301, Addition of a bedroom and bath, Staff Reports•
&IQ
JUL 1 p 1984
CITYOfi 1?
oi Planning Commiss, ?;r G No HI
Rolling Hills
James Brogdon
5 Maverick Ln.
VARIANCE 7 CABALLEROS RD.
Gentlemen:
Regarding the request to encroach 9 feet onto "required"
side yard setback, please consider the following:
The justification seems to be that since they are already 13
feet into the "required" side yard setback, why not another 9
feet, for a total encroachment of 22 feet!
From my experience of seeing that my neighbors on either side
of my lot encroached on the setback, one(legally at that time)
with a driveway, and the spec builder on the other side to
make the lot larger cut into the bank, so that now the only
easement between the 3 properties is the one that my setback
provides, I must object to "only" another 9 feet!
After houses sell several times those easements are encroached
onaccidentally by plants and trees, but we should not
approve diminished easement by design!
A few years ago, one neighbor who was a radio ham wanted to
erect an antenna higher than a telephone pole at a time when
we were, considering removing all telephone poles. By getting
his neighbors' permission, he was approved for the pole. In
one year he sold out and moved away, and we still have the pole!
Some of our houses on Caballeros are very close together because
of agreements to non -conforming conditions. Let's not add to
the condition.
On existing encroachments we've already lost many battles, let's
not surrender and lose the war!
Sincerely,
J W Brogdon