning, but if it was considered that the .zoning being proposed is for the same purpose as the one already in use the 'argumentS: of spot zoning is lost and then it is possible to grant a USe Permit. Chairman Norton advised Mr. Ruffo that the application would be one for Conditional Change of Zoning rather·than one fo~ a Use Permit. Commissioner Crisp inquired if the applicant was asking for a ConUitiona=l'; Use in an R-1 Zone or for Conditional Zoning. Mr. Ruffo answered that the request was for Conditional Zoning and then stated that 1) they were ready to accept all restrictions imposed by the City Planning Co~nission'2) Y~. Margolis enjoys a l'aw practice dealing with taxes that is internationally known 3) he use% the c~ban~ as part of physical therapy program 4) he came to Saratoga 'to.-.die.'due t0'!.ill health in 1951 ~nd has practiced law here ever since and would like this application approved for a period of nine (9) years) but he did not realize that people in Saratoga "do not die they just fade away". Chairman Norton inquired if the "fading away period" took place over a nine (9) year period? Planning Commission Minutes - 9 October 1967 '- Continued # Ii. F. C-109'- Continued Commissioner Crisp informed Mr. Ruffo that the property to the North of the subject property is not zoned R-M (as stated by Mr. Ruffo earlier) but instead is zoned R-1. ~. & Mrs. Walter Harr iman, 20611 Brookwood I~ne, stated they would like to go on record as being opposed to the proposed Change of Zoning. Barbara Colleton of 14200 Victor Place was present and stated that she was against the subject application. ~s. Ruth Owen of 1418~ Victor Pla~e stated that 1) she agreed with the statementmade in ~. Bennett's letter 2) this was obviously a request for spot zoning 3) zoning violations must be carefully checked and 4) she. was definitely opposed to this request. ~. Gordon Chambers, 14051Saratoga-Sunnyvale %oad, stated that'parking seemed inadequate even for a small staff and occasional clients. ~. ~rgolis stated that 1)- he has associates in Los Angeles, San Francisco and one here in Saratoga 2) he employs three (3) secretaries, one (1) full- time and two (2) part-ti~e 3) 'his practice has been located in this residence for sixteen (16) years and his next door neighbors were not aware of it 4) his mail is delivered to the Saratoga Post Office 5) a lot of people would not know about his law practice being located here if the cabana area had not. been constructed 6) since all the trouble began after construction of the cabana" it may have been wiser for him to have maintaine~ his practice in the residence itself 7) he has had problems with his neighbor but all neighbors do (sometimes their dog barked too loud but the~ his daughters violin was not always too good) 8) the cabana and pool cost $50,000. to construct 9) since'most of the business is done by phone the bill for one month was $1500. 10) the disturbance that would be involved consists of an occasional lecture on the 'property and the presence of a half dozen to a dozen lawyers every now and then 11) the parking situation would not be a problem since there is room to park more than the two cars he owns 12) most people coming to.the subject location come by air and usually are present on Saturdays and Sundays 13) if the Planning Commission ruled to allow for the parking of only five (5) cars at one time it would not. bother his practice.' Mr. Chambers noted that it appears the subject property is surrounded by R-1 and the'petition indicates that the residents of the area would like to have this use removed from the :ne'ig~borho~ and hopefully it will be. Mr. Ruffo stated that this could Be a home occupation conducted in the resi- dence. Mrs.. Higgins, 20550 Brookwood I~ne, stated that they have been aware of the law practice and the increasing activity at the Margolis residence, but have not complained prior to this time. She further stated that they were opposed to the subject application (C-109).' Mr. Stuart, 20700 Reid Lane, stated that cars backing out of the driveway at the subject location cause a traffic hazard to the people coming over the hill on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road ~6- PlanninS Commission Minutes 9 October 1967 - Continued II. F. C-109 - Continued At 8:50 P~M. Chairman Norton closed the hearing for the evening, directed C-109 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for study. Mr. Ruffo requested a meeting with the Subdivision Committee. Chairman Norton suggested he phone the Planning Director to make an appointment. G. V-309 - Clay McCullough, Old Tree Way - Request for Variance in Connec- tion with Side Yard Setback Requirements The public hearing on V-309 was opened at 8:51 P.M. The Secretary stated that the Notices of Hearing had been mailed and then briefly reviewed this application. The applicant was'present and explained that the neighbors pool filter and heater were located so near to his (M~. McCullough) bedroom window- he felt it necessary to apply for a Variance to enable him to locate his own filter and heater away from the subject window to avoid addi- tional disturba.nce. No one else wished to comment. After discussion, Chairn~n Norton (8:54 P.M.) closed the public hearing for.the evening,' continued it to the next regular meeting and referred same to.the Variance Committee'for study. CommisSioner'Crisp arranged for an 'appointment with the applicant for 9:30 A.M. on 14 October 1967, for an on-site inspection by the Variance Committee. ='RECESS AND RECONVENE III.. BUILDING SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS A. SDR-710 - B. T. Galeb, Seagull Way - Building Site Approval -.1 Lot - Continued from 25 September 1967 Commissioner McFall stated that the applicant is ~eady to submit a letter granting an extension to allow time to submit new plans.' The Secretary read the letter, submitted by the applicant at the meeting, granting a thirty (30) day extension. In view of the foregoing, Chairman Norton directed SDR-710 continued to. the next regular meeting. B. 'SDR-719 - Willard Thompson, Oak Street and.St. Charles - Building Site Approval 1 Lot Commissioner McFall stated that the applicant had reviewed the'prOposed condition~ of approval and had expressed satisfaction with same. -7- Plannin$ Commission Minutes 9 October 1967 - Continued III. SDR-719 - ContinUed ...It w-as moved by Commissioner McFall, seconded by Commissioner Kasner, that the Subdivision Comnittee Report of 9 October 1967 re].ative to · SDR-719 be adopted with special attention directed to the Note and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 28 September 1967) be' ..-'.~" approved subject'to the conditions set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously. Chairman Norton directed the Secretary to call the subject Note'to the attention of the City Council. IV. DESIGN REVIEW NONE V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT Commissioner Johnson gave a summary on items reviewed and action taken. at the City Council meeting of 4 October 1967, with emphasis on items of particular interest to the Planning Commission.' VI. NEW BUSINESS A. SD-592 - Western Hills Investment Co., Pierce Road - Request for Extension The Secretary read a letter recieved from Mr. William Heiss requesting a one (1) year extension. Af[er a brief discussion, Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by Commissioner, Crisp,.that an extension of one (1) year be granted in connection with SD-592; motion carried unanimously. VII. OLD BUSINESS NONE VIII. COM2vIUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN ,. VALLEY C~RISTIAN SCHOOLS The Secretary read a communication from the Santa Clara County Planning Department stating that 1) an'application for a Use Permit for a school to be located on the Pick Estate"had been submitted by the Valley Christian Science Church and 2) a hearing would be held on same on 18 October 1967.' The Secrgtary, in answer to an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that 1) he would be attending the hearing and 2) the church had made appli- cation for a Use Permit for this purpose, but fault problems on the property prohibited any action re same. Commissioner Johnson stated that this seemed to be a difficult road for a school bus to travel. Chairman Norton directed that.unless the proposed Use Permit presents a problem for the City he could see no reason to register any opposition · to the.granting of same. -8- Planning Commissioner Minutes - 9 October 1967 - Continued # VIII. B. ORAL BRIEF REPORTS Commissioner O'Rorke stated that he noticed in Section 13.4 of Ordinance NS-3 there is inference that' the Design Review Committee should recommend action on an application within thirty (30) days; however, sometimes an application is under consideration for more than thirty (30) days. He then 1) explained that application A-265 filed 27 September 1967 was found to be incomplete at the time the file was reviewed; therefore, no' recommendation was made in view of the lack of complete information and 2) recommended that a brief report be submitted at the Planning Commission meetings explaining why no action is recommended regarding certain applications under consideration. Chairman Norton agreed that a brief explanatory report would be helpfu.1 and then directed that. such a report be submitted in instances where delays are necessary. GUESTS Chairman Norton acknowledge_d, with pleasure, the presence of Councilman Robbins, Mrs. Ruth Owen of the Good Government Group, Mrs. Duffy and Mrs. Ottenberg of the League of Women Voters. He, also, expressed appreciation to Mrs. Owen for th'e coffee served at recess. IX. ADJOURI~MENT The Chairman declared the meeting ~djourned at 9:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~ke~, Secretary Sara, toga Planning Commission j -9-