Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-179 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 03-179 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2003-00902,A REQUEST FOR THE REDUCTION IN LOT DEPTH FOR A SUBDIVISION OF 6 LOTS IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT THE END OF IOAMOSA COURT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1061-611-11 AND 12. A. Recitals. 1. Delbert Feltis filed an application for the issuance of Variance DCR2003-00902, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On December 10, 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW,THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on December 10, 2003, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located west of Hellman Avenue and will front along loamosa Court; and b. The subject site is currently vacant and contains three mature trees on the site, as well as shrubs and grasses. Earth piles and rocks are located on the site. The site slopes from north to south with an overall fall of 18 feet. Surrounding uses are flood control basins to the north and west, and single-family homes to the south and east; and C. The application is necessitated by Tentative Tract 16461,a subdivision of 3.1 acres of land into 6 lots; and d. Literal enforcement of the 200-foot lot depth limit would deprive the applicant of development enjoyed by other properties in the Very Low Residential District, by requiring the applicant to significantly alter the proposed design of the subdivision by using altemative design and construction methods that are not feasible for the subject property and have not been required of other properties in the Very Low Residential District. e. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a special privilege because there are unique site constraints; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03-179 DRC2003-00902 — FELTIS December 10, 2003 Page 2 f. The strict enforcement of the 200-foot lot depth limit would cause a practical difficulty for the applicant's proposed map in that irregular and flag shaped lots would be created. The proposed land division would create typical rectangular shaped lots that already exist in the areas and which are typical for single-family residential subdivision. g. Because of the unique dimension of the property, if the project were to be developed per the 200-foot lot depth requirement;the outcome would be very irregularly shaped lots and unnecessary flag shaped lots. h. Because of the unique situation of the property dimension the granting of the Variance will not set a precedent, and will be compatible with other rectangular shaped parcels in the area. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code; and b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district; and C. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district;and d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; and e. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health,safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to the Standard Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2003. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA '�e' 11_4_� BY: Carry T. Niel, Vice Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03-179 DRC2003-00902 — FELTIS December 10, 2003 Page 3 ATTEST: Brad Bull , Secreta I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of December 2003, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC 2003-00902 SUBJECT: LOT SUBDIVISION INTO 6 LOTS APPLICANT: DELBERT FELTIS LOCATION: ILAMOSA COURT AND WEST OF HAVEN AVENUE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION,(909)477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents,officers,or employees,because of the issuance of such approval,or in the aftemative,to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorneys fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may,at its sole discretion,participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. B. Time Limits 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. SC-10-03 1