Loading...
419, Expand existing SFR constructi, Resolutions & Approval Conditions• • RESOLUTION NO. 90-6 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 419 THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. William Martin with respect to real property located at 17 Caballeros Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 20-SK) requesting a variance to encroach into the rear yard setback to construct a 237 square foot addition to the nonconforming residence, and to construct a retaining wall within the rear yard setback. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed, public hearing to consider the application on February 20, 1990 and March 20, 1990 and conducted field site review on March 17, 1990. Section 3. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of the property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties. Section 17.16.080 requires a rear yard of not less than 50 feet. Section 4. The Planning Commission makes the following findings: A. The existing residence already encroaches 20 feet into the rear yard setback. The proposed residential addition would extend an additional seven (7') feet into the setback for a total encroachment of 27 feet. The proposed retaining wall would encroach 30 feet into the rear yard setback, thereby having a setback of 20 feet. B. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone because the existing development on the site has a 3,891 square foot residence that can be expanded to areas that will comply with setbacks prescribed by the Zoning Ordinance. A residence developed closer to the rear property line would not be compatible with the developmental pattern of surrounding properties. • • C. The variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because a residential structure closer to the rear property line is not consistent with abutting properties that comply with the required 50-foot rear yard setback. D. The granting of the variance would be materially detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity of the zone in which the property is located because the proposed project would result in residential development too close to the property line. Section 5. Based on the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby denies the Variance for Zoning Case No. 419 to permit an encroachment into the rear yard setback, as indicated in the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this of March, 1990 1990. ATTEST: City Clerk 20th Chairman day