11/3/1958 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-3 - Baron cont'd. low The City Clerk read the reco?M�-,endation of the Planning Conrission, dated October 1811 1958, approving the subdivision by a four to one vote. He stated that all agency approvals had been received ex- cept that of the City engineer who disapproved the subdivision be- cause of two (2) substandard lots. The City Clerk further pointed out that, in the ast, approval has been granted for subdivisions less than four (43 lots having one or more substandard lots, an exception provided for in the Subdivision Ordinance. He cited two exar-ples. The Mayor mentioned that approval of the adjacent subdivision (Teilhet) had been denied, causing the owner to lose one lot (w.ak- ing four instead five lots) due to dedication of the right-of-way creating substandard lots. The Teilhet subdivision was approved as four -lot division, having five (5) plus acres gross. Following a discussion relative to future road for the area, the Mayor suggested that the rap be referred back to the Planning Cormission for further study along the lines of future roads plans for access to adjacent properties. ACTION: That the Mitchell Baron tentative rap (122-58) 3 lots be re- ferred back to the Planning Commission for re -consideration, with particular emphasis on aster plan and access to other neighborhood lots. MOTION: Treat; SECOND: Sherlock; VOTE: Passed unanimously 2. Willis, Richard (124-58) 3 lots. Engr. Brian. The City Clerk read the Planning Corrission's recornendation of October 18b, 1958, approving the subdivion by a four to one vote. He reported that the Fire District, in letter dated October 14, 1958, had approved the tentative map. In letter dated October 22, 1958, the Santa Clara County Health Department stated conditions of approval for this subdivision. This letter was read by the City Clerk. The letter from the City engineer, dated October 28, 1958, was read etating conditions of approval relative to location of driveway and fencing along both sides of channel easements. The Mayor commented on the letter from Nestor Barrett, Planning Consultant, and read the following sections:"It is almost univer- sal in adr!inistering zoning natters to follow the rule that where land is being utilized for a public easement for a purpose which makes it completely unuseable by the person who will occupy the building site, that such land cannot be included in calculating the area of a lot." Another portion of the letter states," if the Town is to follow what is general practice in administering zoning it will not permit this channel easement to be included in the calculated area." The Mayor further stated that variances would have to be granted for the substandard lots. Mr. Willis stated that his -:ain reason for requesting this sub- division is in order to have the corner at ':Jest Fremont and St. Francis landoaped and maintained. He further stated that he has