Case Number:
A-17-114
Applicant:
Laura Jones
Owner:
Laura Jones
Council District:
10
Location:
3131 Thousand Oaks
Legal Description:
Lot 15, NCB 13740
Zoning:
"C-2 AHOD" Commercial Airport Hazard Overlay District
Case Manager:
Shepard Beamon, Senior Planner
Request
A request for a variance from the fencing requirement for commercial uses adjacent to single-family residential uses to eliminate the requirement for a fence along the rear property line, as described in Section 35-514(d)(1).
Executive Summary
The subject property is currently a CrossFit facility. As the property is not screened along the rear property line, the activities that take place at the CrossFit center are highly visible from the residential properties. According to the UDC, all property zoned for nonresidential uses shall erect and maintain solid screen (opaque) fencing along the property boundaries adjacent to an existing single-family residential use. The definition of adjacent in the UDC 35-A101 is: Two (2) properties, lots or parcels are "adjacent" where they abut, or where they are nearby and are separated by a dissimilar type of manmade or geologic feature including but not limited to a roadway or street, right-of-way, or railroad line, or any stream, river, canal, lake, or other body of water. Adjacent may or may not imply contact but always implies absence of anything of the same kind in between; to physically touch or border upon, or to share a common property line or border. Includes properties or uses that are separated by a drive, street, or other public-dedicated right-of-way. The owner states that a fence should not be required as there is adequate separation between the commercial and residential uses and that there are similar businesses that also do not have the rear yard screening. The owner of the subject property obtained approval of a certificate of occupancy two years ago, and was not informed that a fence would be required during the permitting process. The landscape r...
Click here for full text