HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-13-1967 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF' SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
"j.';.' · ..TIME: Monday, 13 November' 1967, 7:30 PoM.
.~7/.:~.: P.LACE: City Council Chambers, Fruitvale Avenue,· Saratoga, California ." ." .. "
.Z~;~` ' .... 'TYPE: Regular '~et'ing ' ' "' .. .' '." ' "'
{........ · =... · *******~bW~A~'c***~A-~-~ ' .' '.. ...' '
· ": ""!if: .......' '" : ' ' ....'
!;~l~'./.i .... · . .. ...'... · .. ....... .........
2.'~,:/~'..!~ :" I.ROUTINE ORGANIZATION .... l.. .. "' '.. ,' .'.
· .. A. ROLL CALL'
Present:' Commissioners Crisp, Kasner., McFall, Norton, and' Smith. .. ;'.
Absent: Commissioners Johnson and O!Rorke. ... ' ....
.... B.' MINUTES . ..'. ..
· .. Commissioner Smith moved, seconded' by' Commissioner McFall, that· the .reading .. ..
of the minutes' of the '23 October 1967 meeting be waived and that they be'.
.." approved as distributed to the CommisSion; motion carried unanimously. "
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS ". ';
A.. C-109 - Harry Margolis, Saratoga-Su. nnyvale.'Road:..-. ReqUest for Change of Zoning
"from"~{-1-15,000" (Single Family Residential) to '~-~" ··(Professional- '. "
Administrative) -' Continued from '23 October 1967.· "
The Chairman re-opened the continued' hearing on C-109 at.7:32 P.M. The Secretary
read 'a communication received from the 'applicant's attorney (Mr.' Ruffo) requesting
a continuance to the meeting of 11 DeCember 1967 since c.ommittments .at the Fremont
and San Jose ·Planning Commissions ·conflicted with the scheduled meeting of the
Saratoga Planning.. Commission. ' ' 2' · ..
Commissioner"McFall explained that 1) "the app.licant's 'attorney requested and
..'. received a continuance at the last meeting,' 2) the '····Subdivision Committee.at
;. that meeting (23 October 1967) agreed to grant ~one continuance only and 3) the
'.. 'recommendation of the Subdivision. Committee is that the. request· for further
"'~ '. "' ' .' continuance' be denied. ' ".. "'
" The applicant and his representative,. Mr. Jerry Smith, (Law Office of' Ruffo .and Oneto
Associates) were present. Mr. Smith advised ··there' were no further reasons for
· " the request· for continuance ·other than the·ones already stated in the letter··
submitted by Mr. Ruffo. ..... ........
Chairman Norton ·advised that it is desirable to move matters off the.'agenda as expe-
ditiously'.7-. as possible and since the Subdivision'Committee'has prepared a rec-.
ommendation there is really· no reason to delay action relative to C-!0.9. '..
Commissioner Crisp· 1) noted that he could not ·understand why the 'applicant felt'
other meetings should take precedence over the Saratoga Planping Commission meet- .
" . . ings and 2) suggested that action be taken without further delay..
· ' 'No one else in the audience wished to. comment .... : ....
"'=, .' .Commissioner McFall'in answer 'to an inquiry from Chairman Norton stated that = ."
'~' .. short term Conditional ZOning had not been considered for C-109 by the Sub-
~ · · division Committee. " . .. ...
· ' Commissioner Crisp moved, seconded by Commissioner M'cFall,". that action relative· "'
" to the. Change of Zoning application for Harry'Margolis be taken promptly and the.
request for continuance be denied; motion carried with'Commissioner Kasner abstain-
ing. .. : . ..
-1-'
:: :'~'.~: :'.: ... II~A. C-109 - Continued
'·~ ! =· " Commissioner ~lcFali read the report· o.f the Subdivision Committee·dated
"' 13 November 1967 recommending that the request .for re-zoning (C-109) be
;.:;i d, n'ie l '
" '. A~ 7:Z~3 P.~- Conlmissioner Crisp ~oVed seconded
"""'.. ~hat '~he public hca~in~ on' C-~09 'be closed; motion. carried unznimously.
Commissione~ McF~ll moved, seconded b~ Commissione~ Smith, ~ha~ the Sub-
' ' .. division'ConLmit~ee Repo~ of ~3 Hovembe~ ~967 be adopted and C-~09 be
"" ' · denied' since it does'. no~ meet the objectives of Section ~.~ o~ Ordinance
· ' :'~' ~S-3 and the recommendation ~o~ denim! be forwarded ~o ~he Cit~ Council
~.. :. .'.
· ......... as the action of the Plznnin~ Co~iSsion~ motion ca~ied with Com~issione~
"' .. K~snc~ abstaininG. ..
=.:
':' .".' B. ~-310 - T.,Y~c ~ende~z~, ~oo~hi!l Lznc ReQuest 'fo~ Vz~i~nce in Co~ection
"" with' LoC Width a~cl Size !-',eQ-~iremen~s - Continued from Z3 'Octobe~ ~967'
.:....... ..
"" .' The public heazinS ~elzCive to V-310 wzs resumed '~ 7:~7 ~.M. The Secretary
..."':' ~) re~d a communicetion'~eceived ~.om the ~pp'l. iczn~s
"' Failbanks and 2) exp'l~i~d ~h'a~ attached co the subjec~ communication
...' .... a copy of ~he Srant deed reiativ~ ~o ~he proper~ unde~
Commissioner Crisp stated that 'the .Variance Committee reqUeSted a copy
'.'.' " of the grant deed to clear.up some questions pertinent to the'existence of
· .':'.'7'.".'. a right-of-way 'into the. subject property. .
· .: The applicant and his attorney were present and stated that they would like'
'.' : to reserve their comments until after the reading of the report relative to.
· ... V-310. ' ..
· .:.. ,. .......: .........~. ................... ..: .......
· . .. No one else wished to cormuent.
:.. Commissioner Crisp read the report of the Variance Committee of 13 'November
': .... 1967 recommending that this request.for ~arianCe be denied.
..... Mr. Fairbanks stated that all the'~lots (including th~ one for which the Var~
... .. .iance is requested) in'the general area surrounding the subject property are
' similar in size except for those two (2) lots indicated as.Assessor's No.
..... sixty-four.(64) and ·nineteen (19) and the applicant cannot Use this land for
anything other than a residence.'
i.'..: Commissioner Crisp advised that the Variance Committee felt this request
". .'.' .. should, perhaps,'be considered under a .Charge of Zoning application rather
than a Variance.
· . 'Mr. Fairbanks advised that at the'time the applicant sold a portion of his'
property, the buyer (Dr. Siiberman) wanted his lot to go back as 'far as the
creek and so Mr. Pendergraft'agr&ed to'sell him that much not realizing that'
by doing th{s, he was 'creating'an'illegal non-conforming'lot.
" The Secretary·explained tha~ 1) under County Zoning prior to incorporation·
· .' of the City, this area did. have 10,000 square foot minimum lots 2) in 196~.
after incorporation of the City,'the zoning was changed to acre zoning (40 000
· " square foot lots) 3) the applicant did not divide his property until 1965 and.
· ' 4) Mr. ~atol Romanof was granted a similar Variance C~-252) for his property
.. located on Foothill Lane, which property he had divided when the property was
zoned 10,000 square feet.
· .."2'.'.. Planning· Commission Minutes - 13 'November 1967
'~'."""~." .'..". . II. ' B. V-310 - Continued
. ' .' ~' · Commissioner 'Kasner moved, seconded· by Commissioner· McFall. to close the
~=.~'i;..~ .....~z.r.'. ·hearing at ·7:57 P.M.; motion carried unanimously.
"'·~ '·:· '· · Commissioner Crisp moved seconded by Commissioner Kasner that the
."~.~..~l.i.ni...'..ij!~.,... Variance Co~,~mittee Re~ort of 13 N~.~vember 1967, relative 'to V-310 be.
....·:·.· ~ ·· adopted and the Variance be denied in accordance with said report;
"".!?' .... motion carried unanimously.
.··.'~l. '7· !l'·' Chairman Nor·ton stated he ~as concerned by the decision reached by the
· '· Commission because·of the high cost of Change of Zoning, the fact' that
· '~ "' ".i. the. property cannot be put to any other use and since the owners of other
· . properties in the same district do &nj0y priwileges which· the applicant
· does not. ...
· ' Con~issione.r ·Crisp· state. d there were a dozen or more sites in this neighbor-·.
· -.l' hood that ·cOuld be made into· lots like the one proposed under V-310. .He
further stated that' the reason for the acre .z'oning in' this area was to
· :.~"'."" eliminate lots· like the one in quest{on especially on Pierce Road.·
"""' "" Chairman'Norton stated his pri~r~r.y distress resulted from the knowledge·
· ..~. that these lots will not be put to 'any good use.
Commissioner Kasner stated that h'e agreed with Chairman Norton's basic
L'.. statement but did feel that a :lot .of. Variance applications ha~e been filed
" that should really have be. en change of zoning app'lications.' He further "
:·;·~ ·z stated that V-310 was such an application.
· ··· Chairman Norton informed the appIicant that he could appeal the Planning
Conmission decision to the City· Council or make application' for Change
·-" of Zoning. ..
~"' C. V-3ii - Thomas Coe, Sobey Road·. -··Request for Variance in ·Connection with
Side Yard Setback Requirements - Continued from 23 October 1967
The co'ntinued hearing on V~3].l re'commenced at 8:01 P.M. T[~e Secretary stated
nothing further had been added to' the file.
Mr. Coe was present and stated. he wishe<] to reserve his comments until after
the reading of the Variance Committee Report ....
No one else in the audience wished' to comment.
.... .l.. Commissioner Kasner read 'the report of the Variance· Committee ·recommending
~ .' .. that the subject request' for Variance be denied since the f..indings required
by Section 17.6 of Ordinance NS-3 cannot be made.
Mr. Coe apologized for not meeting the Comn~ittee at the site but stated he
did wait until 2:00 P.M. on .the.appointed day and. nobody arrived for the
" inspection which he understood was scheduled for 10:00 A.M.
. . .' '.. Commissioner crisp advised that the Co~aittee did visit the site at 10':00 A.M.
on 4 .November 1967. but did not notice any sign· of activity..
Commissioner Kasner stated the members.: of the Committee felt it best not
" to knock· because they did not want· to wake anybody.
Mr. Eoe explained that due to the terrain on his property a two (2) car.
garage would still have t.o' be closer to the property line than what Ordinance
NS-3 permits; otherwise, it would be imp0~sible to use the garage.
'."""' Plannin~ Commission Minutes - 13 Novemb~-r 1967 - Continue~t
~.~.':?~...'!'.!.!~.. Commissioner Kasner stated that 1) he could see that if'the garage were
~:"i....:" '. "'.~/.~ erected closer to the house there would be. no room to turn around and
· ...'. 2) he would like to visit this. site again to m~ke a closer study. of the
"'.':~'j"' .. L""' After discussion, Chairman Norton" (8:0.7 P.M. ) closed the public hearing
...... :~,: .......',~.,'~: for 'the evening and directed V-31i continued 'to the next regular.meeting
~."i.-~..-. and referred same to the Variance Com,~ittee for further study.
',:'.,l..~' Commissioner Crisp, on behalf.of the Variance Comanittee, arranged an
· '.. appointment with I,~. Coe for another on-site inspcetion of the property
on Saturday., 18 November 1967 at. 9:00 A.M.
D. V-312 - Lewis Gobble, Glen Brae Drive - RequeSt for Variance in Connection
with Lot Size Requirements
'. "...' "' The hearing relative to V-312 was o~ened at 8:09 P.M. The Secretary stated
that the Notices of Hearing Were nmiled and 'then' explained that .a Variance l ~'=.
"' is. necessary in order to comply with the Zoning Ordinance which 'establishes
' ..". "' 80,000 square feetas the amount' needed "for the operation of a .4-H Project. '
Commissioner Crisp indicated that this request was similar to the reouest
dealing with lot size. submitted by ~. Pendergraft.
· "' ~ The.Secretary,. 'in answer to an inquiry from 'Chairn~n Norton, stated a
· ..~" letter submitted by ~s. Gobble (~r0ject Leader) .explained the .reasons
for this Variance request and 'its connection with the 4-H Club. He
further stated that the applicant' requested 'permissiOn to start' with three
(3) rabbits and acquiring about twenty~three (23) more by ~rch at which
time they will be sold. : ..
.... ..,. Chair.man Norton st'ated he 'was ;concerned" with the results if the rabbits
.. were sold.
'~L' Th~ Secretary stated he. discussed this rec~uest with the 'City AttOrney. and
" he felt that i). no alternative e~risted but for the applicant t0 try. for
a Variance or for the Planning 'Commission to amend the Zoning Ordinance
· '. '. .. and 2) .many more requests for' this. type of project will be forthcoming
". from the 4-H Clubs. : ..
'. F~s. Gobble advised that 1) this was a new]..~ '~ormed project. 2) it is not
" directly connected with the school 3) i6 is cared for on an individual
.... basis 4) there' are (5) members in her club three (3) of whicl~ have an acre
lot and two (2). of which have leSS than an acre and 5) her. 10t is one of
the ones that'does not meet the acre r'eouirement
.. .. Commissioner Crisp stated !) he 'would lik'e to take this under. consideration
'. to see if some kind of a Conditional Use could be arranged in an R-1 Zone
"'. . and'2) he would like to discuss the ~tter with the Variance Co~ittee and
~.. ." the City Attorney. ..
com~miss'ioner 'Kasnar stated he would be opposed to a. Conditional Usa of this
nature. '..
Chairn~n Norton advised that 'a Conditional Use cannot be added t0' the list
.. of Condi'tiona! Uses already inciucie~1 in Ordinance NS-3 'under Section 3.3.
· At 8:19 P.M.. Cha'frman' Norto~ closed the hearing for the ...evening', directed
V-3!2 continued to the next regular meeting and referred' same to the Variance
Co~ittee for study and a report.
[~i.i..-~:..j., ·Planning CommissioD Minutes - 13 November 1967 - Coi~tinued
· ·
up-'142_ - Lewis Gobble~ Gle~ Brae Drive - ReqUe'st for Use Permit for .the
"" ...."" .Keepins o'f Rabbits for 4-H ·Project
.!..,~.:'.:...'!......
f.ll!':l.".. "::':~:"..:.' .'.The public hearing relative to UP-142 'was not opened at this time
· .
"" · .... Chairman Norton directed that this matter be continued to' the ne:<t
'. '~l ~,.. ':~.. -' ·
.... regular meeting ·since a' recOman. endation cannot be made until V~312 ...
'j'Y:!i":';n:'!":'?" (relat'ive .to the 'subject application"UP-142) is'. resolved.· ".' '
. ..:'... ,7.": ..,... · , . .
. .,.~... ... . .
.. ...
"!':"! ...... : Commissioner McFall suggested that the individual request to keep..
small animals be·give·· consideration at.'the time the Small Animal ..
..i' ·Ordinance is taken under study. .. ..
..
..
..
" ON ' " """' "'
"'. .·RECESS AND R. EC VENE ..... " : "' '
· . .'. ..
: 'ill..'. BUILDING· SITES AND SUBDIVISIONS '.
.. ..
..
A. SDR-710 - B. T. Ga,leb; Seagull Way' Building· Site Approval ~ i Lot - ..'.'
Continued from 23 October 1967
..
·
.Commissioner McFall Stated that i)' SDR-710 ~.~as scheduled for consideration
at the same time as' the ·application for Varianc~ (V-3.05) which ~.:as necessary
in order for the apblicant 'to obtain Building' Site Approval for. SDR-7i0 but
which was ·denied at the meeting of 25. September 1967..2) the a~plicant indicated
at that time that'he would submit ·revised.plans for SDR-710 ·which 'would .. not ., ..
· , ·
.... · - require a Variance 3) at the' last meeting '23 October 1967 the ·applicant re-
..l.:'..l'.'' quested an extension to .23.November 1967· and 4). the revised plans have 'not
....
.
....'. "... '..,. been received and unless a iett'e~ request'ing a. furthe~ extension is submitted·
· ,. ,. '.. prior to 23 November .1967 the subject application will expire.'· .. :
..
:..' ." .:... :' . The Secretary explained ·that he he'd discussed .(with the' City·AttOrney) the
: subject applicant's request· to ~ppeal to the City Council 'and was informed"
. .. that the ·time 'allowed for aopeal had lapsed.
... · . .
.... · . . ~. Ted Galeb was present and inquired what h~ could do to bring this matter.
.. be·fore the City Council. ..
..
" .. The Chairmn'y Stated that this·reqUest could be brought UP 'at the City 'Council
... meeting under Oral Communications.·
..
· ..."" ~. Ted Galeb stated ·that it s&emed' unreasonable.to ·demolish a.newiy constructed
.. building to provide an 85' frontage when otherd' in ~he area were'providing ·only
:".' 75'. . . : " .' .'..... '
..
'. . ·
.
.. .
.
;.... Chairran Norton explained that a l~tter. of extension 'was ne. eded 'or the app!i- ·
cation for Building Site Approval would have to be de.nied. be.'fore'.it expires
. .
..
After discussion I~. ~leb submitted a letter granting a 45 day eS.:tension
for SDR-710. "" '
..
..
Chairmn' Norton then dfrected that' t'he subject application be continued to
the next regular meeting.
B. SDR-721 - Ray E.-. Bieber, Pike Road - Building .Si~e. ApprOval - 1 'Lot -
Continued from 23 October i967 ......
..
. . . .
' Comissioner McFall stated that .1). the applicant at .the last meeting requested
a continuance to allow time to confer with the Subdivision Cox~,~ittee re.~Jarding
Condition II-G of the ..Building' Site Con~nittee Rep.ort dated 23 October 1967
· ..
'.. 2) the applicant 'has been l-eqUired to. widen Pike Road from hi~' property' li;.'le
to Pierce Road which is ~uite some distance 3) the.appiicant~r~lizes.the
. importance of the. Pike Road improvements but does not feel that:" such'a large
.... "l'... amount of the road Should be his .resp6nsibility and expense· alone '. ..
.. . . .
,..
. .. ...
..
.
. .
' ' ' ' ....... · .... "':' ""
' ........ Z': ........."'7".
..
' PlanninM Commission Minutes 13 November 1967 Continued
i.:..i: .
""':"" III,' B, SDR-721 - Continued
.r.......
......~
z.. .. 4) the Committee suggested to the applicant that he get together with
".~';.'C..'.~'."L' the other residents of the area and pool the costs of the subject improve-
· '...." merits since the assessment district proposed for that area failed
...~ ....~.....!%.[ .
.".".'z' ~2~ Chairman Norton commented that the problem confronting F~ Bieber is
...:~..!."'. that he is anxious to start construction but cannot because of the costly
.... e .! road improvements.
The Secretary, in answer to'an inquiry from Chairman Norton, stated that
it is necessary for theapplicant to request modification of the proposed
.=... " conditions of approval from t.he Planning Commission before taking the matter
'.. before the City Council.
At this time the applicant requested permission to submit a written request
.. ..... '. for modification of Condition II-B for consideration later on the agenda
.... under New BusineSs.
'=." · Chairman Norton so directed.
,-~
" Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by Commission Crisp, that the Building
· .. Site Committee Report of 23'October '1967 relative to SDR-721 (with Note
"" making special reference to Condition II-B). be adopted and that the tenta-
· rive map (Exhibit "A", filed 16 October 1967) be approved subject to the
conditions. set forth in said report; motion carried unanimously.
C. SDR-722 - George Somps, Saratoga Hills Road - Building' Site Approval -
... 2 Lots
" Commissioner McFall ~tated that 1) the SubdivisiOn Committee had completed
their report 2) the applicant.had met with the Subdivision Committee and
" expressed dissatisfaction with Condition II-I of the report of 13 November
· ' 1967 regarding' improvement on Saratoga 'Hills Road since this condition
had not been imposed on the expired'Building Site Approval (SDR-393)
relative to this property.
Chairman Norton advised that at this time this road needed improvements
· . for reasons Of safety. "
The applfcant stated that 1) he felt the road width requirements were
excessive.when compared to the requirements proposed under SDR-393 2) a one
="~"..... (1) year extension was granted for SDR-393 2).during this one (1) year
period the remainder of the improvements'required were completed.on the
subject property and 4). he was under.the impression that he had met all
· ' the approvals and did not realize that he had to go to the City C6uncil
'.'. for final approval; therefore, SDR-393 expired after the one (1) year
extension.
· ' The Secretary advised that had this 'file gone befor'e the City Council
.. a two (2) year extension would have .been possible.
Mr. Somps explained that 1) he thought he had only to pay a storm drainage
t..:
fee of $450100 to complete the cities requirements and 2) he felt he had
done a first class job with the improvements on this property.
· . Commissioner McFa'll advised 'that the SubdiVision Committee did .agree' to
modify Condition II-H and II-I in order to defray the cost of improve-
ments relative to this application.
-6-.
i .i.' . '.... .. ..
..... .-~r---' ............. ..........~ ... ... .,'. . .' ............. S ....
'.:i...=. planninE Conm~ission Minutes - 13'November 1967 -.'Continued.
III.. C. SDR-722 - Continued
.;..~,.'.i.".~.!t Mr, Somps explained. that 1) the amount of $3200 for road improvements
....~!: would be in addition to the Lmprovements already made on this property
!,':.."..:".. .. 2) Saratoga Hills Road has been a private'road for about twenty (20)
~..'..!"'i.. .; .. years 3) it has been supported by the residents in the area that use
...~..~,.,~,,i'-.~.'. the road 4) he is a property~'.o~vmer'n'in the'area "and ha~.paid .for 't.he up.
.......... '.'.z..' keep of the road all these years 5) the.pUblic has never been denied
'~""""' use of this privately maintained road and 6) he would like to request
!!'!':' "" ~ that SDR-722 be approved under the original conditions required in file
c , 'y' SDR-393.
Chairman'Norton suggested that Mr. Somps approach the people in 'the area
to help pay for the required improvements. "
Mr..SOmps stated that. he felt it/would be useless to make such a request
Chairman Norton then stated that two (2) different'policies'could be
.considered relative tO SDR-722: ~
1) previously expired approved application 'could not justify Violations
relative to application'filed on the' same property at a later date and '
2) no change could be m~de in newly proposed conditions in order to
correlate them with the old.applicati0n.
Commissioner Smith stated that it was not possible to have two policies
regarding one application.. ~ .
CommisSioner Smith stated that the Committeewould find it difficult
to reco~nmend any deviation from the conditions stated in the Building
Site Coramittee Report of 13 N0ve~mer 1967.. ..
Chairman Norton informed the applicant that if the proposed conditions
are approved, it would be possible to request a reconsideration from the
Planning Commission and after their recoranendation it could be taken tO .
the City Council for consideration. '..
'Mr. Somps'requested that the Building Site Connnittee Report be approved
and that his plea for 'reconsideration for modification be. taken up later
on the agenda under New Business.Z
Chairman Norton so directed.
Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by Commissioner Smith, that the Building
Site Committee Report of'13 NOvember 1967 relative to SDR-722 be .adopted
and that the tentative map (Exhibit "'A", filed 24 October 1'967)' be approved-
subject. to the conditions set forth in.said report; motion carried unani~.ously.
" Di- SDR-22~ -.Delaplaine McDa~iel~ Ten Acres Road -.Building Site Approval'-'
· . t Lot
The applicant. was present and ex~'ressed satisfaction.with the proposed
conditions of approval. .. ..
Commlssioner McFall moved, seconded by Comanissioner Crisp, that the. Building
Site Committ'ee Report of 13 November 1967 relative to SDR-723 be adopted and
that the tentative map (Exhibit "A-I", filed 13 November 1967) be approved'
" subject to the conditions se.t forth in said. report; motion carried unanimously.
E. SDR-724 - Jerry Jordan~ Midheels Drive - Building Site Approval - ! Lot "
Mr. Jordan was present and expressed satisfaction with theproposed conditfons
of approval. ..
'.' -7-
"'.' Planning Commission Minutes - 13 ~ovember 1:967 - Continued ..
~".'~"' III. E.' SDR-724'- Continued "
,,~.;,"!..... Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by CommissiOner Smith, that the ..
"./:['.. Building Site Committee Report of 13 November 1967 relative to SDR-724'
ii:j. be adopted and that the tentative map (Exhibit "A", filed 27 October
'."'.'. 1967) be approved .subject to the'conditionsset. forth in-said report;..;
'::'. motion carried unanimously·
· .. IV. DESIGN REVIEW
A.'.' A-266 - City of Saratoga, Fruitvale Avenue - Final Design Review - Addition'
to City Hall and Council Chambers
The Secretary 1) requested that, this nmtter be continued to a~it the sub-
-' mittal of revised plans and 2). 'exptained".that construction consi'sted of
the addition of a new wing and a new roof for the existing City Hall to
match the new wing and the City Council Chambers.
Chairman Norton then directed that A-266 be continued to'the next regular
meeting and referred same to the DeSign Review Cormnittee for study.
· V. CITY COUNCIL REPORT
Commissioner Kasner gave a sun~nary on items reviewed and action taken at the
City Council meeting of 1 November 1967, with emphasis on the following item:
Approval of Ordinance'NS-5.17 relative to '
park.sites and 'collecting fees from same
'."' from subdividers building in the City.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. UP-136 - B. T. Galeb, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road - Request for Modification of
· . Temporary Use Permit for'Kin~ Dodo Playhouse Outdoor Theater
The Secretary explained that 1) due to bad weather the dra~ group must move
to temporary inside quarters since.;.their'."permanent building hzs not yet been
constructed-..and 2) they would like to use the Detour Antique Shop for the.
above mentioned Use.
In answer to an inquiry from Chairm~n Norton'the Secretary stated h~ had i..a,.'?
inspected the Antique Shop with the Fire F~rshall and the Chief Building
Inspector and found some necessary minor improvements which.the.applicant
indicated he would make. '
Commissioner McFall stated that i) the Subdivision Committee ~e'viewed this
request 2). the Conmittee found that no indication of time limit was mentioned
.. relative to vacating the Antique.'Shop for the pernmnent location. 3) the Use
Permit involves a condition that permits use of the outdoor. theater only until
the indoor theater is. completed and 4).'the Committee would like..to'meet with
.~ the applicant to discuss the length of time they plan to use the,:temporary,
.. indoor theater.
"' In answer to an inquiry from Chalrm~n Norton, .Mr. Ted Caleb stated that
1) the length of time the .indoor theater will be used depends'on how
soon the permanent indoor theater Can be completed and 2) the group
would like to begin their p.er. formances on 1,December 1967 in the temporary
indoor theater.
After discussion Chairman Norton. directed-that UP-136 be continued to the
nex~ regular meeting and referred 'same to the' Subdivision Committee for
· study.
:"";"/"' 'Planning Commission Minutes - 13 November 1967 - Continued
VI. B. SDR-721 - Ray E. Bieber, Pike Road - RequeSt'for ModificatiOn of Conditions
"'..~. ...... Commissioner McFall moved, seconded. by Commissioner Crisp, that the request
"~ for modification of Condition iI-B of the Building Site Committee Report of
· .?'" 23 October 1967 be denied and that this recon~nendation be forx~rded to the
:."" City Council as the action of the Planning Commission; motion carried
'i.'t.~ :'.~." ~ .2 . . .
.
"..?.~ ..... unanimously.
· ::..':". C. 'SDR-722 - George Somps, Saratoga Hills Road - Request for Modification
of Conditions
Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by 'Commissioner Smith, that the request
for modification of Condition I!-I of the Building Site Comanittee Report of
13 November 1967 be denied and that this recommendation be forx.mrded to the
City Council aS the action of the Planning Commission; motion.carried unanimously.
VII. OLD BUSINESS
A. SDR-712 - Jerry Jordan, Michaels Drive - Request for Modification of Conditions
- Continued from 23 October 1967
The Secr.etary explained that 1) this request was for the elimination of
underground utilities' and 2) the applicant requested that this matter be
continued since he was still awaiting.further information from P'G & E.
Chairman Norton then directed the matter continued off the agenda until.
such time'as the applicantTreceiVed the necessary information.
Commissione~ McFall stated that the'Subdivision Committee visited the site
and were prepared to make a recommendation at this time.
Mr. Jordan inquired if' the amount charged by P G & E would make apy difference'
in the Committee recommendation.
Commissioner McFall stated that 1). it would not make any difference since the
current policy is to require. underground utilities ahd 2)..'~these"Utilitieslwili
sometime in 'the future serve four (4) Sites and the cost will be divided
eventually among the four owners of the sites.
Fir. Jordan advised that P G & E does not give..r~ates on underground utilit~=~
installations.
Commissioner McFall moved, seconde~ by Conm~issioner Kasner, that the request
for modification of Condition II-H of the Building Site Committee Report. of
11 September 1967 be denied and that .this recommendation be...for~rded to the
City Council as the action of the Planning Commission; motion carried unani-
mously. ..
VIII. COMMUNCIATIONS
A. WRITTEN
1. WESTBROOK LMPROVE~NT ASSOCIATION
CommissiOner Crisp requested,'0n behalf of the General Plan Co~nittee,
that a date be se.t aside for discussion regarding annexation of the area
represented 'b~'.the Westbrook'Improvement Association which'is located
...along the Northern boundSry'ofthe City of Saratoga.
. PlanninS Commission Minutes - 13 November 1967 - Continued
"..' L'. '. .....VIII' A. 1. WESTBROOK - CONTINUED
..':i .'Z Chairman Norton inquired why it was necessary to hold a public
:'. "' hearing for people who were not residents of the City.
.... Commissioner Crisp expalined that· he, along with Com~issiloner
'.. ':." O'Rorke, had had requests from residents in this area for a "
· public hearing for the purpose of discussing matters relative
.. Mr. Thurner, President of the Westbrook Association, ~.~s present
... and stated he and the fellow members of the organization ~ould.
'.. '. appreciate a public hearing to discuss' the subject proposal'.
: .... Chairman Norton then directed that a Notice of Hearing be
'. published and a hearing be sclieduled for il December 1967.
'~.' He further directed that a .letter be forwarded to the West-·
brook· Improvement Association informing them of the scheduled '.'
me e ting.
· ....." ~ 2. SDR-634 - Roy M. Westly, Prospect Road -'Request for Extension
.. . The Secretary read a letter ·submitted by .~ jerry Gurley on
.'.'. behalf of Mr. L.. B. Nelson, requesting an extension of SDR-634
· . 7. :.. for one (1) year.
After discussion, Commissioner McFall moved, seconded by Connnissioner
.. .. Crisp, to grant an extension of one (1)yea'~rel.atriveL":'.toT,.'SDR. 634.,:7.:motion
c. arr ied unanimous ly.
B. ORAL
Chairran Norton acknowledged, wit'h'pleasure:," the presence of Councilm~n
.Burry, Mrs. Stark and Mr. Metcalf' of the Good Government Group, and.~s.
· ' Ottenbergof the League of Women"-. Voters. He, also, expressed appreciation
· ' to Mrs. Stark for the coffee served at recess.
IX. ADJOURN~D~ .
. .' The Chairman' declared the meeting adjourned at !Q:43 P.M.
· " Respectfully submitted,
.- Stanley M. ~er, Secretary
Saratoga Planning Commission
j
-10-