17 ATTACHMENT 08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Zoning~Administrator Hearin The administrative design review and PUD modification applications were reviewed by the Zoning Administrator at a public hearing held on January 22, 2008. Detailed information on this meeting is provided by the attached minutes (see Attachment #5). Aman and Tee Bawa, Frank Nguyen (815 Clara Lane), Xin Chen (2618 Ingrid Court), Steve Fineberg (829 Clara Lane), Joshua Brysk (attorney for Frank Nguyen), and Tami Santiago (Vineyard Hills Homeowners Association representative) attended the hearing. The Zoning Administrator explained the Second Unit State law to clear up any misunderstanding regarding State law versus local government. She stated that cities can regulate the design, setbacks, parking, and other similar standards, but that State law does not allow a city to prohibit second units. [Please see Attachment #14 for a copy of the State Second Unit Law.] At the hearing, Mr. Bawa stated that he tried to place the second unit in the best possible place for the least amount of impact to the neighbors. He noted that the process started in 2006 and that his family had made significant compromises throughout the process to address the neighbors' concerns. Mr. Nguyen and his attorney (Mr. Joshua Brysk) opposed the second unit land use and expressed concerns with the location of the second unit and view impacts. Mr. Brysk also noted that the development's private Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) require occupants to park in the garage and that the outside parking for the second unit is in conflict with the CC&R's. Mr. Chen stated the second unit is too close to his property and would make his backyard activity uncomfortable. He also indicated that the yard cannot be screened because of the open fence condition. Mr. Chen stated that the second unit does not match the community layout and would not make the community look good even if it matched the design of the home. Mr. Fineberg indicated that he was originally opposed to the project due to view impacts, but that his concerns were addressed by the applicants and the Architectural Committee. Ms. Santiago indicated that the Architectural Committee received input from neighbors and worked with the applicants to address the neighbors' concerns. She stated the compromise consisted of the second unit roof height at 13 feet or lower and the building size at 700 square feet. She indicated that the Bawas offered to lower the height to 12 feet 3 inches, which she felt was more than generous to appease the neighbors. The neighbors did not indicate opposition with the proposed PUD modification. The Zoning Administrator questioned the neighbors if the design of the second unit was acceptable. The neighbors did not have any concerns with the design of the second unit. After hearing all public testimony, the Zoning Administrator approved the applications subject to the staff recommended conditions of approval. The Zoning Administrator indicated that the second unit complies with the City's Second Unit Ordinance and that State law does not allow PAP-117 Planning Commission Page 4 of 19