337, Addition and remodel of SFR wi, Staff ReportsTO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
tnuary 12, 1987
City Council Agenda
Item #4 C
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
Zoning Case No. 334 - Victor Martinov, 33 Chuckwagon Road
RECOMMENDATION:
Resolution No. 557 has been drafted to
Council's action regarding Zoning Case No. 334.
557 approves a request for Variance to the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Further,
denies a request for Variance to height limitation
BACKGROUND:
reflect the City
The Resolution No.
front yard setback
Resolution No. 557
requirements.
At it's meeting of December 16, 1986, the City Council, after
extensive public testimony, took action to approve a request for a
Variance of the front yard setback requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance as made by Victor Martinov, 33 Chuckwagon Road. At that
same meeting, the City Council denied a request for a Variance of
the height limitation requirements, also applied for by Victor
Martinov. The City Attorney has drafted Resolution No. 557, which
memorializes and ratifies the action of the City Council taken at
it's December 16, 1986 meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this matter.
• •
City 0/ leoltiny JUL
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521
December 8, 1986
TO: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 334 (Martinov)
The Martinov Variance, which requests an exception to the
height limitation provision in the Zoning Ordinance, will be
considered this evening. In order to provide some guidance to the
City Council regarding the Variance, I have included a memorandum
that was developed by Bill Kinley several years ago which suggests
guidelines for the granting of a Variance. In reading through the
guidelines for granting a Variance, if one were to read the
guidelines from the opposite point of view, then each of the
guidelines can then be used for not granting a Variance. As an
example, the guideline indicates that the granting of a Variance
should not be contrary to the public health, safety, interest and
welfare of the community at large, or be contrary to the intent or
spirit of the Zoning Ordinance, and should have no adverse effect on
the Master Plan of the City. Arguably, a Variance should not be,
granted if in fact it is contrary to the public health, safety,
interest and welfare of the community at large, or be contrary to
the intent or spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and should have no
adverse effect on the Master Plan of the City.
City Council Agenda
November 10, 1986
Item #5A
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 334 - Mr. & Mrs. Victor Martinov
RECOMMENDATI:
The Planning Commission approved an application for Variance
from minimum front yard setback requirements and height limitation
requirement related to habitable space on top of habitable space.
The applicants are Mr. & Mrs. Victor Martinov, 33 Chuckwagon Road.
pACKGROUND
The Planning Commission conducted public hearings on September
16, and October 21, 1986, regarding a Variance application for Mr. &
Mrs. Victor Martinov, which would allow for encroachment into the
established front yard setback and allow for .a construction of
habitable space on top of habitable space at 33 Chuckwagon Road.
The Planning Commission conducted a. site investigation on October 4,
1986.
The applicants property at 33 Chuckwagon Road currently has a
non -conforming encroachment into the minimum front yard setback.
The residence encroaches into the minimum front yard setback of 17
feet to the present time. The Variance request is for the
encroachment of an additional foot, from 17 to 18 feet. The
applicants also have requested a Variance from the height limitation
requirements of the zoning ordinance. Specifically, the applicants
ask for a variance from the prohibition of habitable living space
being built on top of other habitable living space (2 story and/or 2
level construction).
During the public hearing, the Planning Commission received
many comments in support of the variance application. Also, the
applicants presented a petition signed by most of the homeowners in
the Chuckwagon Road area, which express support for Mr. & Mrs.
Martinov's variance application. Following the public hearing, the
Planning Commission found that the topographical, physical and
structural constraints inherent in the property justified the
granting of a variance per the applicants request. The Planning.
Commission voted 3 yes, and 2 no, to approve Zoning Case No. 334.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is none.