CITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
|
|
- Theodore Jenkins
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 DATE: March 22, 2016 CITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Jan Di Leo, Planner (805) THROUGH: Matt Everling, Planning Manager APPLICATION: Administrative Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for a greater than 50% addition to an existing legal nonconforming single family dwelling located at 209 Montecito. Applicant: Irene & Greg Rigali. The project is located outside of the Coastal Appeal Zone. APN: ; Permit P GENERAL PLAN: ZONING DISTRICT: LOCATION: Shell Beach Planning Area (H), Low Density Residential Single Family Residential (R-1), 1983 Zoning Code Southeast of the Shell Beach Road/Montecito Avenue intersection. See Exhibit 1 for a vicinity map. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant is proposing a two-story, 1,475-square-foot addition to an existing one-story, 1,336 square foot legal nonconforming single family residence. Other project components include a roof deck and a tandem garage. Access to the site is provided by Montecito Avenue. The 1983 Zoning Code and active Planning Commission interpretations require that when a property owner proposes greater than a 50% addition that the nonconforming portions of the building be brought up to current zoning code standards. The applicant is requesting that the project not be held to this standard because meeting current code requirements would require that portions of the existing structure be moved or removed. Since the project would be Page 1 of 20
2 inconsistent with City requirements and active Planning Commission interpretations, staff is recommending denial of the project without prejudice. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & APPLICATIONS Currently site development consists of a 1,092-square-foot single story residence and a 244- square-foot, single car garage. See Figure 1 for a depiction of the current residence. The applicant is proposing an addition to the existing residence at the rear of the home as well as a roof deck (see Figure 2). The new additions include new living areas on the first and second floor, two second floor decks and a roof deck. A portion of the west deck would be covered. See Table 1 for details. Figure 1- Existing Residence 209 Montecito. A view of the existing residence from Montecito Avenue. The garage addition will be located behind the existing one-car garage thereby providing tandem garage parking. The existing residence and garage total 1,336 sf. The proposed additions (to the residence and garage) total 1,475 sf and constitute a roughly 110% addition to the site s current square footage. See Figure 3 for a depiction of the project s floor plan that do not meet current code requirements. STAFF ANALYSIS 1. Consistency with the City s General Plan/Local Coastal Plan. Figure 2- Proposed Residence 209 Montecito. An elevation of the proposed residence from Montecito Avenue. Table 1 Existing & Proposed Components Item Existing (sf) Propose d (sf) Total (sf) First Floor Living Area 1, ,792 Garage Second Floor Living Area Subtotal 1,336 1,475 2,811 2nd Floor Deck (rear) nd Floor Deck Covered (West) nd Floor Deck Uncovered (west) Roof Deck Page 2 of 20
3 The City s General Plan and Local Coastal Plan require consistency with the City s zoning code. Since the project is not consistent with the 1983 Zoning Code the project is inconsistent with the City s General Plan and Local Coastal Plan. In this case the major concern is zoning code consistency. Figure 3- Floor Plan First Floor. The yellow line marks the proposed 1 st floor addition. The dashed red line is the location of the required 5 setback. The front portion of the existing garage is 9.5 feet wide versus the required 10 width. 2. Consistency with the City s 1983 Zoning Code / Previous Planning Commission Interpretations Regarding Nonconforming Buildings a. Background. The project site is located within the Single Family Zone (R-1) of the Shell Beach Planning Area. Per the 1983 Zoning regulations this property should provide a minimum 5-foot side setback; the existing side setback on the west side is 3.5 feet. The applicant also proposing a rear addition to the existing garage thereby creating a tandem garage. The current requirements for a tandem garage width is 10 feet. The applicant is proposing a width of 9.5 feet. Because the residence does not meet current zoning code standards it is considered legal nonconforming in terms of design. 1 The applicant is requesting an approximately 110% addition to the existing legal nonconforming residence. The Planning Commission provided interpretations on legal nonconforming structures in September 2003 and October Since that time proposed additions to legal nonconforming structures have been required to conform to this Planning Commission interpretation. b Zoning Code/Planning Commission Interpretations. The 1983 Zoning Code indicates the following: 2 1 See Exhibit 3 for an explanation regarding a legal nonconforming use versus a building that is legal nonconforming as to design. 2 The full text of these sections is provided in Exhibit 3. Page 3 of 20
4 No nonconforming building or structure may be extended to occupy a greater area of land than is occupied at the time of adoption of this title. (Section ) Structural alterations of existing structures, either design or arrangement, may be permitted only if such alteration is in compliance with the regulations set forth for the district where the building or structure is located. (Section ) In the event a nonconforming building is destroyed to the extent of more than fifty percent of its reasonable value it may only be rebuilt consistent with existing regulations. (Section ) Active Planning Commission interpretations have provided further direction and clarification when a property must be brought up to current standards. 1 These interpretations require that additions to single family residences that are legal nonconforming as to design 1 within an R-1 zone may be enlarged provided the new addition(s) meet all the standards indicated below: Are consistent with the adopted zoning code standards (e.g., setback, parking, landscaping, height, etc.), Do not make the design less conforming, and Are not greater than 50% of existing floor area. Under this interpretation new additions of less than 50% are allowed provided the addition(s) meets the standards of the zoning code and the new addition does not make the design less conforming. As noted above, the applicant is proposing an approximately 110% addition and requesting that the project not be required to meet current zoning code requirements. Allowing the applicant to build greater than a 50% addition to a residence that is legal nonconforming would be a violation of the zoning code and active Planning Commission interpretations. Since the project is inconsistent with the City s 1983 Zoning Code and active Planning Commission interpretations, staff is recommending denial of the proposed project without prejudice. c. Other Options Available to the Applicant. The applicant may re-apply for an addition that is 50% or less provided the addition(s) conform to the current setback requirements and do not contribute to the structure being more nonconforming. Such a case would be subject to an Administrative Coastal Development Permit and may be approved at the staff level. Under this scenario, the interior dimensions of the existing one-car garage and setback along the west property line may remain as they currently exist. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In accordance with the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act a Categorical Exemption was issued for the proposed Page 4 of 20
5 project in accordance with Section (Class 1) of the CEQA Guidelines, exempting additions in urban areas. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution (Exhibit 4) denying Permit P without prejudice. Attachment(s): Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 Zoning Code Standards / Policies Exhibit 3 Nonconforming Standards Exhibit 4 Resolution Exhibit 4a - Findings Exhibit 5 - Project Plans Page 5 of 20
6 EXHIBIT 1 VICINITY MAP Page 6 of 20
7 EXHIBIT 2 ZONING CODE STANDARDS/POLICIES Table 2-1 Zoning Code Development Standards Single Family Residential (R-1) Item Permitted/Required Code Section Proposed Complies? Lot area Minimum 5,000 sf B 4,746 SF Yes - existing Maximum Building Height Lot coverage Max building floor area Ratio Minimum Front yard setback Side yard setback Rear yard setback Landscaping Minimum parking spaces 2 nd Floor/1 st Floor ratio Shell Beach 25' when measured from the highest point of roof above center of the building footprint at natural grade 55% Maximum. Allowed: 2,610 sf 86% first 2,700 sf of lot area, & 60% for remainder of lot area. Allowed: 3,549 sf 20% of the average lot depth (0.20 * 95 = 19 ). Allowed: 19 setback (for residence; 20 for garage 10% lot width; min 4' & max. 5 Lot width = Required: 5 feet minimum 10% of lot depth; min 5' & max. 10 (lot depth 95 ) Required: 9.5 feet minimum 20% of lot area Required: 949 sf Single Family Dwelling: 2 spaces within a garage Garage minimum 20 x 20 Tandem Garage allowed subject to findings. Typical size 10 x 40 2 nd floor cannot exceed 80% of 1 st Floor including garage. Proposed 1 st Floor = 1,792; 2 nd Floor cannot exceed 80% or 1,433 SF 2 nd story stepped back a minimum of 30% along front setback A 24 feet Yes B 2,201 SF Yes B 2,811 SF Yes (D, 2) A 19 feet residence; 20 feet garage R=3 6 L= (A) 9 6 Yes R - No L-Yes Yes (B) 1,650 SF (34%) Yes Tandem A proposed Unclear 9 6 X 40 New garage would have 10 A7 width nd floor = 600 Yes sf GP/LCP LU-H-4a (b) >30% of 2 nd story front façade setback Yes Page 7 of 20
8 Page 8 of 20
9 EXHIBIT 3 LEGAL NONCONFORMING STANDARDS Table 3-1 Zoning Code Standards - Nonconforming Uses & Structures Uses existing before effective date of zoning ordinance. Except as otherwise provided in this Title, uses of land, buildings or structures existing at the time of adoption of this Title or its predecessor ordinance may be continued although the particular use, or the building or structure, does not conform to the regulations specified by this Title for the district in which the particular building or structure is located or use is made. No nonconforming use may be extended to occupy a greater area of land, building or structure than is occupied at the time of the adoption of this Title Existing nonconforming structures--structural alterations. Structural alterations including enlargement and extensions of any building or structure existing at the date of the adoption of this Title, if nonconforming in either design or arrangement, may be permitted only if such alteration is in compliance with the regulations set forth in this Title for the district where the building or structure is located. Any alteration which exceeds two hundred square feet in floor area shall require architectural review. The city planner may approve such alteration in the R-1 and R-2 zones. Alterations in all other zones require the approval of the planning commission as provided for in Chapter Destroyed buildings. A nonconforming building verified to have been destroyed to the extent of more than fifty percent of its reasonable value at the time of its destruction by fire, explosion, or other casualty or Act of God, may be restored, reconstructed and used only in compliance with the regulations existing in the district wherein it is located. Provided, however, that any single family R-1 nonconforming use may be rebuilt on it original foundation by only the owneroccupant at that time of destruction within a period of one year from the time of destruction, regardless of the percentage of destruction. Table 3-2 Explanation Nonconforming Use & Nonconforming as to Design (Staff) The Zoning Code discusses basically two types of nonconformities: buildings and uses. In both cases these are often buildings or structures built prior to adoption of the local zoning code and/or existed when the site s zoning changed. One type is a nonconforming use the other type is nonconforming as to design. Legal Nonconforming Use: An example of a legal nonconforming use would be an existing single family residence located within an area zoned industrial. Per the zoning code residential uses are not a permitted use in an industrial zone. Thus the existing residence would be considered a legal nonconforming use. Legal Nonconforming as to Design: A building that is legal nonconforming as to design is typically a permitted use in that zoning designation; however, the design or specifications are inconsistent with the current zoning code. An example would be a single family residence built 3 feet from a side property line whereas the current zoning code regulations require a 5-foot setback. In such a case the proposed use is conforming and/or permitted by the zoning code; however, the design (setbacks) are inconsistent with the code requirements. Page 9 of 20
10 It is possible that you can have a legal nonconforming use that also does not meet the design standards of that zone. In both cases the intent is that the nonconformity become conforming over time. Thus, additions to legal nonconforming buildings are regulated. Page 10 of 20
11 EXHIBIT 4 RESOLUTION NO. PC-R PROJECT NO. P A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 110% ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 209 MONTECITO AVENUE; APN: WHEREAS, Irene and Greg Rigali the "Applicant" has submitted an application to the City of Pismo Beach for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for an approximately 110% addition to an existing legal nonconforming single family dwelling; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing on March 22, 2016 at which all interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the proposed addition to the existing single family residence and other associated improvements are exempt per CEQA Section NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pismo Beach, California as follows: The Planning Commission does hereby deny without prejudice the Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit subject to the findings indicated in Exhibit 4a. UPON MOTION of Commissioner seconded by Commissioner the foregoing Resolution is hereby approved and adopted the 22nd day of March, 2016, by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: APPROVED: ATTEST: Chairman Kathy Schwartz Administrative Secretary Page 11 of 20
12 Page 12 of 20
13 EXHIBIT 4a FINDINGS A. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) 1. The project consists of a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for a 1,475 square foot addition to an existing 1,336 square foot single family dwelling. 2. There proposed project does not create the potential for significant environmental impacts as a result of the construction of the proposed project. 3. The Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for the proposed additions is exempt under CEQA Section of the CEQA Guidelines, exempting additions in urban areas. B. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT: 1. The proposed project would allow for the continuation of a legal nonconforming side yard setback along the west property line and, as a result, will not be compatible with adjacent structures. 2. Although the architecture is compatible, the proposed project will not remedy a side yard setback that is not compatible or consistent with required setbacks within the immediate neighborhood. 3. The proposed development with related improvements is inconsistent with the General Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and General Plan Land Use category of Low Density Residential in that the project perpetuates a legal nonconforming side yard setback. 4. The proposed development with related improvements is incompatible with the nearby existing uses and is detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area of the proposed project in that the project perpetuates a legal nonconforming side yard setback. 5. The proposed development with related improvements is not in keeping with the character of the surrounding area composed of single family residential units and is inconsistent with the zoning of the project site. 6. The proposed project will affect the orderly development of the surrounding area allowing the applicant special privileges not afforded to other development in the area. 7. The proposed development with related improvements will impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the vicinity in that the project perpetuates a legal nonconforming side yard setback. 8. The height, bulk, and scale of the building is incompatible with the adjacent area Page 13 of 20
14 and with the view and other Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan considerations. Page 14 of 20
15 EXHIBIT 5 PROJECT PLANS - ELEVATIONS Page 15 of 20
16 Page 16 of 20
17 PROJECT PLANS FLOOR PLANS LOWER FLOOR Page 17 of 20
18 PROJECT PLANS FLOOR PLANS Page 18 of 20
19 UPPER FLOOR Page 19 of 20
20 Page 20 of 20
CITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT October 9, 2018 Honorable Chair and Planning Commission City of Pismo Beach California RECOMMENDATION: 1) Approve the revocation of Coastal Development
More informationPISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: 1101 & 1161 Price; Rick and Terri Gambril and Tai Martin, Applicant: Project No. P14-000162. Application for a Coastal Development Permit and a Tentative
More informationCity of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report
City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report TO: Zoning Administrator FROM: Reviewed by: Sergio Klotz, AICP, Assistant Development Services DirctJ. o ~ Prepared by: Laura Stokes, Housing Coordinator I Assistant
More informationTERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
gmc MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: BY: PLANNING COMMISSION TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SAM ANDERSON, PLANNING TECHNICIAN SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 17-002; LOCATION 570 LEMON
More informationCITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT November 13, 2018 Honorable Chair and Planning Commission City of Pismo Beach California RECOMMENDATION: 1) Approve the revocation of Coastal Development
More informationMEMORANDUM. TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
MEMORAND MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: BY: PLANNING COMMISSION TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MATTHEW DOWNING, PLANNING MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 17-005; LOCATION
More informationBRUCE BUCKINGHAM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JANET REESE, PLANNER II
CITY OF GROVER BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: February 15, 2011 ITEM #:-,,3,--_ FROM: BRUCE BUCKINGHAM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JANET REESE, PLANNER II SUBJECT: Consideration of an
More informationStenberg Annexation Legal Diagram Exhibit "B" W Subject Property Annexed to the City of Red Bluff VICINITY MAP "1:3:
Stenberg Annexation Legal Diagram Exhibit "B" W Subject Property Annexed to the City of Red Bluff VICINITY MAP "1:3: ORDINANCE NO. 991 REZONE NO. 210 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25.13 OF THE RED BLUFF
More informationNOTICE OF A REGULAR MEETING
NOTICE OF A REGULAR MEETING Pursuant to Section 54954.2 of the Government Code of the State of California, a Regular meeting of the City of Tracy Planning Commission is hereby called for: Date/Time: Wednesday,
More informationPLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT June 18, 2015
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT June 18, 2015 AGENDA ITEM 7.B. PL15-0052 PM, GASSER
More informationCommunity Development Department City of Pismo Beach 760 Mattie Road Pismo Beach, CA Telephone: (805) / Fax: (805)
Community Development Department City of Pismo Beach 760 Mattie Road Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Telephone: (805) 773-4658 / Fax: (805) 773-4684 Address: APN: Area P Development Standards PISMO HEIGHTS PLANNING
More informationCommunity Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA (707)
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT May 7, 2015 AGENDA ITEM# 6.A. PL15-0041 UNIVERSAL
More informationPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT. 17-CA-02 Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance. Jon Biggs, Community Development Director
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: May 3, 2018 Subject: Prepared by: Initiated by: 17-CA-02 Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Jon Biggs, Community Development Director City Council Attachments:
More informationARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA
ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA County Board Agenda Item Meeting of February 12, 2005 DATE: February 8, 2005 SUBJECT: Request to Advertise public hearings on the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment to Section
More information- CITY OF CLOVIS - REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA ITEM NO: X-A - CITY OF CLOVIS - REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: FROM: Clovis Planning Commission Planning and Development Services DATE: March 22, 2018 SUBJECT: Consider Approval Res. 18-,
More informationCommunity Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA (707)
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 7, 2016 AGENDA ITEM #6.C. PL16-0038 HEXA PERSONAL
More informationCITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT. Marisa Lundstedt, Director of Community Development
CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: Planning Commission Marisa Lundstedt, Director of Community Development THROUGH: Laurie B. Jester, Planning Manager BY: Ted
More informationPlanning Commission Report
cjly City of Beverly Hills Planning Division 455 N. Rexford Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 TEL. (310) 285-1141 FAX. (370) 858-5966 Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: April 28, 2016 Subject: Project
More informationItem 10C 1 of 69
MEETING DATE: August 17, 2016 PREPARED BY: Diane S. Langager, Principal Planner ACTING DEPT. DIRECTOR: Manjeet Ranu, AICP DEPARTMENT: Planning & Building CITY MANAGER: Karen P. Brust SUBJECT: Public Hearing
More informationLEMOORE PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting AGENDA Lemoore Council Chamber 429 C Street. May 14, :00 p.m.
LEMOORE PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting AGENDA Lemoore Council Chamber 429 C Street May 14, 2018 7:00 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Call to Order and Roll Call 3. Public Comment This time is reserved
More informationMONTEREY COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
MONTEREY COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR Meeting: June 28, 2007 Time: 1:45pm Agenda Item No.: 4 Project Description: Combined Development Permit including after-the-fact permits to allow a 138 square foot
More informationORDINANCE NUMBER WHEREAS, the regulation of development in single-family residential districts is within the police powers of the City; and,
ORDINANCE NUMBER 1161 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PERRIS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS 05-0059 AND 05-0060 AMENDING CHAPTER 19 OF THE PERRIS
More informationRESOLUTION NO: PC-R
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Pismo Beach Approving Amendment #1 to the Chapman Estate Conditional Use Permit for events at the Chapman Estate and authorizing a Coastal Development
More informationCommunity Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA (707)
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 6, 2015 AGENDA ITEM 6.A. 15-0109-UP; QVMC
More informationRESOLUTION PC NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Duarte resolves as follows:
RESOLUTION PC 18-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUARTE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-02, FOR THE USE AND OPERATION OF A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY FOR VERIZON WIRELESS,
More informationCITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT. Marisa Lundstedt, Director of Community Development
CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: Planning Commission Marisa Lundstedt, Director of Community Development THROUGH: Laurie B. Jester, Planning Manager BY: Ted
More informationRESOLUTION NO. B. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and
RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL REZONING TO MODIFY THE EXISTING POLICY STATEMENT AND ADOPT THE BAY VILLAGE HOMES DEVELOPMENT
More informationCOUNTY OF SONOMA PERMIT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA (707) FAX (707)
COUNTY OF SONOMA PERMIT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA 95403 (707) 565-1900 FAX (707) 565-1103 DATE: TO: FROM: December 15, 2009 at 2:05 p.m. Board of Supervisors
More informationRESOLUTION NO. PC
RESOLUTION NO. PC 17-1235 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WEST HOLLYWOOD, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONE TET AMENDMENT AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 19, WEST HOLLYWOOD
More informationCommunity Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA Napa (707)
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 Napa (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JUNE 2, 2016 AGENDA ITEM #7.E. VR16-0040 18
More informationCITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT DATE: October 27, 2015 TO: FROM: HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Jan Di Leo, Planner (805) 773-7088 jdileo@pismobeach.org APPLICATION:
More informationPLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: November 9, 2016 FROM: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: Bruce Buckingham, Community Development Director Bruce Buckingham, Community Development Director
More informationPlanning Commission Staff Report
Planning Commission Staff Report Project: Summary Vacation of a Drainage Easement for a Drainage Canal or Ditch over the Apple Computer Inc. Campus Property Finding of Consistency with the General Plan
More informationDATE: September 18, 2014 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Douglas Spondello, Associate Planner
DATE: September 18, 2014 TO: FROM: Planning Commission Douglas Spondello, Associate Planner Thank you for the feedback provided at the June 19, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. Staff has revised the proposed
More informationRESOLUTION NO. PC 18-14
RESOLUTION NO. PC 18-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUARTE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 18-02, FOR THE USE AND OPERATION OF AN INDOOR PLAY SPACE, LOCATED AT 1040 HUNTINGTON
More informationCommunity Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA (707)
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MARCH 3, 2016 AGENDA ITEM # 7.B. File No. 15-0158
More informationORDINANCE NO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County
More informationAGENDA CITY OF EL MONTE MODIFICATION COMMITTEE TUESDAY OCTOBER 23, :00 P.M. CITY HALL WEST CONFERENCE ROOM A VALLEY BOULEVARD
AGENDA CITY OF EL MONTE MODIFICATION COMMITTEE TUESDAY OCTOBER 23, 2018 CITY OF EL MONTE MODIFICATION COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON AMY WONG CITY PLANNER JASON C. MIKAELIAN CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL TODD MORRIS
More informationCITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.2 CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: A public hearing to consider a Specific Plan Amendment to the Laguna Ridge Specific Plan and a Rezone of approximately 4.14
More informationROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Dees, Erickson, Morris, Sandhu, Rodriguez
AGENDA REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 380 CIVIC DRIVE, GALT THURSDAY, MARCH 14, 2013, 6:30 P.M. NOTE: Speaker Request Sheets are provided inside the Council Chambers. If you wish
More informationAGENDA COMMITTEE OPENING OF. use. given the. by staff. CHAIRPERSON DALLAS BAKER CITY PLANNER OFFICIAL TODD MORRIS CHIEF BUILDING
AGENDA CITY OF EL MONTE MODIFICATION COMMITTEE CITY OF EL MONTE MODIFICATION COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON DALLAS BAKER PLANNING COMMISSION CITY PLANNER JASON C. MIKAELIAN CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL TODD MORRIS TUESDAY,
More informationCITY OF APALACHICOLA ORDINANCE
CITY OF APALACHICOLA ORDINANCE 2017-05 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 91-7 WHICH ADOPTS THE CITY OF APALACHICOLA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISING SECTION II (DEFINITIONS) RELATING TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES,
More informationARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA
ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA Board of Zoning Appeals Agenda Item V-11250-17-UP-2: Meeting of April 19, 2017 DATE: April 14, 2017 APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: LOT AREA: GLUP DESIGNATION: Robert and Tania
More informationORDINANCE NO BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHARDSON, TEXAS:
ORDINANCE NO. 3719 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RICHARDSON, TEXAS AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RICHARDSON, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, ADDING ARTICLE XXII-G TO ESTABLISH A NEIGHBORHOOD
More informationP.C. RESOLUTION NO
EXHIBIT A P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2012-523 REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. DEV-007-003 (APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 28, 2009) TO CONSTRUCT A 25 -HIGH, 500 SQUARE- FOOT, SECOND-FLOOR
More information1069 regarding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) were signed into law; and
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING TITLE 16 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW AND ADDITIONALLY ROOFTOP
More informationCHAPTER 21 Nonconforming Lots, Structures and Uses
CHAPTER 21 Nonconforming Lots, Structures and Uses Section 21.1 Description and Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to regulate nonconforming uses, structures, and lots as follows: A. The zoning districts
More informationCommunity Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA (707)
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT APRIL 5, 2018 AGENDA ITEM 7.A File No. PL18-0009
More informationMEMORANDUM CITY COUNCIL TERESA MCCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ROBIN DICKERSON, CITY ENGINEER
MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: BY: CITY COUNCIL TERESA MCCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ROBIN DICKERSON, CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS ACCEPTING EASEMENTS AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS;
More informationROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM JEFF ALLRED CITY MANAGER DATE JUNE 9 2015 6 SUBJECT MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT 15 02 AMENDING CHAPTERS 17 04 AND 17 72 OF TITLE
More informationChapter DENSITY AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS
Chapter 19.52 DENSITY AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS Sections: 19.52.010 Lot coverage Requirements generally. 19.52.020 Measurement of lot coverage. 19.52.030 Lot coverage R-15 zone. 19.52.040 Lot coverage
More informationChair Brittingham, Vice-Chair Barron, Commissioner Hurt, Commissioner Keith, Commissioner LaRock
City of Calimesa REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Monday, February 12, 2018 6:00 P.M. Norton Younglove Multi-Purpose Senior Center 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320 In compliance with
More informationCITY OF PALMDALE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO. CC
CITY OF PALMDALE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO. CC 2011-118 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL
More informationPISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT/TITLE: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 2427; SUNSET BEACH ESTATES BY RESOLUTION RECOMMENDATION: Approval by roll call vote
More informationCITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 7, 2018 FROM: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: Matthew Bronson, City Manager A. Rafael Castillo, AICP, Senior Planner Cassandra Mesa, Building
More informationSTAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 6,
STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 6, 2016 PREPARED BY: AGENDA ITEM & FILE NUMBER: PROJECT SIZE & LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: OWNER/APPLICANT: Jeff Zilm, Senior Planner jzilm@brentwoodca.gov
More informationCITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT. Richard Thompson, Director of Community Development
CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: BY: Planning Commission Richard Thompson, Director of Community Development Eric Haaland AICP, Associate Planner DATE: February
More informationARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA
ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA Board of Zoning Appeals Agenda Item V-11354-18-VA-2: Meeting of April 16, 2018 DATE: April 13, 2018 APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: LOT AREA: GLUP DESIGNATION: Roger Ramia of Rush
More informationRESOLUTION NO CITY OF MAPLE GROVE
RESOLUTION NO. 18-122 CITY OF MAPLE GROVE RESOLUTION GRANTING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT STAGE PLAN, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLAN, AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR TERRITORIAL GREENS
More informationNOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIGNAL HILL, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIGNAL HILL, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 08-06, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION
More informationBEVERLY HILLS AGENDA REPORT
BEVERLY HILLS Meeting Date: June 8, 2015 Item Number: i To: From: Subject: AGENDA REPORT Honorable Mayor & City Council Susan Healy Keene, AICP, Director of Community Development Ryan Gohlich, Assistant
More informationCITY OF LOS ALTOS CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 9, 2015
CITY OF LOS ALTOS CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 9, 2015 CONSENT CALENDAR Agenda Item # 4 SUBJECT: Adopt Ordinance No. 2015-408, amending the zoning code to allow emergency shelters as a permitted use in the
More informationCITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 CITY OF HAWTHORNE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL For the meeting of: February 23, 2016 Originating Department: Planning Department Head: Gregg McClain City Manager: Arnold Shadbehr SUBJECT:
More informationTOWN OF SAN ANSELMO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT. For the meeting of January 11, Agenda Item 6C. Zone X (Minimal Flood Hazard Area)
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT For the meeting of January 11, 2016 Agenda Item 6C Owner/Applicant: Daniel and Jacqueline Olson Project Address: 321 Greenfield Avenue Assessor s Parcel
More informationPlanning Commission Report
Beverly Hills Planning Division 455 N. Rexford Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 TEL. (310) 285-1141 FAX. (310) 858-5966 Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: August 12, 2013 Subject: 1184 Loma Linda Drive
More informationRESOLUTION NO WHEREAS, an airport land use report was subsequently prepared by Johnson Aviation for the City of Perris; and
RESOLUTION NO. 4202 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PERRIS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, OVERRULING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION (ALUC) FINDING OF INCONSISTENCY
More informationARTICLE III NONCONFORMITIES
ARTICLE III NONCONFORMITIES 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Article is to establish regulations and limitations on the continued existence of uses, buildings, platted lots or structures established prior
More informationARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA
ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA Board of Zoning Appeals Agenda Item V-11185-16-UP-1: Meeting of October 12, 2016 DATE: October 7, 2016 APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: LOT AREA: GLUP DESIGNATION: Elizabeth Taylor
More informationCOUNTY OF SONOMA PERMIT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA (707) FAX (707)
COUNTY OF SONOMA PERMIT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA 95403 (707) 565-1900 FAX (707) 565-1103 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: December 15, 2009 at 2:05 p.m. Board of Supervisors
More informationCITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Mission Statement We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NO. 12 Meeting Date: February 14,
More informationCommunity Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA Napa (707)
Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA 94559-0660 Napa (707) 257-9530 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JUNE 16, 2016 AGENDA ITEM # 6.B. 16-0056-EXT;
More informationNONCONFORMING LOTS, STRUCTURES, AND USES.
ARTICLE 7. NONCONFORMING LOTS, STRUCTURES, AND USES. Sec. 25-7.1. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide regulations for nonconforming lots, structures, and uses. These regulations are necessary
More informationChapter 15: Non-Conformities
Chapter 15: Non-Conformities Section 15.1 Purpose... 15-2 Section 15.2 Non-Conforming Vacant Lots... 15-2 Section 15.3 Non-Conforming Buildings or Structures... 15-3 Section 15.4 Non-Conforming Uses...
More informationMINNETONKA PLANNING COMMISSION October 26, Rear yard setback variance for a deck expansion at 5732 Kipling Avenue
MINNETONKA PLANNING COMMISSION October 26, 2017 Brief Description Rear yard setback variance for a deck expansion at 5732 Kipling Avenue Recommendation Adopt the resolution approving the variance Background
More informationCITY OF RIO VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: January10, 2018 CITY OF RIO VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM #4.2 PREPARED BY: Lamont Thompson, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2017-001: To consider
More informationCOUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for Transitional and Supportive Housing Ordinance Amendments 1.0 REQUEST
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for Transitional and Supportive Housing Ordinance Amendments Hearing Date: May 3, 2017 Staff Report Date: April 25, 2017 Case Nos.: 17ORD-00000-00002 and 17ORD-00000-00003
More informationTOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS January 11, 2018 Staff Report to the Planning Commission
ITEM #3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Staff Report to the Planning Commission SUBJECT: FROM: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS FOR A NEW 2,831 SQUARE FOOT, TWO
More informationMINNETONKA PLANNING COMMISSION September 6, 2018
MINNETONKA PLANNING COMMISSION September 6, 2018 Brief Description Resolution approving an aggregate side yard setback variance for a garage and living space addition at 4660 Caribou Drive. Recommendation
More informationORDINANCE NO
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING CHAPTER 24.08, PART 10 HISTORIC ALTERATION PERMIT, CHAPTER 24.12, PART 5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION, CHAPTER 24.12 COMMUNITY DESIGN, CHAPTER 24.16 AFFORDABLE
More informationBoard of Adjustment File No.: VAR February 24, 2014 Page 2 of 7 VICINITY MAP ATTACHMENTS
Board of Adjustment File No.: VAR2014 0004 February 24, 2014 Page 2 of 7 VICINITY MAP ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Variance application Attachment B: As-built Attachment C: 1999 Plat Attachment D: Front of
More informationORDINANCE NO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO. 04768 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA * * * * * * AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22.5 (SECOND UNIT ORDINANCE) OF DIVISION VI, PART ONE (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF
More informationARTICLE 4.00 NONCONFORMITIES
Section 4.01 -- INTENT ARTICLE 4.00 NONCONFORMITIES Nonconformities are uses, structures, buildings, or lots which do not conform to one or more provisions or requirements of this Ordinance or a subsequent
More informationARTICLE VII. NONCONFORMITIES. Section 700. Purpose.
ARTICLE VII. NONCONFORMITIES. Section 700. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate and limit the development and continued existence of legal uses, structures, lots, and signs established either
More informationMINOR SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COUNTY OF MONTEREY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO A.P. #
In the matter of the application of Steven and Elvia Goldberg (PLN040113) MINOR SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COUNTY OF MONTEREY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO. 04009 MINOR SUBDIVISION # 040113 A.P. # 008-392-001-000
More informationJONES PROPERTY, INC. PROJECT 8918 Elmwood Ave. Springfield, OH
Project Number: 7201700000 Report Date: March 2, 2017 JONES PROPERTY, INC. PROJECT 8918 Elmwood Ave. Springfield, OH Prepared For: Client Prepared By: Bock & Clark Zoning 3000 S. Berry Rd., Ste. 150 Norman,
More informationItem # 17. Page 1 of 4. Bill No NYE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO.
Item # 17 Bill No. 2017-10 NYE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. SUMMARY: A Bill proposing amend Nye County Code Title 17, Comprehensive Land Use Planning and Zoning Regulations within the Pahrump Regional Planning
More informationCity of Imperial Planning Commission and Traffic Commission
Staff Report Agenda Item No. D-1 To: From: City of Imperial Planning Commission and Traffic Commission Lisa Tylenda, Planner Date: September 21, 2017 Subject: Variance #V1702 Advertisement signs & flags
More information7.20 Article 7.20 Nonconformities
Article Nonconformities.01 Intent It is the intent of this ordinance to permit legal nonconforming lots, structures, or uses to continue until they are removed but not to encourage their survival. For
More informationNOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGVILLE, UTAH... JANUARY 23, 2018
NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGVILLE, UTAH............................ JANUARY 23, 2018 Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission will hold a public meeting
More informationRoll Call - Chair: Carla Hansen; Commissioners: Brendan Bloom, Kevin Colin, Michael Iswalt, Andrea Lucas, Leslie Mendez and Lisa Motoyama.
AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Community Development Department 7:30 p.m. Wednesday, April 19, 2017 El Cerrito City Hall Council Chambers 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito This Meeting
More informationPLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO
Exhibit A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014-566 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CALABASAS RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF FILE NO. 140000288, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
More informationCommunity Development
Community Development STAFF REPORT Planning Commission Meeting Date: 12/5/2016 Staff Report Number: 16-101-PC Public Hearing: Consider Zoning Ordinance Amendments Relating to Secondary Dwelling Units Recommendation
More informationCOUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: October 20, 2016 TO: FROM: Zoning Hearing Officer Planning Staff SUBJECT: Consideration of a Non-Conforming Use Permit, pursuant to Sections 6135
More informationPLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ALBANY, COUNTY
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 0-0 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ALBANY, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO CREATE A PARCEL AT
More information2. Specify the limited conditions and circumstances under which nonconformities shall be permitted to continue.
ARTICLE 22 NONCONFORMITIES Section 22.01 Intent and Purpose. It is recognized that there exists within the districts established by this Ordinance lots, structures, sites and uses which were lawful prior
More informationPLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
106 William Avenue PC Meeting: 8/26/14 Agenda Item: 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: August 26, 2014 RE: DR/FAR 14-26, Geoffrey Butler, Applicant; House Properties 77 LLP, Property Owner; 106 William
More informationCITY OF WILDOMAR PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item #2.1 PUBLIC HEARING Meeting Date: June 6, 2018
CITY OF WILDOMAR PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item #2.1 PUBLIC HEARING Meeting Date: June 6, 2018 TO: FROM: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Alfredo Garcia, Associate Planner SUBJECT: WPS/Mission
More informationRESOLUTION NUMBER 4238
RESOLUTION NUMBER 4238 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PERRIS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING: (1) TENTATIVE MAP AND STREET VACATION 05-0112 (COUNTY MAP NO. 33587)
More informationCOUNTY OF SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA ZONING ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA ZONING ADMINISTRATOR REPORT For the Agenda of: May 4, 2016 To: From: Subject: Supervisorial District(s): Zoning Administrator Department of Community Development PLNP2015-00222.
More informationZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MANSFIELD RESOLUTION NO CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF SHARON IRICK VARIANCE APPROVAL
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MANSFIELD RESOLUTION NO. 2017 01-04 CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF SHARON IRICK VARIANCE APPROVAL WHEREAS, Sharon Irick has applied to the Zoning Board of Adjustment
More information