HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01191993 - H.2 •H. 2
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS •j Contra
Costa
v:,:;.
FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON „^"""� dr County
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: December 22 , 1992sT� �oUUAN
SUBJECT: Appeal - LUP #2030-92, filed by John Rolf Hattam (Applicant a Owner) -
Kensington Area (S.D.I. ) - Parcel x`572-060-027
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) 4 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Deny the appeal and uphold the County Planning Commission's
decision to deny the request for a second residence on the
site.
2. Adopt the findings of the County Planning Commission as the
reasons for this denial .
3. Find the environmental documentation for the project complete
and adequate.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
A building permit to build a new primary residence on the site has
been issued. The property owner, Mr. Hattam, has filed LUP 2030-92
to allow for the continued use of the existing 600 sq. ft.
residence on the site as a second residence when the new primary
residence .is occupied.
On October 26, 1992 the, County Zoning Administrator held a noticed,
public hearing on this request. The applicant spoke along with
several neighbors who opposed the project. The Kensington
Municipal Advisory Council recommended denial of the proposal .
After taking testimony where it was clear that no matter what the
Zoning Administrator's decision was, it would be appealed, the
Zoning Administrator referred LUP 2030-92 to the County Planning
,Commission for. hearing and decision.
On November 24 , 1992 the County Planning Commission held a noticed
public hearing on this request. After taking testimony, the County
Planning Commission denied Mr. Hattam's request due to substandard
access to the site, steep terrain and the fact a creek crosses the
site near the location of the proposed second residence. The
applicant appealed the County Planning Commission's denial to the
Board of Supervisors for hearing and determination.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE CJS•.,—"
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON January 26 , 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _� OTHER _x
This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors for hearing on the appeal by John Rolf Hattam from the
decision of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission on the
application of John Rolf Hattam (applicant and owner) for approval to
continue the residential use of the existing 600 square foot second
residence on site after new primary residence is completed (LUP
2030-92) in the Kensington area.
1 .
Dennis Barry, Community Development Department, presented the
staff report on the appeal, described the site location, and he
commented on the Planning Commission' s denial of the request.
The following persons appeared to testify:
John Rolf Hattam, 37 Kensington Road, Kensington.,
applicant/appellant, commented on two errors he felt were in the staff
report, and he requested that the Board of Supervisors approve his
second unit application.
John Grosvenor, 4 Franciscan Way, Kensington, representing the
Kensington Municipal Advisory Council, spoke in opposition to the Land
Use Permit.
Chuck Grant, 26 Sunset Drive, Kensington, spoke in opposition and
presented written testimony.
Ernest S. Kuh, 50 Sunset Drive, Kensington, spoke in opposition
and presented written testimony.
Mrs. Marguerite Jukes, 170 Arlington Avenue, Kensington, spoke in
opposition and presented written testimony.
Sam Witten, 30 Sunset Drive, Kensington, spoke in opposition and
presented written testimony.
Alice Pasqualetti, 38 Sunset Drive, Kensington, spoke in
opposition and presented written testimony.
Mr. Hattam spoke in rebuttal.
Supervisor Bishop and the appellant discussed the issue of the
removal of the kitchen sink.
The public hearing was closed.
Supervisor Powers commented on the staff report for the Planning
Commission dated November 24,' 1992 contained in the packet and a
compromise that had been worked out when the original large residence
was built, and he recommended denial of the application.
Supervisor Bishop second the motion.
Victor Westman, County Counsel, suggested that the Board add to
the motion that it is not satisfied that there is enough evidence
before it to make the other seven findings required for a Land Use
Permit as specified in County Ordinance Code Section 26-2.2008.
Supervisors Powers and Bishop amended the motion to include Mr.
Westman's suggestion.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that recommendations 1, 2 as amended,
and 3 are APPROVED.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: - MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHORN.
Contact:Arthur Beresford - 646-2032
Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED January 26 , 1993
cc: John Rolf Hattam PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
County Counsel THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Public Wor'cs Ai
COON, ADMINISTRATOR
Building Inspection Dept.
BY , DEPUTY