CC Min 1996-08-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

n-----n--------______n______--------------------------------------------______n_n__________nn_____n_____---- Mayor Hartnett recessed the Meeting at 9:30 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 9:44 p.m. n______n______---n-n---------------------------------------------------______n_n_________nn_____n___------- C. Public Hearing to consider the appeal of the decision by the Zoning Administrator to deny four variances to construct a 2,100 square feet house at 3738 Laurel Way, Bradford Whitaker, appellant (603); Location: 3738 Laurel Way; Lot 16, Block 8 of map entitled "Highlands of emerald Lake No.1; Book 13, page 24 of Records of San Mateo County; APN 057-301-270; RH (Residential HiIIside) Zoning District. Affidavits of mailing and publication of notice of hearing are on file in the City Clerk Department; 1) Staff report: Senior Planner Passanisi, August 26, 1996 Report ITom Appellant Brad Whitaker dated August 26, 1996 Letter ITom Michael D. McCracken to the City Clerk dated March 21, 1996 Senior Planner Passanisi presented the staff report and described the requested variances and why they were denied (see report.) Senior Planner Passanisi said the Council established a policy in 1988 which essentially only allowed development on Laurel Way upon completion of an Environmental Impact Report and certain technical studies. The policy was established to address the specific conditions along Laurel Way including narrow lots, steep grades, dense vegetation, inadequate sewer and water supplies, geological hazards, and substandard street improvements. Senior Planner Passanisi said the issue before the Council was the established policy and whether the Council wanted to reaffirm, amend or eliminate that policy. Senior Planner Passanisi showed slides of the area depicting conditions he noted as confirming the policy limiting development due to the above stated conditions, including soil creepage, trees in the unimproved roadway, ponding water and the need for sandbags along Laurel Way. In response to Council questions, Senior Planner Passanisi advised that the ponding and sandbags were not in ITont of the appellant's property, but further west on Laurel Way. Senior Planner Passanisi said because of the geotec~caI, vegetation, grading and fiIIing problems, "staff believes that the policy should stand. There should be no development along Laurel Way." Senior Planner Passanisi described the appellant Brad Whitaker's recent letter that proposed a partial solution for developing Laurel Way, to make full roadway improvements consistent with the improvement plans which were approved by the City REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 54 AUGUST 26, 1996 MINUTES Page No. 457 PAGE 20