HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2636 RESOLUTION NO.: 2636
BESOL~ON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SARATOGA UPHOLDING A DEC]BION OF
THE PLANNING COMMESSION
WHEREAS, STEPHEN DYMAND, the applicant, has applied to the City of
Saratoga for a lot line adjustment and design review approval and variances to
construct a single family dwelling upon the property located at 21116 Comer Drive,
such applications being identified as LL-89-005, DR-89-065 and V-89-021;
WHEREAS, on September 27, 1989, the Planning Commission of the City of
Saratoga conducted a public hearing on said applications, and following the conclusion
thereof, the Planning Commission approved the applications, and
WHEREAS, Bernard and Luanne Nieman have appealed the decision of the
Planning Commission to the City Council on the ground that an access easement
should be granted over the applicant's property to the rear of appellants' property; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 1989, the City Council conducted a de novo
public hearing on the appeal, at which time any person interested in the matter was
given an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the staff reports,
minutes of proceedings conducted by the Planning Commission relating to said
application, and the written and oral evidence presented to the City Council in support
of and in opposition to the appeal; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on December 6, 1989, by a vote of 3-2 with
Councilmembers Moyles and Peterson dissenting, the City Council upheld the appeal
and required the applicant to provide access over his property for the purpose of
annual weed abatement on the Nieman property; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 1989, upon motion by Councilmember
Anderson, by a vote of 3-2 with Councilmembers Clevenger and Stutzman dissenting,
the City Council voted to reconsider its decision rendered on December 6, 1989,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga at its
meeting on December 20, 1989, by a vote of 3-2 with Councilmembers Clevenger and
Stutzman dissenting, did resolve as follows:
1. The appeal from the Planning Commission was denied and the
decision of the Planning Commission was affirmed.
2. The Council found and determined that weed abatement could be
performed upon the Nieman property without utilizing an access
easement over the applicant's property. Consequently, there was no
public safety justification for requiring the easement and no other
basis for establishing a causal relationship between development of
the applieant's property and the access easement requested by the
Niemans.
-1-
***
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 7th day of !~rch
1990, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Anderson, Moyles and Peterson
NOES: Cbuncilme_nte~ Stut2man and Mayor Clevenger
ABSENT: None ~
ATTEST:
-2-