HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 10663/16/82
RESOLUTION NO. 1066
I~OLUTION O~ T~E CIT~ COUNCIL O~ T~E CI~¥ O~
SARATOGA REVERSING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, MAKING REQUISITE FINDINGS, GRANTING
A VARIANCE AND APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR
V-568 AND A-804
WHEREAS, applicants James and Ruthann Elder have
requested Design Review and Variance approval to construct an
addition to an existing two-story dwelling; and
WHEREAS, said proposed addition is not in conformity
with Ordinance NS-3.47, Section 5(a), regarding maximum floor
area ratio, and Section 5(b), regarding maximum impervious
cover; and
WHEREAS, Section 6 of Ordinance NS-3.47 provides that
an exception to said ordinance may be granted by the Planning
Commission through the variance procedure as set forth in Section
17 of the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on January 13, 1982, the Planning Commission
held a public hearing on applicants' request for Design Review
and Variance approval and after said public hearing denied said
request; and
WHEREAS, applicants have appealed the Planning Commission's
decision to the City Council pursuant to Section 17.7 of the Zoning
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on March 3, 1982, the City Council held a
de novo public hearing and after the closing of said public hearing
reviewed and considered the applicants' request, staff reports,
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 13, 1982,
and other evidence, both written and oral, presented to the Council
during said public hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of
Saratoga HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
-1-
1. The applicants' appeal from the Planning Commission
is granted and the decision of the Planning Commission is overruled.
2. The Council makes all of the findings as set out
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
3. Having made the appropriate findings, Design Review
for V-568 and A-804 is hereby approved, and a Variance to Sections
5(a) and 5(b) of Ordinance NS-3.47 is hereby granted.
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 17thdav of March, 1982 by the following
vote:
AYES: Councilm~rs Clevenger, Jensen, Watson
NOES: Councilmember Mallory and Mayor Callon
ABSENT: None
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CL(~.RK~>~7~''
-2-
EXHIBIT "A"
FINDINGS
1. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty
or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives
of the Zoning Ordinance in that previous severe, excessive and
inappropriate grading of the property has constrained the full
and effective use and enjoyment of the site as designated under
the general purposes of the Zoning Ordinance.
2. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the
intended use of the property which do not apply generally to
other properties classified in the same Zoning District in that
prior to the establishment of effective controls on grading of land,
the lot was severely graded in such a way that the building pad for
the lot is not placed in the most suitable location because of said grading and
in order to add li~ving space, pole supports are necessary to support the addition;
it is ~Dre aesthetically pleasing to enclose the support system, thereby "signi-
ficantly increasin~ the Square footage of the structure.
3. -Strict or~literal inter~preta~ion and enforcement
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners
of other properties classified in the same Zoning District in that
the prior severe, excessive and inappropriate grading of the lot
prevents the opportunity for full and beneficial use of the property
in the manner enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity, similarly
classified, because of artificially created steep slopes.
4. The granting of the variance will not constitute
a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations
on other properties in the vicinity and in the same Zoning District
in that such other properties are able to gain the full benefit and
use of land not so encumbered with severe, excessive and inappropriate
grading whereas only by the granting of this variance can this
'1-
EXHIBIT "A"
property provide its full and beneficial use.
5. The granting of this variance is not detrimental
to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious
to properties in the vicinity in that it will enhance the
neighborhood and there has been no testimony or evidence presented
which claims or tends to show detrimental or injurious effects
to the public health, safety or welfare.
-2-