Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-30-1986 City Council Agenda packet30 e,g5t, t AGENDA BILL NO. 0- 9 DATE: 5/30/86 DEPT.: Planning CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA ITEM 7/4 CITY MGR. APPROV SUBJECT: V -736 Clarence Neale, Request for refund of variance fees Summary: 1. The applicant submitted plans for design review for the conversion of an accessory structure to a multi family residential structure. A variance application was required since the proposed covered parking did not maintain the required setbacks. 2. Fees submitted: $500 for design review application, -$1000 for variance application, $50 administrative fee and $150 deposit for public noticing. 3. The project was publicly noticed, a staff report was prepared and forwarded to the Planning Commission based on the plans submitted. 4. Prior to the Commission Meeting, the applicant worked with a contractor who was able to redesign the parking in compliance with ordinance requirements. Fiscal Impacts: If the application fees are refunded, monies submitted will not cover staff time expended. Exhibits /Attachments: 1. Letter from applicant Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the application fees not be refunded since staff work was completed. Council Action 12ed=iequest. City Council of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga,, Calfiornia 95070 Sirs: Please be informed that I C.W. Neale paid $1,000.00 for a variance that I have since been told by the planning department is not required. My engineer stated that my building is in the proper place and I did not need any variance for this property nor did we request any for the car ports. The planning staff visited my site and they stated no variance was needed. I need this money as soon as possible so I can go on with my building program. The City Manager and Mr. Yuchuek Hsia have been duly informed of this most costly error on the part of the City, where no variance was required or acted upon. Please return my money immediately. Thank You, 7 C.W. Neale Application V -736 Dated April 22, 1986 CC: John Kahl, Attorney City Manager Yuchuek Hsia City Engineer June 28, 1986 LE AVENUE ALIF. 95070 867 -3438 .A3777 FRU SARATOGA PHONE: 4141 Z21 RECEIVED FROM ADDRESS 1 FOR: PLAN CHECK FEES CONSTRUCTION TAX BUSINESS LICENSE TAX BUILDING PERMITS •PLUMBING PERMITS ELECTRIC PERMITS MECHANICAL PERMITS GRADING PERMITS PUBLIC NEARING EIIW GED/CONSULT1NG REFUNDABLE DEPOSITS SUBDIVISION REVIEW FEES BUILDING SITE REVIEW FEES VARIANCE APPLICA- TION FEES COND. USE PERMITS APPUCATION FEES ENGINEERING INSPECTION. FEES 21 -3510 21 -3030 21 -3040 21 -3500 21 -3501 21 -3502 21 -3503 21 -3504 21 -2100 21 -2110 21 -3511 21 -3512 21 -3520 a a AMOUNT: a a a a a 21 -3521 a FOR: APPEALS OTHER DEVEL- OPMENT FEES DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FEES 'EIR REVIEW FEES CENTRAL PLAN/ REZONING FEE FINAL MAP REVIEW SUBDIVISION PARK DEDICATION FEES STORM DRAIN FEE CALABAZAS IMPROVEMENT FEE CALABAZAS FIRE PROTECTION FEE SPECIFIC PLAN FEE SALE OF MAPS/ PUBLICATIONS EROXING 214800- 250-20 AMOUNT: 21 -3565 a 21 -3549 a 21 -3540 21 -3547 21 -3548 a 21 -3513 a 55 -3550 a 87 -3551 a 21 -3560 a 21 -3581 a 21 -3562 a 21 -3700 a a June 6, 1986 Dear Mr. Neale: Sincerely, Grace E. Cory Deputy City Clerk Tig7 ©2 0 Mr. Clarence Neale 14165 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road Saratoga, California 95070 Please let me know if you have any questions. 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA. CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Linda Callon Martha Clevenger Virginia Laden Fanelli Joyce Hlava David Moyles The City Council considered your letter requesting refund of variance fees at its meeting of June 4. The Council also considered a staff report on the subject which explained that the original plans which were submitted required a variance, and noticing and staff reports were completed in accordance with those plans. The Council voted unanimously to uphold the staff recommendation to deny the refund. AGENDA BILL NO. V AGENDA ITEM 4i DATE: May 29, 1986 DEPT.: City Attorney CITY MGR. APPROVAL SUBJECT: Further extension on expiration date of SDR -1290 (Lauren Hulse) Summary: In connection with the settlement agreement negotiated with Lauren Hulse, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2233 extending the time for expiration of the tentative building site approval until May 25, 1986. Mr. Hulse has requested a further extension and we are relying upon the authority of Government Code Section 66452.6(c) to do so (this section authorizes a stay on the running of time for expiration of tentative map approval by reason of the pending litigation). Procedurally, the further extension should be handled by amending Resolution No. 2233. Fiscal Impacts: None. CITY OF SARATOGA Exhibits /Attachments: (a) Request for extension. (b) Resolution No. 2233. (c) Proposed resolution providing for extension of time to November 25, 1986. Recommended Action: Staff has no problem relative to the additional extension and recommends adoption of the resolution. Council Action: Approved Res. 2233.1 Ms. Cathy Curtis City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 May 8, 1986 Re: SDR 1290 Extension of Completion Date Dear Ms Curtis, We are requesting the completion date of SDR 1290 map recording be extended 6 months.( to Nov. 25, 1986) Last May (85) the corporation I worked for went bankrupt. Being unemployed for 10 months has certainly presented a hardship on us and has slowed us down in being able to finish SDR 1290 fees etc. We are now proceeding once again. Any consideration given us by the City Council will be appreciated. Sincerely, Lauren L. Hulse 21801 Mt. Eden Rd. Saratoga, CA 95070 RESOLUTION NO. 2233 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA STAYING THE PERIOD OF TIME FOR EXPIRATION OF TENTATIVE BUILDING SITE APPROVAL FOR SDR -1290 WHEREAS, LAUREN HULSE and JOYCE HULSE "Hulse applied to the City of Saratoga for tentative building site approval to divide that certain real property located at 21801 Mt. Eden Road into two lots, such application being identified as SDR -1290; and WHEREAS, tentative building site approval was granted by the City on or about February 17, 1977; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 1981, Hulse commenced a lawsuit against the City in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara, Case No. 483896, pertaining to the applicatiuon of the initiative ordinance known as Measure A to SDR -1290, and said lawsuit is still pending as of this date; and WHEREAS, a settlement of said lawsuit has been negotiated between the City and Hulse, as set forth in that certain Stipulation for Settlement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 66452.6(c) of the California Government Code, Hulse has applied to the City for a stay on the period of time otherwise provided for expiration of SDR -1290, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AS FOLLOWS: 1. By reason of the pending litigation between the City and Hulse involving SDR -1290 and pursuant to the authority granted under Section 66452.6(c) of the Government Code, a stay is hereby approved for a period of Twenty -Six (26) months, commencing as of the expiration date otherwise applicable to SDR -1290 and terminating on May -25, 1986. 2. The stay is conditioned upon the execution by all parties of the Stipulation for Settlement, in the form of Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Passed and adopte t a regular meetin of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the s day of 1985, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Clevenger, Hlava, Moyles and Mayor Fanelli NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Councilmetnber Callon