0581A
RESOLUTION NO. 581
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE IN ZONING
CASE NO. 361
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
00 HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and
Mrs'.'Hitoshi Yamamoto with respect to real property located at .
No. 14 Southfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 34 -SF) requesting a
m variance to permit construction of a house addition within the
Q established front yard of said property.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly
noticed public hearing to consider the application on May 17,
July 21 and August 30, 1988. After considering the evidence,
both written and oral, the Commission denied the application.
The Commission's decision was timely appealed by the applicants
pursuant to Section 17.32.140(a) of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code.
Section 3. On October 10, 1988, the -City Council
opened a duly noticed, de novo public hearing pursuant to.
Municipal Code Section 17.32.190 to consider the application.
Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered
by the City Council. The applicants appeared before the Council
in support of the application. The Council's deliberations were
adjourned to a field trip on October 15, 1988 and to a continued
public hearing on October 24, 1988, at which times applicants
were present.
Section 4. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030
permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements
of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to
other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from
making use of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar
properties. Pursuant to these Sections, the City Council finds
that:
A. The established front yard is 144 feet from the
roadway to the existing residential structure and is
considerably larger than is required by the Zoning Ordinance
(fifty feet). An existing stable structure is located
within the front yard;
B. Due to the shape and topography of the lot, the
house can only reasonably be expanded in the direction of
the front yard. The proposed expansion, as revised by the
applicant, would not extend beyond the point at which the
stable structure presently exists, meaning that there will
be no greater incursion into the front yard than already
exists on the property at this time.
C. In view of the topographical situation, the
presence of an existing incursion in the front yard and the
larger than usual size of the front yard, there exists
unique circumstances not generally applicable to other
properties in the same zone that justify the requested
encroachment.
D. The grant of a variance under these circumstances
will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare and will be compatible with surrounding properties
and will be consistent with the goals of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Section 5. Based on the foregoing findings, the
City Council hereby approves the Variance for Case No. 361
subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of
Nov m r , 1988.
U Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The foregoing Resolution No. 581 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 361
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the
City Council at a meeting on November 14, 1988 by the
following roll call vote:
00
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Pernell
Swanson, Mayor Leeuwenburgh
W NOES: None
m
Q ABSENT: None
1
i.