Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 09-061RESOLUTION NO. 09 -061 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING AN APPEAL; THEREBY AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION CUP 09 -0004 for a new day care facility in the Professional Administrative Zoning District Alex Du Von; 20398 Blauer Drive WHEREAS, on October 14, 2009, following a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and present evidence, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission denied a Conditional Use Permit application (CUP09 -0004) for the operation of a day care facility for 56 students in the Professional Administrative Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 2009 an appeal of the Planning Commission decision was filed by the appellant Julia Hashemieh; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 2009, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga has considered the appeal and all testimony and other evidence submitted in connection therewith. Now, therefore be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby: I. Denies the appeal and affirms the Planning Commission's denial of a Conditional Use Permit application; and II. Determines that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves, pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15270(a). III. Determines that the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said application for Conditional Use Permit Approval, as consistent with the following Conditional Use Permit findings specified in City Code Section 15 -55 and the below General Plan goals and policies. General Plan Goals and Policies The proposed project is not consistent with the following General Plan Policies: Provide adequate parking for non residential uses to minimize intrusion into adjacent neighborhoods (Circulation Policy 7.0a). The project is not consistent with this General Plan Policy in that as proposed, the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students on property which has only 14 available parking spaces. Applicant's own Traffic Study dated June 18, 2009 (as to which Applicant refused Peer Review) indicates that existing parking on site can accommodate only 40 students (based on the assumption that "the average parking duration would be a few minutes" and giving no consideration to the potential for large events). Hence, the City Council finds that the proposed non residential project will not provide adequate parking to minimize intrusion into adjacent neighborhoods. Development proposals shall be evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light, appearance, and intensity of the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be fully mitigated (Land Use Policy 5.2). The project is not consistent with this General Plan Policy in that the number of available parking spaces is not in proportion to the number of students proposed, the proposed fence is over the maximum allowed in the front setback, and play structures are not allowed in the front setback and would not be harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses. Use Permit Findings The Applicant's Project has not met the burden of proof to support the Findings required for approval of a Use Permit under Article 15 -55 of the City Code, as set forth below: The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. As proposed, the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students on property which has only 14 available parking spaces. The applicant's own Traffic Study dated June 18, 2009 (as to which Applicant refused Peer Review) indicates that existing parking on site can accommodate only 40 students (based on the assumption that "the average parking duration would be a few minutes" and giving no consideration to the potential for large events). Hence, the City Council fmds that the proposed non residential project will intrude into and adversely affect the immediate neighborhood and surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. Day Care Facilities are not allowed as of right in the Professional Administrative (PA) zoning district. Due to the inadequate parking spaces on the property and the intrusion and adverse affects which will result to immediate neighborhoods and surrounding properties, this proposed project is not in accord with the following purposes of the PA zoning district: City Code Section 15- 05.020 (a) To control the physical development of the City in such a manner as to preserve it as essentially a residential community with a rural atmosphere. (c) To foster a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses. (d) To promote the stability of existing land uses which conform with the General Plan, and to protect them from inharmonious influences and harmful intrusions. (e) To ensure that public and private lands ultimately are used for the purposes, which are most appropriate and most beneficial from the standpoint of the City as a whole. 2 (h) To minimize traffic congestion and to avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the land around them. (j) To provide for adequate off street parking and loading facilities. and City Code Section 15- 18.010 (a) To reserve appropriately located areas for harmonious transitional uses to serve as buffers between residential districts and commercial districts (as proposed this will not be a harmonious transitional use). (c) To create a suitable environment for office buildings especially designed for their purposes, located on sites large enough to provide room for landscaped open spaces and off street parking facilities. (e) To provide adequate space to meet the needs of modern office buildings, including off street parking of automobiles (f) To minimize traffic congestion The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare and injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that: as proposed, the facility would have five (5) employees and provide services for 56 students on property which has only 14 available parking spaces. The applicant's own Traffic Study dated June 18, 2009 (as to which Applicant refused Peer Review) indicates that existing parking on site can accommodate only 40 students (based on the assumption that "the average parking duration would be a few minutes" and giving no consideration to the potential for large events). The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Saratoga Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 15 of the City Code. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative. The proposed fence that would be located on top of a retaining wall would be taller than the maximum allowed height for fences in the front setback. Play structures are not allowed in the front setback and the project does not meet the State's requirement for outdoor play space. Furtheiniore, the project does not meet the City's requirement for off street parking. IV. Project Denial After careful consideration of the entire Application and any other exhibits and evidence submitted in connection with this matter, the statutory exemption from CEQA is approved, the findings for denial set forth above are made, and the Application No. CUP -09 -0004 for a new day care facility in the Professional Administrative Zoning District is hereby denied. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of Saratoga, State of California, this 18 day of November, 2009 by the following vote: 3 AYES: Councilmember Howard Miller, Jill Hunter, Susie Nagpal, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: Ann ullivan, City Clerk 4