Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-21 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-21 DENYING THE APPEAL UPHOLDING THE TOWN'S ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING VARIANCE REQUEST V AR10-008 176 ESTATES DRIVE (APN: 208-034-013) WHEREAS, David and Pauline Keyes (APPLICANTS/OWNERS) applied for variance approval for to construct a 460 + / - square foot garage ADDITION and a 390 + / - square foot residential addition along the southeast property line; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located at 176 Estates Drive and is further identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 208-034-013; and WHEREAS, Administrative approval of V AR10-008 was granted on June 7, 2010; and WHEREAS, an appeal was filed by Duane Warren in response to the circulation of the Appealable Action Letter for V AR10-008; and WHEREAS, the Town of Danville Single Family Residential District Ordinance requires approval of a Variance prior to the construction of the proposed addition; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the project at a noticed public hearing on September 28,2010; and WHEREAS, the project has been found to be Categorically Exempt the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, the public notice of this action was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a staff report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Division's administrative approval of Variance request V AR10-008; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all reports, recommendations, and testimony submitted in writing and presented at the hearing; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the Town of Danville denies the appeal of the Planning Division's administrative approval and reaffirms the approval of Variance request V AR10-008, and makes the following findings in support of this action: FINDINGS OF APPROVAL: 1. This variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the area and the R-20; Single Family Residential District in which the subject property is located. Due to the fact that most lots in the immediate neighborhood, including the subject lot, are substantially smaller than the 20,000 square foot minimum lot size required by the R-20 District (i.e., most lots are 15,000+/- square feet in size), it is difficult to provide for reasonable expansion or modification of the residence while providing for full compliance with the R-20; Single Family Residential District setback standards. 2. Because of the following special circumstances applicable to this specific property, strict application of the applicable zoning regulations would deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed by others in the general vicinity and/ or located in the same zoning district. a. The Town of Danville Municipal Code requires two covered parking spaces for each home in a residential zoning district. This house currently does not have any covered parking. The proposed addition wouid provide two covered parking spaces and bring the home in to compliance with the requirements of the Town's Single Family Residential Zoning District Ordinance. b. The physical improvements proposed under the varIance request are consistent with the pattern of development present within the surrounding neighborhood. Other properties in the immediate neighborhood have been granted similar variances. c. Requiring the proposed additions to observe the full 20'-0" minimum side yard setback and/ or the 35'-0" minimum aggregate side yard setback, as required in the R-20; Single Family Residential District, would result in a floor plan and roof plan layout that would be detrimental to the use and enjoyment of the residence and would be detrimental to the aesthetic quality of the neighborhood. 3. This variance is in substantial conformance with the intent and purpose of the R- 20; Single Family Residential District in which the subject property is located since the variance allows for a reasonable method of expanding the existing single family residence. PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2010-21 Unless otherwise specified, the following conditions shall be complied with prior to the Town Council approval of the initial final map for the project. Each item is subject to review and approval by the Planning Division unless otherwise specified. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Except as may be modified by the following conditions of approval, development authorized under this variance approval shall be substantially as shown on the project plans labeled "176 Estates Drive," on file with tbe Planning Division and consisting of three sheets dated received May 19, 2010. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall reimburse the Town for costs incurred to notify neighboring residents of the proposed variance request. Reimbursement shall be in the amount of $286.40 ($110.00 plus 40 notices X $0.83 per notice x 2 mailings) made payable to the Town of Danville. 3. Construction and grading activity shall be limited to weekdays during the hours from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., unless otherwise approved in writing by the Chief Building Official. 4. Prior to construction, the applicant shall obtain all necessary building permits from the Town of Danville Building Division. 5. Unless otherwise authorized by the Planning Division, the exterior building colors and materials used for the addition shall match, or be substantially compatible with, the existing building colors and materials. 6. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit a report, prepared by a Certified Arborist, which details the project specific recommendations to ensure the protection of the trees along the right side property line during development. The recommendations shall be reviewed by the Planning Division and implemented to the extent feasible. 7. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall schedule a "Life and Safety" inspection with the Town's Building Division to ensure the illegally constructed pool house in the rear yard is not a threat to health and safety. Upon completion of the inspection, the Building Division shall determine if a Notice of Non-Compliance should be placed against the property to notify future owners of the illegal construction. No future alterations shall occur to this structure without obtaining a retroactive Building Permit for the entire structure. PAGE 3 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2010-21 APPROVED by the Danville Planning Commission at a regular meeting on September 28, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Combs, Graham, Morgan, Nichols, Overcashier, Radich Attwood Antoun APPROVED AS TO FORM: l?:f:!13 ~I PAGE 4 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2010-21