2001-012-Approving A Request To Construct A New Single Family Residence On Property Zoned Hr- 2 1/2 Architecture And Application S -99-13 Property Location: 285 Wooded View Drive PropRESOLUTION 2001-12
RESOLUTION GRANTING AN APPEAL OF A DECISION FROM THE PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE ON PROPERTY ZONED HR-2 %2.
ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATION: 5-99-13
PROPERTY LOCATION: 285 WOODED VIEW DRIVE
PROPERTY OWNER /APPLICANT /APPELLANT: VINO MALHOTRA
WHEREAS:.
A. This matter came before Council for public hearing on January 8, 2001, on an appeal
by Vino Malhotra from a decision of the Planning Commission, and was regularly noticed in
conformance with State and Town law.
B. Council received testimony and documentary evidence from the appellant/applicant
and all interested persons who wished to testify or submit documents. Council considered all
testimonry and materials submitted, including the record of the Planning.. Commission ;proceedings
.and the packet of material contained in the Council Agenda Reports dated November 27, 2000 and
January 3, 2001., the Deslc Item dated December 4, 2000, along with subsequent reports and
materials prepared concerning this application.
C. The appellant/applicant. is proposing to construct an 6,9.50 square .foot two-story
single family residence and a 1,1.58 square foot attached four-car garage with a wine cellar. The
subject property is located on the north side of Wooded View Drive near the end of the cul-e-sac.
D. The Planning Commission continued the application from July 27t~' to October 1 1,
.2000 and requested additional information. On October 11, 2000, the Commission considered
revised plans and approved the application.
1
E. 'The appellant/applicant is appealing the Planning Commission decision because'he
believes that the Commission erred or abused its discretion by imposing deed restrictions that limited
the residence to the approved footprint and prohibited future construction of accessory structures.
F. The deed restrictions were added by the Planning Commission to ensure that the level
of development of the project site remains consistent withthe level of development of neighboring
properties. While the appellant/applicant consented to the deed restrictions during the hearing before
the Plaruiing Commission, he contends that he did so with the understanding that he was consenting
to the restrictions in the form of conditions, not as deed restrictions..
G. Council finds pursuant to Town Code .Section 29.20300 that new information was
submitted to the Council during the requested hearing that was not readily available at the time of
the Planning Commissionreview that concerned the impact of the proj ect on existing trees, including
the removal of trees, :and the removal of the deed restriction requirement which was significant to
the Planning Commission's decision to approve the application..
RESOLVED:
The appeal ofthe decision ofthe Planning Commission on Architecture and Site Application
5-99-13 is :granted and the application remanded to the Planning Commission with the following
direction:
1. That the application be considered with a complete survey of the existing trees
to be impacted by the project; and
2. That a condition, such as one requiring a 5-year maintenance contract, be
applied in order to maximize tree survival; and
That the Commission consider design changes in order to enhance
2
compatibility with neighboring structures and to protect existing trees including, but not limited to,
site location, building :footprint and reduced mass and scale.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los
Gatos, California held on the 5TH day of February, 2001 by the following vote.
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
.AYES: Randy Attaway, Steven Blanton, Sandy Decker,. Steve Glickman,
Mayor Joe Pirzynski.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN.: None
~~
SIGNED:
MA ' OR OF THE T WN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
AT'I'ES`l'
GL,ERI~ OF THE. TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LAS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
3