224, Enlarge the garage by 12 feet,, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsBEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of the Application
of
Dr. Bill Colvard
Lot 24-1-RH
,ZONING CASE NO. 224
FINDINGS AND REPORT
The application of Dr. Bill Colvard, Lot 24-1-RH, Rolling
Hills Tract for a Variance under ARTICLE III, Section 3.06, Front
Yard Requirements and ARTICLE V, Section 5.06, Extension of Non-
conforming Building, Ordinance No. 33 for a residence addition came
on for hearing on the 20th day of March 1979 in the Council Chamber
of the administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling
Hills, California, and the applicant, having submitted evidence in
support of the application, the Planning Commission, being advised,
now makes its Findings and Report as required by the Ordinances of
the City of Rolling Hills, California.
I.
The Commission finds that the applicant, Dr. Bill Colvard,
is the owner of that certain real property described as Lot 24-1-RH
located at 1 Meadowlark Lane in the City of Rolling Hills, and that
notice of the public hearing in connection with said application was
given as required by Sections 8.06 and 8.07 of Ordinance No. 33 of
the City of Rolling Hills, California. The Commission finds, further,
that no comment, written or verbal, was received in opposition to the
request, and that Mrs. Virginia Gibson, 3 Meadowlark Lane, attended
the meeting and advised the Commission that she had no objection to
the request and considered any improvement a benefit which would add
to the value of the property and would reflect favorably on the gen-
eral area.
II.
The Commission finds that the applicant has requested a
variance for construction of a residence addition consisting of
a new garage and relocation of the existing driveway. The Commission
finds that a variance should be granted in order to preserve substantial
property rights in the same vicinity and zone, and that the granting
of such variance would not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare, nor injurious to property in the same vicinity and zone.
III.
From the foregoing it is concluded that a variance should
be granted under ARTICLE III, Section 3.06 and ARTICLE V, Section 5.06
of Ordinance No. 33 for construction of a garage which would be located
12 feet from the road easement, and it is, therefore, so ordered. This
approval shall expire one year from the date of grant, if not acted on.
/s/ Carol Hanscom
Chairman, Planning Commission
?1 .s2d!/ d a
etary, Planning ommission