Loading...
2000-099-Granting An Appeal Of A Planning Commission Decision Requesting Approval To Construct An Accessory Living Quarter And A Variance Application To Exceed The Allowable Height On Property Zoned Hr-2.5. Conditional Use Permit.RESOLUTION 2000 - 99 RESOLUTION GRANTING AN APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION REQUESTING APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AN ACCESSORY LIVING QUARTER AND A VARIANCE APPLICATION TO EXCEED THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT ON PROPERTY ZONED HR-2.5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION; U-00-1 VARIANCE APPLICATION.: V-00-1 PROPERTY LOCATION: 15690 GUM TREE LANE PROPERTY OWNER/ APPELLANT: ERIC HAMILTON WHEREAS: A. This matter came before the Council for public hearing on .July 17, 2000., on an appeal by Eric Hamilton from a decision of the Planning Commission and was regularly noticed in conformance with State and Town law. B. The Council received testimony and documentary evidence from the appellant and all interested persons who wished to testify or submit documents. 'The Council considered all testimony .and materials submitted, including the record of the Planning Commission proceedings and the packet of material contained in the Council Agenda Report dated July 17, 2000, along with subsequent reports and materials prepared concerning. this application. C. Appellant is requesting approval to construct an accessory living quarter and a variance application to exceed the allowable height of 15 feet on a nine (9) acre parcel of property zoned HR-2.5. D. The basis of the appeal is appellant's belief that the Commission lacl~ed the discretion to address errors that appellant alleges were made by the Town in May 199$ which resulted in the expiration of the original conditional use permit. E. Council .finds as follows: (1) :Pursuant to Town Code section 29.20.300 that this matter presented an issue or policy over which the Planning Commission did not have discretion to modify or address, but which is vested in the Council for modification or decision; to wit, w11et11er, in light of the facts of this application, special conditions exist that would make enforcement of the provisions of the Town zoning code result in undue .hardship within the meaning of Town Code section 29.20.165. (2) Pursuant to 'Town Code sections 29..20.165 and 29..20.170, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including the size and topography of the property that would reduce the visual impact of the proposed project, and the hillside location of the property that throughout the 1996 through 1998 El Nino condition when appellant's original permit was .active made development in the hillside areas difficult, the strict application of the provisions of the Town :zoning code deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zone including the ability to Have constructed an accessory .structure in excess of 15 feet, which would have. been possible under the original permit. (3) Pursuant to Town Code section 29.20.170, the granting of a variance would not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated because appellant had a permit to construct an accessory structure at the desired height consistent with prior Town regulations, but was denied the ability to construct said structure consistent. with the permit due the 1996 through 1998 El Nino condition when appellant's original permit was active made 2 development in the hillside areas difficult. (4) Pursuant to Town Code section 29.20..190, the proposed use of the property is essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare, will not impair the integrity and character of the zone, would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare and is in harmony with the .elements and objectives of the General Plan because the proposed use is a low density use that preserves the traditional rural setting, unidue terrain and natural topography and integrity of the hillside area consistent with the goals and policies for properties located within the Hillside Residential designation of the General Plan; because accessory structures are allowed in all residential zones including the HR-2.5 zone; because the structure will be situated on the northwesterly corner of a nine (9) acre parcel and will be substantially hidden from neighboring properties and .from the valley floor; and because the Town Code allows for variances .from the strict application of zoning regulations. (5) The project is categorically exempt pursuant to section 15303 of the State Environmental Guidelines as .adopted by the Town. RESOLVED: 1. The .appeal of the decision of the Plam~ing Commission on Conditional Use Permit Application U-00-1 and Variance Application V-00-1 is .granted and the applications .are approved subject to the conditions of approval attached hereto as Exhibit "A" to this resolution and by this resolution, incorporated herein. 2. This constitutes a final adjudicatory administrative decision subject to judicial review within the time limits specified in section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, the provisions of which have been adopted by the Town of Los Gatos. 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California held on the 7`" day of August, 2000 by the following vote. COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: Randy Attaway, Jan Hutchins, Linda Lubeck, Joe Pirzynslci, Mayor Steven Blanton. NAYS.: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN:. None SIGNED; ATTEST CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LO~ GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ~iA U~, C;AL1N VKNlA S;\ATY87.12 4