PC R 92-13691 �7 �
RESOLUTION NO. 92-1369
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A
VARIANCE, CASE NO. 92-163, APPLIED FOR BY
DOLORES DANA AND PAUL J. RALPH AT 150 W.
BRANCH STREET, FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE
REQUIREMENT THAT A TIME EXTENSION BE FILED 30
DAYS PRIOR TO EXPIRATION OF A PERMIT OR
APPROVAL.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered
Variance Application No. 92-163, filed by Dolores Dana and Paul J. Ralph, for a variance from
the requiremerit that a time extension be filed 30 days prior to expiration of a permit or approval
at 150 W. Branch Street, in the Village Commercial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on this application in
accordance with the City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that this project is consistent with the
General Plan and the Environmental documents associated therewith; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed this project in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that a Negative Declaration
can be adopted, and instructs the Secretary to file a Notice of Determination; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation and public
hearing, the following circumstances exist:
1. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result
in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by others in the
surrounding area. Specifically, the project would be required to start over through the
permitting process. ,
2. 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 classified in the same zone. The applicant was aware of the procedure
for applying for a time extension under the old zoning ordinance and complied with that
procedure, however, the applicant was not aware that the Development Code had
changed the procedure.
3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would
deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties classified in the
same zone.
�
5.
The granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent
with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone.
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.
�
The granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and policies of the General
Plan and the intent of this title.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City
of Arroyo Grande hereby adopts a negative declaration, instructs the Secretary to file a Notice
of Determination; and approves said variance, subject to the following conditions:
Resolution No. 92-1369
Variance Case No. 92-163
April 7, 1992
Page 2
General Conditions
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all State, County and City requirements
as are applicable to this project.
2. This application shall automatically expire on November 7, 1992 unless a building permit
is issued and substantial construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward
completion, or a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Thirty (30) days prior to the
expiration of the approval, the applicant may apply to the Planning Commission for an
extension of one (1) year from the original date of expiration.
3. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the
Planning Commission at the meeting of November 7, 1989 and marked "Exhibit A".
4. The applicant shall agree to defend at his/her sole expense any action brought against the
City, its agents, officers, or employees because of the issuance of said approval, or in
the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its
agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fee's 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/her obligations
under this condition.
Planning Department Conditions
5. Development shall with all conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit Case No.
89-456.
On motion of Commissioner Souza, seconded by Commissioner Boggess, and on the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Moore, Souza, Boggess, Groves, Soto, Carr and
Chairman Brandy
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 7th day of April, 1992.
ATTEST:
ona Prelesnik, Commission Clerk
Drew Brandy, Chairman