HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - CC - 083-1975RESOLUTION NO. 83- 75
SUSTAINING DENIAL OF VARIANCE - JOHN
F. DEVINE
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame,
California that
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Ordinance
Code of the City of Burlingame a variance was applied for by
John F. Devine to allow the division of that lot located at
1348 DeSoto Avenue, Burlingame, into two lots, said variance being
to allow one lot to average less than fifty (50) feet in width;
and
WHEREAS, after due notice and hearing said variance
was denied by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame
on October 14, 1975, as more fully set forth in the minutes of
the meeting of that date; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of said Code, the
decision denying the variance was appealed to the City Council,
and after due notice a hearing was held thereon on November 17,
1975;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED, DETERMINED AND
I.FOUND that:
1. The variance application of John F. Devine to allow
division of that parcel located at 1348 DeSoto Avenue, Burlingame,
into two parcels, one of which would average less than fifty (50)
feet in width, was denied by the Planning Commission on October
14, 1975.
2. The denial of said variance by the Planning
Commission was appealed to the City Council as allowed by said
Code, and all proper notices and procedures were duly given and
followed.
-1-
11/1?/75
3. Based upon the evidence presented to the City
Council on November 17, 1975, the following findings are made:
(a) Lot dimensions and lot requirements of the R-1
District Regulations specify that lots must have an
average width of not less than fifty (50) feet, and lots
shall have an average area of not less than five thousand
(5,000) square feet. The proposal of the applicant would
create one lot averaging more than fifty (50) feet and a
second lot averaging forty-five and forty-four one -hundredths
(45.44) feet in width. Both lots as proposed would exceed
the five thousand (5,000) square foot minimal size.
(b) On August 28, 1972, a tentative parcel map was
approved which would allow the division of said property
into two equal fifty (50) foot lots, provided a portion of
the existing dwelling was removed. A building permit was
issued to Mr. Devine, but he determined not to perform
such work. The requested variance would not require
any alterations to the existing building.
(c) No evidence was presented concerning the design
or pattern of lots in the neighborhood. No substantial
evidence was presented of exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property
involved which do not apply generally to the property or
class of uses in the district. No substantial evidence
was presented that such a variance would be necessary for
the preservation or enjoyment of a property right of the
owner. No substantial evidence was presented concerning
the public health, safety or welfare, nor was any evidence
presented concerning the affects of such variance upon the
comprehensive zoning plan of the City.
-2-
4. On the basis of the evidence presented to this
Council at the hearing of November 17, 1975, it is concluded that:
(a) There are no exceptional or extraordinary circum-
stances applicable to the property involved.
(b) Such variance is not necessary for preservation
or enjoyment of a property right of the owner of the
property involved.
5. To approve said variance would grant said property
privileges not enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and
others under identical zoning classification, and said appeal
should therefore be denied and the Planning Commission's decision
should be sustained.
HERBERT K. WHITE, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,
does hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced
at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 1st day of
December, 1975, and adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Amstrup-Crosby-Cusick-Harrison-ilangini
NOES: COUNCILMEN None
COUNCILMEN: None
HERBERT K. WHITE, City Clerk
By �� /'�✓ %
D uty City Clerk
-3-