Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council grants Subaru dealership request to reconsider planning appeal after late‑night October hearing
Summary
Council voted 6–1 to allow reconsideration of the Subaru dealership appeal of a planning commission denial of a CUP modification after the applicant said prior October proceedings stretched into the early morning and prevented full discussion.
The Santa Clara City Council voted 6–1 on Oct. 21 to accept a timely request for reconsideration from legal counsel for a Subaru dealership appealing a planning commission decision on a conditional use permit (CUP) modification for Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Background: The applicant’s counsel, John Demang, told the council the item ran late at the City Council meeting on Oct. 7 and that staff, neighbors and the applicant had not had a chance to fully explore options; he said Mission Trails (a contractor or consultant referenced in the hearing) had dropped off the line during the late‑hour testimony. Demang said the appeal started as a narrow safety question about waste pickup but broadened into other neighborhood concerns late into the night; he asked the council to reopen the matter to allow a de novo hearing and fuller discussion.
City Attorney guidance: City Attorney staff advised the council that, under the city policy on reconsideration (Policy 42) and governing rules, a motion to reconsider is permitted where there effectively was no final action or prevailing side; any council member who participated on Oct. 7 may move to reconsider. The effect of a successful reconsideration is to set a future de novo hearing with re‑notice.
Council action: Councilmember Hardy moved to approve reconsideration; Councilmember Gonzales seconded. The council voted to approve reconsideration 6–1. City staff said the reopened hearing would be re‑noticed and that parties and prior notice recipients would receive mailed notice of the new hearing date.
Quote: “At that late hour, we really didn’t… address staff concerns and the city council’s concerns,” counsel John Demang told the council. The city attorney explained the reconsideration mechanism and said if it passes the hearing would be re‑noticed.
Next steps: The council did not schedule a date at the Oct. 21 meeting; staff said the matter would be re‑noticed once the new hearing date is fixed.
