250, Front yard setback, 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 )
) ZONING CASE NO. 250
Dr. Michael Ishak )
)
Lot 84-RH )
FINDINGS AND REPORT
The application of Dr. Michael Ishak, Lot 84-RH, Rolling
Hills Tract, for a Variance of Front Yard Requirements under ARTICLE
III, Section 3.06 of Ordinance No. 169, and Extension of Non -conforming
Use under ARTICLE V, Section 5.06 of Ordinance No. 33 for a residence
addition came on for hearing on the 27th day of May, 1980 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, Dr. Michael Ishak,
is the owner of that certain real property described as Lot 84-RH,
located at 8 Blackwater Canyon Road. The Commission finds, further,
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, and that no comment, written
or verbal, was received in favor of or in opposition to the request.
II.
The Commission finds that the applicant wishes to have an
extensive alteration and addition to his residence. The Commission
finds, further, that a major portion of the existing residence is
within the prescribed fifty foot front yard setback, and in order to
achieve a more architecturally pleasing effect, a variance of front
yard requirements was requested for a small portion of the addition
to eliminate a blank wall and break up the expanse mass. Further,
the Commission finds that the 30 foot setback formerly required has
been retained, and if a variance is not approved, the entire kitchen
wing of the residence will.have to be re -designed. The Commission
finds that a Variance should be granted in order to preserve substan-
tial 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 of Front
Yard Requirements under ARTICLE III, Section 3.06 of Ordinance No. 169
and Extension of Non -conforming Use under ARTICLE V, Section 5.06 of
Ordinance No. 33 for a residence addition should be granted to Dr.
Michael Ishak, subject to the condition that a stockpile of rocks on
the property, with the exception of rocks used in landscaping or
construction of a swimming pool, be removed within 90 days or issuance
o.f a building permit, whichever comes first, and it is so ordered.
This approval shall expire one year from the date of grant,
if not acted on.
4,/heLl
Chair 'an,S ai n ng Commission
ef}retary, PlanninCommission