HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 96-02 RESOLUTION NO. 96- 02
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SARATOGA GRANTING AN APPEAL FROM
THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
V-95-012 BUTLER; 20659 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR.
WHEREAS, Mr. Butler, the applicant, has applied for variance approval to
allow a second 6 foot tall wall to be located within a required front yard setback, and
to allow a portion of the wall to exceed 6 feet; and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 1995, 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 contusion thereof, the Harming Commission, granted the
application in part and denied it in pan; and
WHEREAS, applicant has appealed the denial of the Harming Commission to
the City Courtall; and
WHEREAS, on January 3, 1996, the City Council conducted a de novo public
heating on the appeal at which time any person interested in the matter was given a
full opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Councfi reviewed and considered the staff report,
minutes of proceedings conducted by the commission relating to the application, and
the written and oral evidence presented to the City Councfi in support of and in
opposition to the appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councfi of the City of
Saratoga as follows:
1. By split vote of the City Coundl (Coundlmember Moran voting in
opposition) the appeal from the Harming Commission is hereby granted and the
derision of the Planning Commission is reversed in pan, to wit: the applicant has
January 10, 1996
273~es96Xbutler.res I
met the burden of proof required to support the application and the following
findings have been determined:
Because of spedal drcumstances applicable to the subiect property, including
size, shape, topography, location of existing structures thereon or surroundings, strict
enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the applicant of privileges
enioyed by owners of properties in the vidnity and classified in the same zoning
district. The spedal drcumstances that warrant the six foot wall in the required front
yard setback are the existing six foot front gate and the existing subdivision-built six
foot wall that would prevent the new six foot wall from being visually noticeable from
Montalvo Heights Dr. The spedal circumstance that warrants a portion of the
fenring exceeding six feet, is that the grade change between the sub]ect property and
the adiacent parcel results in the wall at that point only being five feet in height.
Requiting the wall to be six feet from grade would reduce its effectiveness as a privacy
barrier between the two parcels.
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 the height of the wall is consistent with the height of
many other walls constructed on properties within the immediate neighborhood.
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 vidnity in that
the wall is constructed in accordance with applicable code requirements and is
consistent with walls of other residences within the immediate neighborhood and is
not considered to be or constitute a sight-distance or other hazard to public health,
safety or welfare or to be materially iniurious to improvements or property in the
vicinity.
2. The application of Butler for Variance Approval be and the same is
hereby granted subject to the following conditions:
a. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses,
including attorneys' fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of the City in
connection with Citfs defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State
or Federal Court, challenging the Ci~s action with respect to the applicant's proiect.
b. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall
constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the
January 10, 1996
273N~es96Xbutler.res 2
City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250.00 shall be payable
to this City per each day of the violation.
c. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other
governmental entities must be met.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Saratoga held on the 17th day of January , 1996, by the following vote:
AlflES: Coundlmembers Burger, Moran, Wolfe;? and Mayor Oacobs
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Tucker
ABSTAIN: None
Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
January 10, 1996
273xtes96Xbufier.res 3