Laserfiche WebLink
VARIANCE AND PERh11T COMMISSION <br />Trnm of Los Altos Hills <br />26379 Fremont Road <br />Los Altos Hills, California <br />Wednesday, January 14, 1976 <br />vpc: Reel 43, Side 2, Tract 1, Count 1 to 540. <br />Chairman Young called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. In the Council Chambers <br />Town Hail, Los Altos Hills, California. <br />A. ROLL CALL Chairman K. Young, Commissioners D. Proft and T. Schick. <br />Also Present: R. E. Crowe, City Manager; K. R. Pastrof, Town Planner; D. Pennington, Secre. D. Russell, City tary. <br />Chairman Young added an agenda Item: <br />B. CONSENT CALENDAR <br />Approval of the Minutes of the meeting of December 10, 1976. <br />Commissioner Proft moved, seconded by Chairman Young, that the minutes be <br />approved as submitted. The motion passed by the following vote: <br />AYES: Chairman Young and Commissioner Proft. <br />NOES: None <br />ABSTAIN:Commissiner Schick <br />Commissioner Schick asked that the record reflect that she abstained from <br />voting because she was not present at that meeting. <br />B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: <br />LANDS OF SAVIANO. File VAR 70242475 <br />Commfssloner Proft stepped down, and dfd not take part in the discussion <br />because of.a possible c6nflict'of interest. <br />Mr. Pastrof gave a brief synopsis of the Staff Report. He added that <br />the Saviano's engineer had made a mistake in his original calculations <br />and so a revised map had been submitted to the Town on January 12, 1976. <br />This map showed one corner of the tennis court would encroach about 15' <br />into the westerly setback, and about 20' Into the southeasterly setback. <br />It was calculated that 15.2% of the court would be located in the <br />setback area. <br />Chairman Young asked if these changes had been called to the attention <br />of the property miners. Mr. Pastrof advised that the revised map had <br />been available in the Town Hall office for anyone's perusal since Mon- <br />day. Commissioner Schick questioned whether the Commission could be <br />held legally accountable because the revised map was not called to the <br />attroperty <br />r. <br />eproperty ownersrounding were senntpa not ceathat a variance applrof icplied that <br />ati n had <br />the <br />been filed; they were not sent maps. <br />