HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso 93-02 PA92-083 DENIED Enea Properties TPMRESOLUTION NO. 93 - 002
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DENYING PA 92-083 ENEA PROPERTIES TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 6344 AND
VARIANCE APPLICATION AT 6670-6690 AMADOR PLAZA ROAD
WHEREAS, Robert Enea, on behalf of Enea Properties has submitted
an application for Tentative Parcel Map 6344 to divide an existing,
improved 3.41± acre parcel into three separate parcels (Lot A=.96
Acres, Lot B=l.21 Acres, Lot C=1.24 Acres) and a Variance request to
allow two of the new parcels (Parcels B and C) to have substandard
effective lot frontages; and
WHEREAS, the State of California Subdivision Map Act and the
adopted City of Dublin Subdivision Regulations require that no real
property may be divided into two or more parcels for purpose of sale,
lease or financing unless a tentative map is acted upon, and a final
map or Parcel Map is approved consistent with the Subdivision Map Act
and City of Dublin subdivision regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said
application on February 1, 1993; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and it
was found that CEQA does not apply to this project pursuant to Section
15270 of the State CEQA guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the
Tentative Parcel Map 6344 and the Variance be denied; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said
reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find that:
1. Tentative Parcel Map 6344 is not consistent with Article 3,
Section 8-3.4 of the City of Dublin Subdivision Ordinance,
which state~ that Lot~ ~hall be d~ign~d to m~t or ~xce~d
the minimum standard for area, median lot width and effective
lot frontage specified for the City of Dublin Zoning
Ordinance for the zoning district in which the subdivision is
located.
Tentative Parcel Map 6344 is not consistent with Article 2,
Section 8-2.6 of the City of Dublin Subdivision Ordinance,
which states that no Tentative Map shall be approved which is
not in conformance with the provisions of this Chapter, the
City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance and any other Ordinance of
the City of Dublin.
There is not sufficient evidence to justify the granting of a
Variance.
There are no special circumstances including size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, applicable to the
property which deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity under the identical zoning
classifications. The fact that the existing parcel cannot be
subdivided in conformance with the provisions of the city's
Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances is not the result of an
existing physical hardship inherent with the land, which is
depriving the property owner of any privileges. It is due to
the fact that the property was originally built and intended
to function as one integrated office complex.
The granting of the application may constitute a grant of
special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon
other properties in the vicinity and zone. Approval of
Tentative Parcel Map 6344, along with the Variance request,
may set an undesirable precedent for the development of the
adjacent, vacant parcel which fronts on the east side of the
bulb along Amador Plaza Road, which is owned by the
Applicant.
The granting of the application may be detrimental to persons
or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare.
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 6344, along with the
Variance, may create potential conflicts for future
businesses arising from the shared use of this site.
NOW, ~EREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED T~AT T~E Dublin Planning
Commission does hereby deny PA 92-083 Tentative Parcel Map 6344 and
Variance application.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of February, 1993.
AYES: Commissioners Burnham, North, Rafanelli and Zika
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Barnes
ATTEST:
Planning Dir~tor
'~'Pi anni?~.~ Comml ss ~ ' Chairperson
- 2 -