HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso 01-29 PA01-008 DENIED Variance Dublin Storage SDR RESOLUTION NO. 01 - 29
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DENYING A VARIANCE AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF TWO BUILDINGS WITHIN THE REQUIRED SETBACK FOR
PA 01-008 DUBLIN SECURITY STORAGE
WHEREAS, Glenn Kierstead, the Property Owner and Applicant, has requested approval of a
Variance and Site Development Review to allow construction within the rear yard setback area of two
storage unit buildings totaling approximately 10,000 square feet at Dublin Security Storage located at 6005
Scarlett Court; and
WHEREAS, a complete application for the above noted entitlement request is available and on file
in the Department of Community Development; and
WHEREAS, Applicant has submitted Project Plans dated received August 27, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the Project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines, under Section
15301(e)(2), Class 1, as the project is an addition to an existing facility where the net increase in area is no more
than 10,000 square feet and all services are available; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said project application on
November 27, 2001; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public heating was given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all
said reports, recommendations, and testimony heminabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission of the
City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed
Variance and Site Development Review:
1) There are no special circumstances applicable to the physical characteristics of the property that deprive
the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and the same zoning classification
2)
Approval of the variance would appear to be a grant of special privileges by allowing buildings to be
located in the required rear yard area while other properties in the vicinity have been required to meet
the zoning district building setbacks.
3) Approval of the variance would be inconsistent with recent project approvals in the Scarlett Court area.
4) Approval of the variance would be inconsistent with the General Plan Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the
land use designation and would result in further overbuilding of the site with minimal landscaping.
5) Approval of the Site Development Review for the project is not consistent with the General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance related to required setbacks, landscaping and intensity of development on the site.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby deny the said application.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of November, 2001.
AYES:
Cm. Johnson, Musser, Fasulkey and Nassar
NOES:
ABSENT:
Cm. Jennings
ATTEST:
Community Development Dil~ctor i/
Pla~nni~g~ission Chairperson