HomeMy WebLinkAbout015-90EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION - 15-90
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF DANVILLE
UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF THE DANVILLE ESTATES HOMEOWNERS AND
REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH REGARD TO
THE APPROVAL OF LAND USE PERMIT & VARIANCE FOR
GERALD WEBER (LUP 89-22 AND VAR 89-40)
WHEREAS, Gerald Weber has requested approval of a Land Use
Permit (LUP 89-22) and Variance (VAR 89-40) application to allow
establishment of a childcare facility in an existing residence at
225 E1 Dorado; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the Land Use
Permit at a duly noticed hearing on November 13, 1989; and,
WHEREAS, proper notice was given in all respects as required
by law for the Planning Commission public hearing of November 13,
1989; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received and considered the
report and recommendations as submitted by Town staff as contained
in the staff report to the Planning Commission dated November 13,
1989; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all
reports, recommendations and testimony presented prior to or during
the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the
Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance prepared for the
project and found the Negative Declaration was complete and
adequate, satisfying the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted the Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance and acted to
conditionally approve Land Use Permit request LUP 89-22 and VAR 89-
40, subject to the Findings and Conditions; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 1989 the Danville Estates
neighborhood property owners filed an appeal of the Planning
Commission decision approving the Land Use Permit and Variance
application (LUP 89-22 and VAR 89-40) on the basis of concerns
related to traffic, intrusion on non-residential land uses,
validation of the need for day care, and other uses;
WHEREAS, the Town Council did review the appeal requests at
a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 1990; and,
WHEREAS, proper notice was given in all respects as required
by law for the Town Council public hearing on the appeals on
January 16, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has received and considered the
report and recommendations as submitted by the Town staff as
contained in the staff report to the Town Council dated January 16,
1990; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council did hear and consider all reports,
recommendations and testimony presented prior to or during the
public hearing; now, therefore
BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Danville
that the Town Council hereby finds as follows denying the Land Use
Permit request LUP 89-22 and VAR 89-40:
Land Use Permit
.
The proposed development is not in conformance with the
Danville 2005 General Plan. The development will
adversely affect the policies and goals as set by the
General Plan. General Plan Policy 1.12 of the Danville
2005 General Plan (pg 25) states that the Town should:
"...protect existing residential areas :from intrusion of
incompatible land uses and disruptive traffic to the
extent reasonably possible."
The cumulative impacts of the proposed use in conjunction
with the presently existing care facilities in the
immediate area have an adverse impact on the surrounding
neighborhood;
.
The proposed development is not in conformance with all
applicable zoning requirements. The permit included a
front yard fence within the front yard setback area which
is not in conformance with the R-20; Single Family
Residential District;
.
The proposed development will adversely impact adjacent
residential properties as the facility will generate
additional traffic and potential circulation hazards;
.
The proposed development will be detrimental to the
health, safety and general welfare of the Community
because effective buffering cannot be achieved to protect
the surrounding properties from the intrusion of added
noise and traffic;
.
The proposed development will adversely affect the
preservation of property values and the protection of the
tax base within the surrounding neighborhood;
·
The proposed development may encourage marginal
development within the neighborhood by over saturation
of institutional uses within a small geographical area
and cause the neighborhood to become a "transitional"
area;
·
That special conditions and unique characteristics of the
subject property and its location or surroundings are
not present.
Variance
~
The variance will constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in
the vicinity and the Single Family Residential District
in which this property is located as no other properties
in the immediate area contain fenced front yards that
include area reserved as required yard setback.
.
Strict application of the respective zoning regulations
are not found to deprive the property of rights enjoyed
by other properties in the vicinity and within the
identical land use district·
·
The variance shall not substantially meet the intent and
purpose of the R-20; Single Family Residential District
in which this property is located since fencing of the
front setback area would be utilized to fulfill the area
requirements outdoor space for the day care use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of
Danville, that appeal of the Danville Estates Homeowners filed on
November 23, 1989, is hereby upheld, and the November 13, 1989
action of the Danville Planning Commission is hereby reversed and
overruled·
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January 1990 by
the following vote:
AYES:
Greenberg, Schlendorf, and Shimansky
NOES: Ritchey
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Lane
ATTEST:
OWN ATTORNEY