Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT <br /> March 25, 2004 <br /> Page 2 <br /> OPENED PUBLIC HEARING <br /> George Vera, 300 Second Street, Los Altos, David and Lucile Packard Foundation <br /> representative, was available for questions. He stated that the property is used for charitable <br /> purposes so that the only individuals who will be using it are on staff, board members plus <br /> grantees. He further discussed the number of meetings per year as noted in the staff report. <br /> David Beyer, 26030 Elena Road, neighbor, voiced no objections to the modification of the Use <br /> Permit. <br /> CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING <br /> The Commissioners were all in agreement with the modification to the Use Permit. <br /> MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Cottrell and seconded by <br /> Commissioner Vitu to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for the <br /> requested Conditional Use Permit modification to allow small meetings of up to 45 persons, <br /> Lands of Packard Foundation, 26580 Taaffe Road, with the deletion of conditions 11, 12, 13 and <br /> 15 because these conditions have been completed by the applicant and are no longer applicable. <br /> AYES: Commissioners Kerns, Vitu &Cottrell <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: Chairman Clow &Commissioner Mordo <br /> This item will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing agenda. <br /> 3.2 LANDS OF SPECTOR & ANE\4ER, 26625 St. Francis Drive (193-03-ZP-SD- <br /> VAR); A request for a Site Development Permit for a 1,192 square foot pool and <br /> spa and a variance to allow deck encroachment into setbacks. (staff-Debbie <br /> Pedro) <br /> Staff introduced this item stating the applicants are requesting a variance to rebuild an existing <br /> pool deck encroaching into the side yard setback by up to 12 feet with a new pool deck that will <br /> be in approximately the same location. Findings for the variance have been prepared by the <br /> applicants and are included in the staff report. According to the applicants, it is impractical to <br /> move the pool deck to an alternate location because the outdoor entertainment area will not be <br /> located within a reasonable distance from the bathroom and the outdoor barbeque that is located <br /> on the east side of the house. In addition, the existing sewer line which is located on the north <br /> and west side of the pool, does pose some constraints to the placement of the new pool and <br /> decking. The adjacent neighbor closest to where the deck encroachment occurs has submitted a <br /> letter to the Town indicating no issues with the proposal. Relocating the deck to another area of <br /> the yard will not serve to reduce any adverse visual or privacy impacts. <br /> OPENED PUBLIC HEARING <br />