HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-36 EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 94-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF DANVILLE
APPROVING AN APPEAL AND DENYING VARIANCE
REQUEST VAR 94-28 -- DIESENDRUCK
WHEREAS, Samuel and Esther Diesendruck have requested approval of a Variance request (VAR
94-28) to allow the construction of a 250 +/- square foot room addition to the north side of the
residence which would encroach approximately five feet into the required ten foot sideyard
setback, resulting in a five foot setback on a .59 +/- acre site; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is located at 1244 Greenbrook Drive and is identified as Assessor's
Parcel Number 207-261-002; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Danville Single Family Residential Ordinance (Ord. No. 43-84) allows for
variances from certain zoning standards, including setback requirements, when the strict
application of such standards may be inappropriate because of special characteristics of the
property; and
WHEREAS, on September 2, 1994, notice was sent to surrounding properties of the Town's
intent to administratively approve the variance request; and
WHEREAS, on September 10, 1994, the Town received an appeal of the administrative approval
from Thomas C. Souza, owner of 1236 Greenbrook Drive; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the project at a noticed public hearing on
December 13, 1994; 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 Planning Commission deny the
appeal and approve the variance request; 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 approves the appeal and
denies the Variance request (VAR 94-28) and makes the following findings in support of this
action:
The proposed variance would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations on other properties in the area and the R-15; Single Family Residential District
in which the subject property is located.
The proposed variance is not substantial in conformance with the intent and
purpose of the R-15; Single Family Residential District in which the subject
property is located since the variance would allow for an addition to a single family
residence which does not meet the sideyard setback standards required of other
residents in the zoning district and vicinity.
DENIED by the Danville Planning Commission at a Regular Meeting on December 13,
1994, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Arnerich, Bowlby, Jameson, Murphy, Osborn, Vilhauer
Hunt
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City A[torney ...... ~ Chief of Pl/a~
pdcz71