PC-97-43 - Laserfiche WebLink

PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF PLEASANTON , ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO. PC-97-43 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF CSB CONSTRUCTION/ RAY'S ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING FOR DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL AND A VARIANCE FROM THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AS FILED UNDER CASE Z-97 -5 8/Z-97 -88/V -97 -03 WHEREAS, CSB Construction/Ray's Electrical has applied for I) design review approval to construct an approximately 4,350 square foot storage building to be located behind the existing 3730/3732 Stanley Boulevard building and design review approval for a new monument sign, and 2) a variance from the Municipal Code to allow the proposed storage building to encroach into the required rear yard setback, located at 3724-:3732 Stanley Boulevard; and WHEREAS, zoning for the property is C-S (Service Commercial) District; and WHEREAS, at their duly noticed public hearing of May 14, 1997, the Planning Commission considered all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and recommendations of the City staff concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings: 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the provisions of this chapter deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. At approximately 180 ft. in width, 262 ft. in depth, and 1.12 acres in area, the subject lot is comparable with lots in the area under the same zoning district. However, the subject property is unique in that it is irregularly-shaped along the front property line and has an atypical development pattern by having the Public Storage Building fronting onto the rear property line. These factors make compliance with the normal rear yard setback requirements more difficult or less necessary on the subject lot than on rectilinear-shaped lots with standard development patterns. This constitutes a special circumstance unique to the property. 2. Granting the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation on other properties classified in the same zoning district.