217, Remodel SFR and addition to e, Resolutions & Approval Conditions• •
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of the Application
of
Mr. Richard Hale
Lot 76-EF
FINDINGS AND REPORT
ZONING CASE NO. 217
The application of Mr. Richard Hale, Lot 76-EF, Eastfield
Tract, for a variance of side yard requirements under ARTICLE III,
Section 3.07, Side Yard Requirements, Ordinance No. 33 for a
residence addition which would project into the side yard came on
for hearing on the 13th day of December, 1978 in the Council Chambers
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, Mr. Richard Hale, is
the owner of that certain real property described as Lot 76-EF,
located at 16 Outrider Road 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 that no
communication, written or verbal, was received in opposition to the
request, and that Mr. E. Mickelson, 14 Outrider Road, viewed the plan
and visited the property, and stated that she had no objection to the
request.
II.
The Commission finds that Mr. Hale is having extensive remodeling
done to his home, and an addition to the existing garage, which presently
projects into the side yard, would result in a three car garage which
would project 10 feet into the side yard setback. The Commission finds
that the house, when built, was never completed inside, and the work
is being done to bring the house up to code. The Commission finds that
• •
the variance should be granted in order to preserve substantial
property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity
and zone, and that the granting of such permit 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 of side
yard regulations should be granted to Mr. Hale for construction of
a residence addition which would include a garage which would project
ten feet into the side yard, 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