HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2247 RESOLUTION NO. 2247
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SARATOGA REVERSING A DECISION OF Tr-gR PLANNING
COMMISSION
WHEREAS, ANGELO KARAYARAM, the applicant, has applied to the City
of Saratoga for variance approval to permit a restaurant use in a shopping center
which does not meet required parking standards, such application being identified as V-
699, and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 1985, the Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on said application, and following the conclusion thereof, the Planning
Commission denied the application; and
WHEREAS, the applicant appealed the decision of the Planning Commission
to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on April 14, 1985, 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, upon evidence being presented by the applicant that the nature
of the proposed restaurant use was different from the use as described during the
proceedings before the Planning Commission, the City Council referred the matter
back to the Planning Commission for further consideration, reserving jurisdiction over
the appeal; and
WHEREAS, on May 22, 1985, the Planning Commission conducted a further
public hearing and upon the conclusion thereof, the Commission again denied the
application; and
WHEREAS, the decision of the Planning Commission was transmitted to
the City Council and on June 19, 1985, the City Council reopened the public hearing on
the appeal, at which time any person interested in the matter was given the
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,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga, at its
meeting on June 19, 1985, by a vote of 4-0 with Councilmember Hlava absent, did
resolve as follows:
1. The appeal from the Planning Commission was upheld and the
decision of the Planning Commission was reversed.
2. The City Council was able to make the findings required for granting
a parking variance under Sections 17.6(a) and 17.6(c) of the Zoning
Ordinance, based upon the following considerations:
-1-
(a) The proposed use will be loeated at the northerly end of the
shopping center where, on the basis of the evidence presented,
the Council finds that no shortage of parking places now exists
or is likely to be created from the operation of the restaurant.
(b) A practical difficulty exists in that the site is fully developed
and there is no available area for additional parking spaces.
Moreover, the aplicant will utilize only a small portion of the
shopping center and it would be economically impractical to
require a restripping of the entire parking lot by the applicant.
(e) Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do exist in that the
parking facilities are now adequate for the proposed use and
there is little or no risk of overflow parking upon the adjacent
residential streets since no access to the shopping center is
provided from these streets.
(d) The granting of a variance would not confer a special privilege
upon the applicant in view of the demonstrated adequacy of
existing parking facilities. The City has granted parking
variances to other restaurant uses in order to encourage such
retail activity and consideration is now being given to a
relaxation of parking requirements for outdoor dining in the
village area. To the extent that other restaurant uses have
been allowed to operate in specific cases where modification of
the parking standards will not create a shortage of parking
spaces otherwise available or cause traffic congestion, a denial
of this variance would deprive the applicant of a common
privilege.
(e) As determined by the City staff and for the reasons set forth in
the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 15, t985, the
variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
weftare; will not cause present or future traffic problems; will
not result in the parking of additional vehicles on adjacent
public streets; and will not create a safety hazard or other
conditions inconsistent with the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance.
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 3rd day of July, 1985,
by the following vote:
AYES: Councils Call~n, Clevenger, Hlava, Moyles and Mayor Fanelli
NOES: None
A B SEN T: None .¢ ~' ~ ~. ~i '
M Y
~ A OR'
ATTEST:
.... CITY CLERK' / "
-2-