Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout024-89 RESOLUTION NO. 24-89 A Resolution of the Danville Town Council Denying Minor Subdivision Request MS 854-88 and Variance request VAR 88-19 WHEREAS, Jerry Stadtler (Applicant) and Frank & Edward Hom (Owners) have requested approval of a Minor Subdivision to resubdivide Parcel C of MS 85-68 (zoned R-20; Single Family Residential District) into two parcels, proposed respectively at 20,030 ± net square feet and 22,350 ± net square feet; and WHEREAS, the project proponents concurrently submitted a Variance request to allow deviation from the minimum average lot width standards set forth in the R-20 District (116' and 104' proposed-120' minimum average lot width required); and WHEREAS, the State of California Subdivision Map Act and the adopted Town of Danville Subdivision Regulations require that no real property may be divided into two or more parcels or lots for purposes of sale, lease or financing unless a Tentative Map is acted upon a Final Map is approved consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, and the Town of Danville Subdivision Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the project at two public hearings, beginning with a noticed public hearing on October 20, 1988, and concluding with a public hearing on November 14, 1988; and WHEREAS, proper notice of this request was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State environmental regulations, a Draft Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance was prepared for the projects; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all reports, and public testimony and information and presented during the public hearing regarding the projects; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission identified concerns for development of the site related to compatibility with surrounding neighborhood, potential impact of additional traffic on San Andreas Drive, and non-conforming lot depth dimensions. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made findings in support of denial of MS 854-88 and VAR 88-19 on November 14, 1988. WHEREAS, Jerry Stadtler (Applicant) and Frank & Edward Hom (Owners) appealed the decision of the Planning Commission on November 30, 1988. WHEREAS, proper notice of this request was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Town Council did hear and consider all reports, and public testimony and information presented during the public hearing on February 23, 1989 regarding the projects; and WHEREAS, the Town Council upheld the decision of the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF DANVILLE HEREBY DENIES MS 854-88 AND VAR 88-19 AND MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ACTION: 1) That San Andreas Drive was originally designed as an 18 foot width roadway to serve four parcels. This proposed subdivision would increase the traffic along the private roadway and could potentially overburden the roadway. 2) That Policy 1.12 (page 25 and 1.13 (page 26) of the Danville 2005 General Plan protects existing residential areas from intrusion of incompatible uses and promotes land use compatibility. The rural character of San Andreas Drive would be compromised by the introduction of 20,000 square feet lots. Parcels of this size would be inconsistent with the size and orientation of the surrounding neighborhood which contains 1+ acre parcels where the keeping of livestock is allowed and rural influences are encouraged. 3) That Goal 3 of the General plan (page 28) requires that new developments be integrated visually and functionally in a manner compatible with the physical character and desired image of the Community. 4) That the request for lot width reduction can not be supported as this is a flat rectangular parcel with no special circumstances to support findings for the granting of a variance. Therefore, the proposed tentative subdivision is inconsistent with the intent of the general plan and zoning ordinance. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 23rd day of February , 1989 by the following vote: AYES: GREENBERG, JAGGER, LANE, RITCHEY, SCHLENDORF NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAINED: NONE MAYOR ATTEST: Approved as tq,Form: ./ apmm2