SR 05:320 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATIACHMENT 7 PAP-87. Jerrv Wal!ner. ADDellant (PDR-482, David Ouartaroli) Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval of an application for design review approval to construct an approximately 6,901-square-foot two-story custom home with 876 square feet of garage area located at 5210 Clubhouse Drive (Lot 11 of Tract 7372, Mariposa Ranch Development by the Callippe Preserve Golf Course). Zoning for the property is PUD-LDR (Planned Unit Development - Low Density Residential) Mr. Pavan summarized the staff report and noted that the processing and design review guidelines were followed for this home. It was approved by the Zoning Administrator and was then forwarded to the Planning Commission on September 28,2005, He noted that the appellant, Mr. Jerry Wagner, appealed the house on the basis of nitrate contamination ofthe ground water, the floor area ratio (FAR) for the house was excessive, and concern with the general size of the approved home, Staff advised that the floor area of the house was 7,777 square feet and conformed to the FAR allowed for this property, This house conformed to the design guidelines recently adopted by City Council. Staff believes that this house, as designed, was attractive and conformed to the Craftsman style listed in the design guidelines. Staff stated that the architect did an excellent job in designing the volumes, massing details, etc, to make the house attractive, Regarding the floor area, the notice was done incorrectly for the first mailing with respect to the size of the house; staff sent out a corrected notice to all residents within 1,000 feet of the site, including all residents within the Happy Valley Specific Plan area, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Zoning Administrator's action. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts whether there was a record of the Commission requesting a report from staffregarding the ground water contamination, Mr. Grubstick replied that Public Works was performing baseline studies of the ground water in that area, He did not know the status of that information and added that they were performing tests at a number of wells in the area. Commissioner Arkin believed the discussion of the nitrate contamination should be part ofthe environment review rather than of a design review. Mr. Pavan concurred with that assessment. The subject of ground water contamination was addressed in the E1R that was done for the golf course, which also included this development. Mitigation measures including best management practices, using biodegradable fertilizers, were approved by the City Council and, to staff s best knowledge, are being followed with the maintenance of the golf course. When the guidelines were approved by the Council, a condition was added that the applicant be encouraged to employ measures comparable to those for the golf course with respect to fertilizer, landscape management, and so on, which had been done. Staff had satisfied the Council's direction as stated in to the design guidelines. He noted that this item addressed the design review of this house and whether it conformed to the approved guidelines, After review, staff determined that it did conform to those guidelines and that it was attractive, well designed, and fitted in with the area. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Arkin whether anything had changed that would justify a second look, Ms, Nerland confirmed that there had been no changed circumstances that would suggest reopening the environment review at this time, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, October 19, 2005 Page 1 of 4