Laserfiche WebLink
THE CITY OF <br /> w - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 6 <br /> LAuTdi . <br /> February 19, 2019 <br /> Community Development <br /> Planning Division <br /> TITLE: CONSIDER TWO APPEALS OF MICHAEL AND DARLENE MILLER <br /> AND CHABAD OF THE TRI-VALLEY OF THE PLANNING <br /> COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND <br /> DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE OPERATION OF A RELIGIOUS <br /> INSTITUTION WITH A CHILDCARE FACILITY/PRESCHOOL AND FOR <br /> SITE MODIFICATIONS INCLUDING A PLAYGROUND AND TERRACE <br /> FOR OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES FOR CHABAD OF THE TRI-VALLEY <br /> LOCATED AT 3370 HOPYARD ROAD <br /> APPELLANTS: 1. DARLENE AND MICHAEL MILLER <br /> 2. CHABAD OF THE TRI-VALLEY <br /> SUMMARY <br /> Chabad of the Tri-Valley ("Chabad") filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit <br /> (CUP) to operate a religious institution as well as a childcare/preschool, and for Design <br /> Review (DR) approval for site modifications including the installation of a playground <br /> and a terrace to be used for outdoor activities. On June 27, 2018, the Planning <br /> Commission, on a 4:1 vote, approved Chabad's proposal, subject to conditions of <br /> approval, including refinements recommended by the Commission as a result of their <br /> review. The Planning Commission's approval was subsequently appealed to the City <br /> Council by adjacent neighbors Michael and Darlene Miller on June 29, 2018, then by <br /> the Chabad on July 11, 2018. <br /> On August 21, 2018, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the appeals. Just <br /> prior to the hearing, the Chabad and the Millers submitted proposed additional revisions <br /> to the Conditions of Approval, related to the allowable size, frequency, and location of <br /> outdoor events and activities, and to the design and operation of the proposed <br /> preschool playground, among other items. There was agreement between the two <br /> appellants on some of the proposed amendments, but differences remained on several <br /> major aspects of the project. Following public comments, and considering the two <br /> appellants' proposals, the Council continued the hearing to a date uncertain to allow <br /> time for staff to analyze the potential revisions to the conditions and formulate <br /> recommendations for additional modifications to the conditions if needed. <br />