06/01/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Finn, seconded by Cheng and passed unanimously to approve the request for a site development permit for a new residence and detached garage with an office studio above, on the lower level, Lands of Kerns, 11890 Francemont, as shown on the revised plans submitted by the applicant, subject to the conditions of approval stated in attachment 1 of the 6/1/00 staff report with the amendment to condition #16 that the applicant would work with the Pathways Committee on the placement of the path. 11.4 Request for approval of a site development permit for a new residence, Lands of Le and Do, 24018 Oak Knoll Circle Johnson said he was uncomfortable with the way this application had come to the Council in that there was no recommendation from the Planning Commission. Casey stated that she appealed this continuance by the Planning Commission because she did not agree at all that this project should be redesigned. The Planning Commission had not even met with the architect and/or the applicant to discuss it and the oak tree was not in danger. Finn stated that a redesign was basically a denial and Council had just realized that they were able to appeal continuances. MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Dauber and failed by the following roll call vote to continue this item and send it back to the Planning Commission for recommendation. • AYES: Mayor Dauber and Councilmember Johnson NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Finn and Councilmembers Casey and Cheng Mark Godby, applicant's architect, addressed the project and stated that they believed it to be a well thought out design that fit the lot. Concerning the oak tree they had checked with the arborist who had stated that the proposed location of the house would not negatively affect the oak tree. He also referred to the covered rear terraces which had arched openings on three sides. He noted that these arches could be increased if necessary. Mr. Godby noted that the house had been stepped down the hill to make it less visible. Carl Cahill, Associate Planner, responded to a comment made that staff had directed the applicant to take off part of the oak tree to put up the story poles. He stated that staff would not have given such direction and he requested clarification of this statement from the architect. In addition the Associate Planner recommended that if Council had any concerns about a project they should ask staff for clarification. Mark Godby, applicant's architect, in response to an inquiry from Council, stated that he would have given the Planning Commission the same presentation he was now giving the Council. He also responded to the Associate Planner's comments by noting that it was heresay from the person employed to put in the story poles that staff had told him to trim the oak tree. June 1, 2000 Regular City Council Meeting 10