HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 4.A 03/15/2004CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
a.
AGENDA ILL March 1 , 2
A enda Title: Appeal by Delco Builders and. Developer, Inc., of Meeting Date: March 15, 2004
he Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee's ( SPARC)
Decision to Deny the 46 -Unit Single Family and 46 -Unit 1VMeetine Time Z 3:00 PM
7
Townhouse Gatti /Stratford Place Subdivision at 7101, . Sonoma ❑ 7:00 PM
Mountain Parkway. 04 -APL -0466 "(Moore /Robbe')...This' item was
continued from the March 1, 2004 City Council Meeting.
Category (check one ❑ :Consent Calendar R1 Public Hearing ❑ New Business
❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation
Department
Director „
Contact ;Person
Phone Number
Community
Mike Mo
Tiffany Robbe,. 7S `
778 -4301
Development
Associate Planner
Cost of Proposal N/A
Account Number N/A
Amount Budgeted N/A
Name of Fund: N/A
Attachments to Agenda Packetatem
1. Letter of appeal dated January 22,.2004
2. Minutes and Staff Report (excluding, attachments) from the November 13, 2003 SPARC hearing
3. Minutes including verbatim portion and Staff Report (with draft findings & conditions attachments)
from the January 8, 2004 SPARC hearing
4. Minutes and Staff Report (with draft findings & conditions) from February 26, 2004 SPARC hearing
5. ratford Place PUD Guidelines
St
Draft Resolution Denying the Appeal and Upholding. SPARC's project denial
Summary Statement: The City Council approved the major entitlements for this project (rezoning,
tentative subdivision map, & environmental review) on August 4 th 2003. The project was then reviewed by
SPARC on November 13 th , at which time they continued the project. to give the applicant time to respond
to their comments. At the second SPARC ,;hearing, on January 8, 2.004, SPARC unanimously denied the
project due to their dissatisfaction with- the townhouse portion, of the, site plan and after the applicant
indicated their unwillingness- to make the kind of townhouse site 2pfan changes that SPARC desired
(attachment 3 provides the staff report; including the draft. findings sand conditions). The applicant felt
these types of changes would resultin major map modifications and in the loss of the townhouse units. On
January 22 "a, the applicant filed:an. appeal of SPARC's denial to `the City Council. On February 11
applicant submitted a new SPARC application with site plan modifications .which they hoped would
address SPARC's issues regarding the functionality of the townhouse area, and, which included those
modifications or conditions proposed in their appeal letter (see attachment 1 agreeing to follow SPARC's
direction regarding issues other than the townhouse site plan). On February 26 th , SPARC considered the
revised project, but ultimately, denied the project again due to their continued dissatisfaction with the
functionality of the townhouse portion of the site plan.
Recommended City Council Action /Suggested Motion
Uphold the SPARC decision and deny °the appeal, requiring that the applicant revise the site plan to address
the concerns of the Site Plan. and Architectural Review Committee.
eviewed by I "inan a D' ectort
Reviewed by City Attorney
Date:
AUroxchlby City Manager:
Date:
oday's Date
Revision # and Date Revised:
File Co e:
#
March 2, 2004
S: \CC -City Council \Reports \GattiAppeal.doc
a.
P
Mailing, List for .Gatti Appeal
R.J. Wilson
Mardel LLC
2,5 Stanwell. Drive, Suite 203
Concord, CA 94520 ,
SPARC Committee Members:
® Jack Rittenhouse
• Teresa Barrett
• Janet 'Gracyk
•
•
•