HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-17RESOLUTION NO. 2005-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE TOWN OF DANVILLE DENYING AN APPEAL AND
DENYING VARIANCE REQUEST VAR 2005-14
(APN: 199-322-029 --- WALSH)
WHEREAS, Kevin and Natalie Walsh have requested approval of a Variance
application to allow the construction of a 1,902 +/- square foot one-story
addition that would encroach approximately 4'9" into the required minimum
10' side yard setback, resulting in a 5'3" setback on a 0.24 +/- acre site; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is located at 106 Danvilla Court and is further
identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 199-322-029; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Division reviewed the project and was unable to make
the necessary findings to support the proposed variance request, and therefore
sent an appealable action letter denying the project to the applicant on April 29,
2005; and
WHEREAS, the applicant filed an appeal of the Town of Danville Planning
Division's decision to deny Variance application VAR 2005-14 on May 6, 2005;
and
WHEREAS, a public notice of the May 24, 2005 Planning Commission meeting
was mailed to surrounding property owners within 350 feet of the project site;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Division has prepared a staff report recommending
that the Planning Commission deny the request and uphold the Planning
Divisions denial of the variance application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all reports,
recommendations, and testimony submitted in writing and presented at the
hearing on May 24, 2005; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the Town of Danville denies the
appeal and Variance request VAR 2005-14, and makes the following findings in
support of this action:
This variance does constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with
the limitations on other properties in the area and the R-10; Single Family
Residential District in which the subject property is located.
PAGE 1 OF RESOLUTION 2005-17
o
There are no special circumstances applicable to this specific property,
therefore, strict application of the applicable zoning regulations would not
deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed by others in the general
vicinity and/or located in the same zoning district.
This variance'is not in substantial conformance with the intent and
purpose of the R-10; Single Family Residential District in which the subject
property is located.
APPROVED by the Danville Planning Commission at a Regular Meeting on May
24, 2005 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Combs, Condie, Moran, Morgan, Nichols, Storer, Osborn
Graham
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION 2005-17