Laserfiche WebLink
C>_ PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS <br />V_ PAP-87, Jerry Wagner, Anoellant (PDR-482. David Ouartaroli) <br />Appeal of the Toning Administrator's approval of an application for design review approval to <br />construct an approximately 6,901 -square-foot two-story custom home with 876 square feet of <br />garage area located at 521 O Clubhouse Drive Lot 1 7 of Tract 7372, Mariposa Ranch <br />Development by the Callippe Preserve Golf Course). Zoning for the property is PUD-LUR <br />~Plaiined Unit Development -Low Density Residential) <br />Mr. Pavan summarized Lhe slat-f-report and noted that the processing and design review guidelines were <br />followed for this home. It was approved by the 7,oning Administrator and was then forwarded to the <br />Planning Commission on September 28, 2005. He noted that the appellant, Mr_ Jerry Wagn cr, appealed <br />the house on the basis of nitrate contatriination of the ground water, the floor area ratio (NARK for the <br />house was excessive, and concern with the general size of the approved home. Staff advised that the <br />floor area of the house was 7,777 square feet and conformed to the FAR allowed for this property. This <br />house conformed to the design guidelines recently adopted by City Council. <br />Staff believes that this house, as designed, was attractive and conformed to the CraRsman style listed in <br />the design guidelines. Sta(I-stated Lhat the architect did an excellent job in designing the volumes, <br />massing details, etc. to make the house attractive. Regarding the floor area, the notice was done <br />incorrectly for the first mailing with respect to the size of the house, staff sent out a corrected notice to <br />all residents within 1,000 feet of the site, including all residents within the Ilappy Valley Specific Plan <br />arca_ <br />Staff recc»r~~riends that the Planning Comiriission deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Zoning <br />Administrator's action. <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts whether th are was a record of the Commission <br />requesting a report from staff regarding the ground water contamination, Mr. Grubstick replied that <br />Public Works was performing baseline studies of the ground water in that area_ He did not know the <br />status of that information and added that they were performing tests at a number of wells in the area_ <br />Commissioner Arkin believed the discussion of the nitrate contamination should be part of the <br />environment review rather than of a design review. Mr. Pavan concurred with that assessment The <br />subject of ground water contamination was addressed in the E1R that was done for the golf course, <br />which also included this development Mitigation measures including best management practices, using <br />biodegradable fertilizers, were approved by the City Council and, to stab-mss best knowledge, are being <br />followed with the maintenance of the golf course. When the guidelines were approved by the Council, a <br />condition was added that the applicant be encouraged to employ measures comparable to those for the <br />golf course with respect to fertilizer, landscape management, and so on, which had been donc_ Staff had <br />satisfied the Council's direction as stated in to the design guidelines. He noted that this item addressed <br />the design review of this house and whether it conformed to the approved guidelines. After review, staff <br />determined that it did conform to those guidelines and that it was attractive, well designed, and fitted in <br />with the area. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MiNUTFS October 7 9, 2005 Page 3 of 19 <br />