HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-28-1987 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DATE: October 28, 1987 - 7:00 P.M.
PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
Roll Call: Present: Vice Chairwoman Guch, Commissioners Burger, Tucker, Clay, Kolstad
Approval of Minutes: Meeting of October 14, 1987
Commissioner Kolstad asked that on Page 5, both Motions on SD-87-010, read, "Passed, 6-1,
Commissioner Kolstad opposed."
BURGER/KOLSTAD MOVED APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1987, AS
AMENDED. Passed 5-0.
Deletions to the Agenda: Item 14, Application V-87-020, Chevron U.S.A., to be continued
per request of the Applicant.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS;
REPORT OF CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA;
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this Meeting was properly posted on
October 23, 1987.
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR;
1. DR-87-128 Raney, 14760 Farwell Ave., request for design review approval of plans
to construct an 1,158 sq. ft. second story addition to an existing one-story
single family home in the R-I-40,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of
the City Code. Continued to December 12, 1987.
2. SUP-87-001.1Rose, 14725 Sobey Rd., request to modify the conditions of a second
unit use permit to allow installation of certain street improvements and
sewer facilities to be deferred to coincide with the installation of similar
improvements on the adjacent property to the north, in the R-1-40,000
zoning district per Chapter .15 of the City Cede.
3. DR-87-069 Pan Cal Development, 20960 Bowhill Ct., request for design review
approval of plans to construct a new 5,417 sq. ft. two-story home in the
NHR zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
4. UP-87-015 Krichman, 14220 Loveland Ct., request for use permit approval of plans
to construct a 900 sq. ft. accessory structure (guest house) in the
R-1-20,000 zoning diswict per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
5. SD-87-016 Woolworth Construction Co., 14770 Three Oaks Way, request for
tentative subdivision approval of plans for a 7-1ot subdivision of an 8.09
acre lot in the R-1-40,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the
City Cede. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project.
6. DR-87-130 Woolworth Construction Co., 13037 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd., request
for design review approval of plans to construct a new 3,919 sq. ft.
one-story single family home in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per
Chapter 15 of the City Code.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page
OCTOBER 28, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued
7. DR-87-129 Woolworth Construction Co., 13019 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd., request
for design review approval of plans to construct a new 4,497 sq. ft.
one-story single family home in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per
Chapter 15 of the City Code.
8. DR-87-113 Woolworth Construction Co., 13055 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd., request
for design review approval of plans to construct a new 3,897 sq. ft.
one-story single family home in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per
Chapter 15 of the City Code.
9. DR-87-094 Wm. Day Co., Inc., 12412 Crayside Lane, request for design review
approval of plans to construct a new 5,746 sq. ft. two-story single family
on Lot 21 in the Beauchamps subdivision in the NHR zoning district per
Chapter 15 of the City Code (R- 1-20,000 per negotiated settlement)
10. DR-87-126 Dura Style Homes, 18247 Montpere Way, request for design review
approval of plans to construct a new 3,416 sq. ft. one-story single family
home in the R-l-10,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
Vice Chairwoman Guch noted that Item 1, DR-87-128, was continued to December 9, 1987.
Planner Caldwell noted that Consent Calendar Item 9 had been withdrawn by the Applicant.
Commissioner Tucker requested removal of Public Hearings Consent Calendar Item 4.
Commissioner Kolstad requested removal of Public Hearings Consent Calendar Item 5.
A member of the Public requested removal of Public Hearings Consent Calendar Items 6, 7, 8.
Planner Caldwell noted that in Item 10, DR-87-126, Exhibit "A" had been revised; the
Applicant had been informed of this change and was agreeable to the revision.
CLAY/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEMS 2, 3, 10. Passed 5-0.
4. UP-87-015 Krichman, 14220 Loveland Ct., request for use permit approval of plans
to construct a 900 sq. ft. accessory structure (guest house) in the
R-1-20,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of October 28, 1987.
Commissioner Tucker asked that the Applicant clarify information on plans submitted and
noted concern regarding the proximity of the proposed structure to the neighbors.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:08 P.M. :
Mr. Harold Krichman, Applicant, stated that there was no kitchen, i.e., 220 wiring, gas or any
other equipment which could be used in the preparation of meals. He added that it was noted
on a site visit that there was not another home within 100 ft. of the proposed structure.
Planning Director Hsia called attention to UP-87-015, 3., which prohibited kitchen facilities.
City Attorney Toppel added that 'a deed restriction would prohibit any such future use.
BURGER/KOLSTAD MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:10 P.M.
Passed 5-0.
Commissioner Tucker stated that the Applicant had addressed her questions regarding use as a
second unit; she remained concerned regarding the proposed 900 sq. ft. size. Commissioner
Kolstad noted on a site visit that there was adequate landscape screening and rear yard setback.
Commissioner Clay felt that his concerns regarding impacts on neighbors had been answered.
BURGER/CLAY MOVED APPROVAL UP-87-015 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION.
Passed 5-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page
OCTOBER 28, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued
5. SD-87-016 Woolworth Construction Co., 14770 Three Oaks Way, request for
tentative subdivision approval of plans for a 7-lot subdivision of an 8.09
acre lot in the R-l-40,000 zoning district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the
City Code. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project.
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of October 28, 1987.
Planner Caldwell noted an amended Exhibit "A" III. Specific Conditions-Engineering Division:
3. to read, "...40 ft. wide right-of-way on the street labeled "private street."
10. to read, "The applicant shall record a non-access easement along Lot l's frontage."
Commissioner Kolstad noted concern regarding an appearance of excessive bulk. He cited
Exhibit "A", VIII. Specific Conditions-Planning Department, 3. and suggested that Lot 3 be
restricted to a one-story house; such would eliminate an appearance of bulk at the corner and
prevent four two-story houses from being built adjacent to each other.
The Public Hearing was opened 7:16 P.M.
Mr. A1 Woolworth, Woolworth Construction Co., was agreeable to Staffs request on Lot 1
and concurred with the Commissioner regarding Lot 3; however, he objected to any restrictions
placed on Lot 5 until design review. Houses will be built to client specifications and
Applicants asked that there be some flexibility in planning the subdivision.
Commissioner Kolstad requested assurances that there would not be excessive bulk; Mr.
Woolworth was agreeable to wording limiting one of the four rear lots to a one-story house.
Mr. Bill Bouler, Baranga Ln. and Three Oaks Wy., Saratoga, commented that he:
- Supported lengthening the street which would maintain property values on Three Oaks Way
- Spoke with Mr. L. Woolworth who agreed to consider the appearance of the neighborhood
beyond basic requirements of the Code
In response to Vice Chairwoman Guch's question, he stated that he would prefer to have one
story homes without privacy impacts to existing residents; however, he recognized the right of
the Applicants to develop the property.
Ms. Jessie Mc Guire, 15350 Vestview Ct., Saratoga, noted concern regarding size and bulk of
homes; she asked that the open feeling in the Three Oaks Way neighborhood be maintained.
Ms. Joan Detter, 14930 Farwell, Saratoga, requested consideration of preservation of the Oak,
Redwood and Walnut trees on site.
Mr. Bill Varcy cited concern regarding current noise from Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. and asked
that the Commission require fencing to reduce noise impacts.
Mr. Bob Duammerals, Los Gatos, favored allowing some latitude to the project architect in
developing this property.
Mr. Woolworth responded that a wall would be. built along Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. Every
effort will be made to preserve the trees on site; to his knowledge, no Oaks would be removed.
BURGER/KOLSTAD MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:30 P.M.
Passed 5-0.
Commissioner Kolstad was agreeable to allowing the Applicant to determine which of Lots 4-7
would be single story, with final approval being given at design review; Commissioner .Clay
asked that language be added to address the requirement that at least one of these lots be a
single story residence. The City Attorney suggested a phrase be added, "One of the four lots
shall be single story."
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ; Page 4
OCTOBER 28, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT CALENDAR Continued
Commissioner Burger was favorable to this Application; however, she favored consideration
of a height limitation instead of a restriction to a single story. She objected to such a restriction
on Lot 5, since this lot had the most Ordinance Size Oak trees and a single story house would
increase the footprint of the house. She favored not specifying which of Lots 4-7 would be
restricted to single story/height limitation.
Planner Caldwell advised the Commission that only the two-story homes would be subject to
further review by the Commission at design review.
Consensus of the Commission that restriction on 'Lots 4-7 would not be specified in the Motion
BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Passed 5-0.
BURGER/KOLSTAD MOVED APPROVAL OF SD-87-016 PER MODEL RESOLUTION,
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS AMENDED, WITH AN ADDED CHANGE IN
EXHIBIT "A", VIII. 3., TO READ, "FUTURE HOMES ON LOTS 1 AND 3 SHALL BE
SINGLE- STORY IN DESIGN." Passed 5-0.
6. DR-87-130 Woolworth Construction Co., 13037 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd., request
for design review approval of plans to construct a new 3,919 sq. ft.
one-story single family home in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per
Chapter 15 of the City Code.
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission, October 28, 1987.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:42 P.M.
Mr. John Bonnett, speaking on behalf of Ms. Marjorie Morgan, 13121 Saratoga-Sunnyvale
Rd., Saratoga, noted her concern regarding the building of a two-story house adjacent to her
home. He requested information on the fencing.:
Planning Director Hsia stated that the speaker seemed to be interested in Item 8; Items 6 and 7
proposed to build single story homes. Mr. Bonnett had no objection to the placement of a
two-story house on the lot in Item 8 since this property was depressed.
Mr. Woolworth responded that plans had already been changed to a one-story house to accom-
modate Ms. Morgan; a "good neighbor" fence was planned, namely, a redwood, 6 ft. fence.
TUCKER/CLAY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 7:46 P.M. Passed 5-0.
TUCKER/CLAY MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87-130 PER MODEL RESOLUTION.
Passed 5-0.
Items 7 and 8 to be heard jointly.
7. DR-87-129 Woolworth Construction Co., 13019 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd., request
for design review approval of plans to construct a new 4,497 sq. ft.
one-story single family home in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per
Chapter 15 of the City Code.
8. DR-87-113 Woolworth Construction Co., 13055 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd., request
for design review approval of plans to construct a new 3,897 sq. ft.
one-story single family home in the R-1-12,500 zoning district per
Chapter 15 of the City Code.
There was no one to speak to either Item 7 nor 8.
BURGER/TUCKER MOVED APPROVAL OF DR-87-129 PER MODEL RESOLUTION
AND DR-87-113 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION. Passed 5-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page
OCTOBER 28, 1987 ~
PUBLIC HEARINGS;;
11. DR-87-046 Heeter, 14298 Springer Ave., request for design review approval of plans
to construct a new 2,576 sq: ft. one-story home in the R-l-10,000 zoning
district per Chapters 14 and 15 of the City Code.
Planning Director Hsia presented Report to the Planning Commission, October 28, 1987.
Noted for the record that address listed in this Application was incorrect.
Commissioner Tucker reported on the land use visit.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:55 P.M.
Mr. Heeter, Applicant, noted that Springer Ave. homes were extremely diverse and added that
the area was undergoing remodelling. Applicant 'and designer felt that a well designed, quality
home would not be out of place. He reviewed the original design proposed and noted that
there remained some concerns in the redesign being presented, namely: The look of a long, narrow house
The concern of an adjacent home owner for privacy impacts and open space
He compared the design under consideration with other homes and stated that he was willing to
lower the house to 18 ft. if this remained of concern to others. However, the design presented
carefully addressed good design factors as well as privacy of adjacent property owners; a home
of the quality proposed would enhance the neighborhood. Pictures were presented.
Mr. Bob Rockwood, Designer, noted the desire to build a house which would conform to the
neighborhood. He reviewed design elements of the roof line and noted that the mountains
could be seen above the trees on an adjacent property, which were 14 ft. to 19 ft. in height.
Mr. Rick Deignan, 14291 Springer Ave., Saratoga, opposed the 19 ft. height of the center
section and felt it should be lowered to 14 ft.--the maximun height of single story homes on
substandard lots within a radius of two to three blocks. His major concern was height of the
house, not the square footage as proposed.
Mr. Tom McKenna, 14256 Springer Ave., Saratoga, stated that this project required two
exceptions; namely, bulk (square footage) and height. He suggested that square footage be
viewed from a proportional point of view and questioned the need for a 19 ft. ceiling in a
single-story dwelling. He favored 14 ft. height.
Mr. George Wallington, 14250 Springer Ave., Saratoga, questioned whether a 2500 sq. ft.
home could be considered small and objected to the 19 ft. height which would block his view.
He felt that the design proposed would not be compatible with the existing neighborhood.
Mr. Jim Powell, 14300 Paul Ave., Saratoga, noted the unsightliness of empty lots; however,
he objected to a 19 ft. height and felt that the size proposed would not be compatible.
Mr. Don Schwartz, 14271 Springer Ave., Saratoga, stated that Finding 4, could not be made.
Mr. Rockwood felt that the above comments indicated that the design was not understood; he
noted that the 19 ft. height was a singular point of the house and felt that both design and
aesthetics were being cornpromised.
BURGER/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:26 P.M.
Passed 5-0.
Commissioner Burger noted that any house on this substandard lot would be highly visible;
she was not concerned regarding the square footage proposed. However, she was not
favorable to this Application at a 19 ft. height, even though only a small portion of the house
would be at 19 ft; such would be too impacfful to the neighborhood.
Commissioner Tucker noted the neighborhood character and cited efforts necessary to preserve
this character. She wished to see the size of the house more in proportion to the lot and
understood the neighbor's concerns with respect to the roofiine.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 6
OCTOBER 28, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Commissioner Clay felt the house was too large for this lot and asked that height be reduced.
Commissioner Kolstad was not opposed to the square footage proposed; however, height was
excessive in comparison to other houses in the area. He suggested a 14-16 ft. height.
Vice Chairwoman Guch also opposed the 19 ft. height and favored a height of 14-16 ft.
Consensus reached by the Commission that height was not to exceed 16 ft; square footage pro-
posed was acceptable to all but Commissioner TUcker, due to visual impacts on neighbors.
CLAY/TUCKER MOVED TO CONTINUE DR-87-046 TO NOVEMBER 17, 1987.
Passed 5-0.
12. DR-87-089 Booker 21602 Masson Ct., request for design review approval of plans to
V-87-021 construct a new two-story 6,418 sq. ft. single family dwelling where
6,200 sq. ft. is the standard in the NHR zoning district. In addition,
variance approval is requested to allow a 16 ft. high detached cabana
where 12 ft. is the maximum per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission, October 28, 1987.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:41 P.M.
Mr. Roger Griffin, Paragon Design, noted that the roofline had been lowered 2 ft. 8 in. as
discussed in the Study Session. He asked that the Design Review Application be voted on
with a continuance of the Variance Application.
BURGER/CLAY MOVED TO CONTINUE V-87-021 TO NOVEMBER 17, 1987. Passed 5-0
BURGER/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:43 P.M.
Passed 5-0
KOLSTAD/BURGER MOVED TO APPROVE DR-87-089 PER MODEL RESOLUTION.
Passed 5-0.
13. DR-87-096 Ross, 11915 Shadybrook Ct., request for design review approval of a
1,179 sq. ft. addition to an existing 3,617 sq. ft. one-story single family
home in the Re 1-15,000 zoning district per Chapter 15 of the City Code.
With the addition, the floor area will exceed the 4,300 sq. ft. district
standard.
Planning Director Hsia presented the Report to the Planning Commission of October 28, 1987.
Vice Chairwoman Guch noted the letter of Mr. Ronald A. Sege in opposition to this Item.
Commissioner Tucker reported on the land use visit.
The Public Heating was opened at 8:50 P.M.
Mr. Bob Duammeral, Designer, noted that bulk was a matter of perception; when design
conditions or natural features altered this perception, they must be taken into account.
Applicants had taken these factors into account as well as maintaining privacy and building a
house in keeping with the neighborhood.
Ms. Gail Baxter, 11936 Shaeffer Ct., Saratoga, had no objections to the improvement or
addition to this site. Letter from Mrs. C. Penuci, 11935 Shadybrook Ct., Saratoga, presented.
BURGER/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:54 P.M. Passed
5-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 7
OCTOBER 28, 1987
PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued
Commissioner Burger noted the resulting improvement to the property and the neighborhood;
Commissioner Tucker concurred and noted that the proposed addition would not impact Mr.
Sege's property. Commissioner Clay felt that the addition would be compatible with adjacent
homes. Commissioner Kolstad noted that he did not feel this addition would result in an
invasion of privacy for Mr. Sege; Vice Chairwoman Guch concurred.
TUCKER/CLAY MOVED TO APPROVE DR-87-096 PER THE MODEL RESOLUTION.
Passed 5-0.
MISCELLANEOUS:
15. Grading permit - Saratoga-S unnyvale Rd.,: at Cox Ave. (Referred by the City Engineer)
Recommendation: Approve grading plan. '
Planning Director Hsia reviewed the Memorandum of the City Engineer, October 19, 1987.
CLAY/BURGER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE GRADING PLAN AS PRESENTED.
Passed 5-0.
COMMUNICATIONS:
Written:
1. Santa Clara Valley Integrated Environmental Management Project's final Stage II Report.
Noted and filed.
2. Committee-of-the-Whole Minutes of October 6, 1987, - Noted and filed.
3. Minutes of Heritage Preservation Commission of September 16, 1987, -
Noted and filed.
Oral by Commission:
Vice Chairwoman Guch reviewed the City Council Meeting of October 21, 1987.
ADJOURNMENT:
The Meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:05 P.M.
Resp/e..,. tfully sub ' d, .
/
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MINUTES
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING - 10-27-87
SUP-86-002 - FRANK HORVATH, 15209 BLUE GUM CT.
Planning Director Hsia explained the administrative hearing
procedure stating that staff would present the report and then the
applicant and any others present 'could speak.
Assistant Planner Calkins stated .that Mr. & Mrs. Coe requested an
administrative hearing be held regarding the legalization of the
existing second unit at 15209 Blue Gum Ct. He stated that the Coe's
letter regarding this second unit referenced a previous letter
written by them in which they' stated that when the unit was
constructed they were assured that the guest house would be used
as a bedroom for inlaws. Secondly, they stated in their letter that
granting the second unit use permit would dilute their residential
designation and set a precedent for the growth of the commercial
enterprise in the area. Planner Calkins noted that a review of the
building inspection records indicated that the proposed unit was
originally approved and constructed as a guest house and it was not
until after final inspection that Mr. Horvath converted the guest
house into a second unit by installing an oven. He stated that
staff was not aware of any use. restriction agreement that would
prohibit Mr. Horvath from using the guest house as a second unit if
the application were approved. Staff finds the proposal consistent
with the development standards and all the required findings can be
made. Staff recommends approval of SUP-86-002.
The applicant, Mr. Horvath, stated that the building site approval
in 1982 had no conditions restricting him from putting in an oven
and that the guest house was appr0ved at that time. He stated that
for security purposes they found it necessary to have someone on
their property at all times and they also needed someone to watch
their children. He also stated that he feels the property is large
enough to accomodate this second unit and it does not interfere with
surrounding views and privacy.
The neighbor, Mr. Coe, stated that after reviewing the regulations
and the ordinance pertinent to this application and from the letter
of the law standpoint, the only concerns they have would be that the
occupancy of the unit be a senior citizen or handicapped person. He
stated that in 1982 when the Horvaths were getting permits for the
house, there was concern about the guest house over the garage and
the impact of the large home. Then in 1983, Mr. Horvath illegally,
installed the kitchen facilities. He also stated that Mr. Horvath
was aware of the restrictions and laws regarding second units and if
the unit did not exist, that today he could not obtain a permit
because of the lot size and slope of the lot. He also noted that
the unit does not meet the requirements or intent of the Second Unit
Ordinance regarding the age or handicapped provisions.
1
Administrative Hearing Minutes - 10/27/87
Frank Horvath - SUP-86-002
Commenting on the privacy aspect, Mr. Coe stated that they look out
onto the home and they see moving vans and cars driving in and out
of the property and young people coming and going constantly.
Lastly, he emphasized that they did not object to the residence
being used properly but that is not what has been going on and that
it has been rented by young people. Mr. Horvath stated that the
reasons they had young residents in the unit is because they were
renting to interns from the hospital where his wife works. He also
noted that his wife is a doctor and is on call which means she may
come and go from the property often. He stated that the property
behind them is for sale and that has created quite a bit of traffic
coming and going.
Planning Director Hsia stated that the purpose of allowing second
units was so that the Council would have some control over how these
units were being used and that in light of this situation, he agrees
with staff's recommendation. He stated that with the conditions of
the permit, the use would comply with the requirements of the
ordinance and we would have much better control over the second unit
situation. There would be a condition that the unit has to be
occupied by a person 60 years of age or handicapped. Director Hsia
stated that he feels staff's findings are correct and after
inspection, the second unit will comply with the ordinance and
regulations of the City.
Director Hsia closed the Administrative Hearing and stated that his
determination would be to grant the second unit use permit and that
Mr. Hovath would have 30 days to sign the agreement to the
conditions. He also noted that the applicant or neighbors have the
option to appeal this decision to the City Council within 10 days of
the hearing.
Mr. Coe asked for clarification on whether or not this second unit
could be allowed as the Second Unit Ordinance reads today? He asked
why we are allowing this second unit now when the applicant could
not get the permit today as the law reads? Director Hsia stated
that he is basing the decision on Sec. 15-56.110 of the Second Unit
Ordinance ("Existing Second Units,').
Mr. Coe asked how the City would enforce the condition that someone
60 years or older or handicapped will occupy this residence?
Planner Calkins stated that there is a provision in the ordinance
that does allow the City to verify, at 5-year intervals, that Mr.
Horvath is in compliance with the ordinance. This 5-year interval
could be reduced accordingly. Director Hsia stated he would add as
a condition of approval that there be an yearly check on the tenants
occupying this unit to see that they are in conformance and
thereafter it would be checked at 5-year intervals.
2
Administrative Hearing - 10/27/87'
Frank Horvath - SUP-86-002
Director Hsia stated again that he would grant this permit based on
staff's recommendation and if you do not agree with this decision,
the applicant or neighbors may appeal this decisin to the City
Council. He explained that what we are trying to do is to provide
housing for elderly and handicapped.
The Administrative Hearing was closed at 11:10 a.m.
Minutes