Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 93-003 RESOLUTION NO. 93 - 003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA GRANTING AN APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION 80-92-007 AND V-92-012-BEHEL; 20241 HERRIMAN AVENUE RBSOLVED, by the City council of the City of Saratoga, California as follows: WBBRIAB, Norma Behel, the applicant, has made application under the SUbdivision Map Act of the State of California and under the SUbdivision Ordinance of the City of Saratoga, for tentative map "APproval of two lots; and for a variance approval to allow the creation of two parcels with 82-foot lot widths in an R1-10000 Zone District which prescribes a minimum lot width of 85 feet; and WBBRBAS, on November 10, 1992, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga held a dUly-noticed public hearing on said application at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and following the conclusion thereof the Planning Commission, voted to approve the tentative map and the variance; and WBBRBAS, applicant has appealed the approval by the Planning commission to the City Council for the specific purpose of appealing a condition of approval of the tentative map and the variance, limiting development on the newly-created vacant parcel to a 2400 square foot, single story structure, not to exceed 20 feet in height; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 1992, the City Council conducted a de novo public hearing on the Appeal at which time any person interested in the matter was given à full opportunity to be heard; and .. WHBRBAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the staff report, minutes of proceedings conducted by the Planning Commission relating to the application, and the written and oral evidence presented to the City Council in support of and in opposition to the appeal. BOW, 'rBBRB:rORB, be it resolved ))y the city council of the City of saratoga as follows: 1. By unanimous vote of the City Council approving the tentative map for a two lot subdivision, with deletion of the condition of approval limiting development on the newly-created vacant parcel to a 2400 square foot, single-story structure, not 1 to exceed 20 feet in height, the appeal from the Planning Commission is hereby granted, to wit: the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the application for the tentative map and the following findings have been determined: a. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Saratoga General and with all specific plans relating thereto, and the proposed subdivision and land use is compatible with the objections, policies and general land use and programs specified in such general plan; b. The City Council has heretofore received and considered the categorical exemption for this projection in accordance with the currently applicable provisions of CEQA¡ """~... c. None of the conditions set forth in Government Code sections 66474(a)-(g) and 66474.6 exist with respect to said subdivision. 2. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Behel for tentative map approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: a. Prior to submittal of the Final Map to the City Engineer for examination, the owner (applicant) shall cause the property to be surveyed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or an authorized Civil Engineer. The submitted map shall show the existence of a monument at all external property locations, either found or set. The submitted map shall also show monuments set at each ne corner locatiòn, angle pint, or as directed by the City Engineer, all in conformity'with the Subdivision Map Act and the Professional Land Surveyors Act. .. b. The owner (applicant)" shall submit four (4) copies of a Final Map in substantial conformattce with the approved Tentative Map, along with the additional documents required by section 14-40.030 of the Municipal code and shall be accompanied by the following items: 1. One copy of map checking calculations. 2. Preliminary Title Report for the property dated within ninety (90) days of the date of submittal for the Final Map. 3. One copy of each map referenced on the Final Map. 4. One copy of each document/deed referenced on the Final Map. 2 5. One copy of any other map, document, deed, easement or other resource that will faoilitate the examination process as requested by the City Engineer. c. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Map Checking fee, as determined by the city Engineer, at the time of submittal of the Final Map for examination. d. Interior monuments shall be set at each lot corner either prior to recordation of the Final Map or some later date to be specified on the Final Map. If the owner (applicant) chooses to defer the setting of interior monuments to a specified later date, then sufficient security as determined by the City Engineer shall be furnished prior to Final Map approval, to guarantee the·setting of interior monuments. e. The owner (applicant) shall provide Irrevocable Offers of Dedication for all required easements and/or rights of way on the Final Map, in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map, prior to Final Map approval. f. The owner (applicant) shall file with the Santa Clara County Recorder the requisite statement indicating that there are no liens against the property or any part thereof for any unpaid taxes or special assessments. A copy of the statement(s) shall be provided to the city Engineer prior to Final Map approval. g. The owner (applicant) shall pay the applicable Park and Recreation in-lieu _fees prior to Final Map approval. h. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the owner (applicant) shall execute an agreement with the City waiving the rights of the owner or any successive owners of any of the lots created by the sUbdivision to protest the formation of an underground utility district for the purpose of undergrounding existing overhead utility lines in the vicinity of the property. The agreement shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map and reference to the agreement shall appear in the Owner's certification on the Final Map. i. Design review approval shall be required for parcel A and shall only be granted upon finding that the proposed structure is compatible in terms of scale and design with the existing adjacent residences, that it is in conformance with the City's Residential Design Guidelines and that all of the necessary Design Review findings can be made. j. Future development on parcel A shall comply with the approved site development plan, marked Exhibit "B." 3 k. Prior to Final Map approval, the applicant and/or property owner shall file with the Planning Director, a written statement of an I.S.A. Certified Arborist, that all pruning, cabling and applicable fertilizing work has been performed pursuant to the city Arborist Report dated 8/31/92. 1. All other applicable requirements of the city Aborist shall be complied with at the time development is proposed for parcel A. m. The owner (applicant) shall, upon the City's request, defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, boards, commissions, employees and volunteers harmless from and against any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void or annul this approval, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations'taken, done or made prior to such approval, which is brought within the time specified in Section 14-85.060 of the Municipal Code. If a defense is requested, the City shall give prompt notice to the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. Nothing herein shall prevent the City from participating in the defense, but in such event, the City shall pay its own attorney's fees and costs. n. The owner (applicant) shall furnish a written indemnity agreement and proof of insurance coverage, in accordance with Section 14-05.055 of the Municipal Code, prior to Final Map approval. o. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City per each day of the violation. 3. By unanimous vote at the City Council approving the variance to allow two parcels to be created with 82-foot lot widths in an R1-10000 Zone District, the appeal from the Planning Commission is hereby granted to wit: the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the application for the variance and the following findings have been determined: a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district, in that all of the immediately adjacent lots were created with 82 ft. widths. 4 b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district, in that all of the immediately adjacent lots were created with 82 ft. widths. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Behel for variance approval be, and the same is hereby granted, subject to the following.conditions: a. All conditions of the tentative map approval shall apply. b. The final map must be recorded with the Office of the County Recorder within 24 months or approval will expire. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on 6th day of January , 1993 by the fallowing vote of the members thereof: AYES: Councilmembers Burger, Mania, Tucker, and Mayor Anderson NOES: None JUBSEarr: Cauncilmember Kohler ABSTAIN: None ~ (d) I' ," ~ ?~Jn-__ Mayor ATTEST: ~; C~~k~ Deceaber 21, 1992 273\re.\behel.re. 5