HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2375 Resolution No. 23 75
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SARATOGA REVERSING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
WHEREAS, BARRY and JANET NEEDMAN, the applicants, have applied to
the City of Saratoga for a variance to exceed the impervious coverage standard by
constructing a tennis court on the property located at 13917 Camino Bareo, such
application being identified as V-739, and
WHEREAS, on July 23, 1986, the Planning Commission of the City of
Saratoga conducted a public hearing on said application, and following the conclusion
thereof, the Planning Commission denied the application; and
WHEREAS, the applicants have appealed the decision of the Planning
Commission to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on September 3, 1986, 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, 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 September 3, 1986, by a vote of 4-1 with Councilmember Moyles
dissenting, 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
the variance, based upon the following considerations:
(a) A practical difficulty and exceptional circumstances exist in
that the house was sited on the lot at a location designed to
leave room for a tennis court or swimming pool. In addition,
the existing driveways cannot be removed to reduce impervious
coverage without creating a potential safety hazard from the
loss of off-street parking area. The house and driveways were
constructed prior to the adoption of the current standards
regulating impervious coverage.
(b) Numerous other homes in the immediate neighborhood have
tennis courts. Consequently, the granting of a variance would
not confer a special privilege.
-1-
(c) The granting of a variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or we]fare or injurious to other properties in the
vicinity since the tennis court will be fenced and screened by
vegetation, will not cause any drainage problems, and will not
appear to be an overdevelopment of the site.
3. The applicants shall execute a building restriction agreement to
prohibit the construction or installation of any additional impervious
coverage on the site, and said agreement shall be recorded as a
covenant running with the land.
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 17th day
of September, 1986, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Anderscn, Clevenger, Moyles, Peterson, and Mayor Hlava
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None ~
CITY CLERK
-2-