Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZAV 1983-06 RESOLUTION N0. ZAV-83-6 RESOLUTION OF CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING A VARIANCE WHEREAS, a duly verified application for variance was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on February 9, 1983, by Mariano and Joann Ingargiola, and WHEREAS, said application requested a reduction in the required sideyard setback from 10 feet to 7 1/2 feet in order to construct an 11 1/2' x 24' family room addition onto the existing single family dwelling located at 824 David Drive in the R-1 zone, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said variance application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing, and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m., March 23, 1983, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION finds as follows: 1. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists. Said hardship may include practical difficulties in developing the property for the needs of the owner consistent with the regulations of the zone; but in this context, personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits, and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance. Further, a previous variance can never have set a precedent, for each case must be considered only on its individual merits. The rear 38 feet of the subject property is encumbered by a downward slope resulting in a level pad area of only 4600 sq. ft. The existing floor plan, improvements and conditions (including usable open space) make it more practical to locate the addition in the side yard area. 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors. The subject property was developed at a time when the required sideyard setback was 5 feet and there are other properties in the immediate vicinity developed with 5 foot sideyards. The granting of this request will bring the property into parity with those properties, i 3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and will not materially impair the purposes of this chapter or the public interest. There will be a 13 foot separation between structures and there is a 5 foot difference in elevation, therefore the adjoining property should not adversely affected or have a loss of privacy. 4. That the authorizing of such variance will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any governmental agency. The General Plan will not be affected by the granting of this request. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION grants a variance to Mariano and Joann Ingargiola to reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 7 1/2 feet for the construction of a family room addition subject to the following conditions: 1. No second story addition shall be located closer than 10 feet to the easterly property line. 2. The family room addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structure through the use of the same exterior materials and colors (this includes the roof). This variance shall become void and ineffective if the same is not utilized within one year from the date of this resolution in accordance with ' Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 23rd day of March, 1983, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Commissioners R. Johnson, Pressutti, Green, Shipe and O'Neill NOES: Commissioners G. Johnson and Cannon ABSENT: None F"~ -01-~.... oy o n ~ airman ATTEST: Ruth M. Smith, Secretary WPC 0269P -2-