Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 14-7461 - Denying Appeal of a Variance (PLN-12-00261) Requesting to Deviate from DMC Section 9312.08(A) in order to Encroach Into the Required 20-Ft. Rear Yard Setback, thereby allowing the Main Structure to be Built to the Property Line AtRESOLUTION NO. 14-7461 A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF A VARIANCE (PLN-12-00261) REQUESTING TO DEVIATE FROM DOWNEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9312.08(A) IN ORDER TO ENCROACH INTO THE REQUIRED 20-FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK, THEREBY ALLOWING THE MAIN STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT TO THE PROPERTY LINE AT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7215 BAIRNSDALE STREET (AIN: 6366-031-002) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS : SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Downey does hereby find, determine and declare that: A On October 17, 2012, the applicant, Alberto Montalvan, on behalf of owners Mr. and Mrs. Elias, submitted an application for PLN-12-00261 (Variance) – A request to deviate from Downey Municipal Code Section 9312.08(a) in order to encroach into the required 20-foot rear yard setback to allow the main structure to be built to the property line on property located at 7215 Bairnsdale Street, zoned R-1 6,000 (Single Family Residential); and, B.On April 18, 2013 notice of the pending public hearing was published in the Downey Patriot and notice was sent to all property owners within 500’ of the subject site; and, C.The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on May 1, 2013 and after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing adopted Resolution 13-2823 denying PLN-12-00261 (Variance); and, D On May 10, 2013 the owners, Mr. and Mrs. Marco Elias, submitted an appeal to the Planning Commission’s denial of PLN-12-00261 (Variance); and E On June 13, 2013 notice of the pending public hearing was published in the Downey Patriot and notice was sent to all property owners within 500’ of the subject site; F.The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on June 25, 2013 and after fully considering all oral and written testimony, facts and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing continued the item; G On September 13, 2013 notice of the pending public hearing was published in the Downey Patriot and notice was sent to all property owners within 500’ of the subject site; H The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on September 24, 2013 and after fully considering all oral and written testimony, facts and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing continued the item; RESOLUTION NO. 14-7461 PAGE 2 I On January 2, 2013 notice of the pending public hearing was published in the Downey Patriot and notice was sent to all property owners within 500’ of the subject site; and J The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on January 14, 2014 and after fully considering all oral and written testimony, facts and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing adopted this resolution. SECTION 2. The City Council further finds, determines and declares the environmental impact of the proposed development has been reviewed and has been found to be in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Guideline Section No. 15305 (Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) SECTION 3. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said public hearings, the City Council further finds, determines and declares that f.That exceptional or extraordinary conditions or circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not generally applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same vicinity and zone. Exceptional or extraordinary conditions or circumstances do not exist at the subject site. The subject site meets most minimum requirements of the R-1 6,000 (Single Family Residential) zone, with exception of the minimum lot size. The subject lot was created in 1959 and met the standards of the time, and although it does not meet the minimum square footage requirements for a new lot today, the existing property does conform to the average lot size and pattern of adjacent properties. In addition, the existing dwelling was developed lawfully through a building permit issued March 18, 1959 with subsequent lawful additions permitted via building permit No. 82-2121 and No. 08-381. There are no physical conditions that are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved, which are generally not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same vicinity or zone. The site or development is not unique in nature; as such, the applicant can feasibly comply with all current zoning standards 2 That the literal interpretation of the provisions of this article would deprive the applicant of rights under the terms of this article commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the property is located. As previously mentioned the subject site meets most minimum development requirements of the zone and as such, has enough area to meet the setback requirements of Section 9312.06 of Downey Municipal Code (DMC). The main dwelling on this property currently legally [non- conforming] encroaches into the required minimum 20-foot rear yard setback by 10 feet, and thus, is currently enjoying rights not commonly enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. As such, it is staff’s opinion that this finding cannot be made RESOLUTION NO. 14-7461 PAGE 3 3.That exceptional or extraordinary conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Approving this variance (PLN-12-00261) will allow the applicant to construct an attached, open patio cover over a deck that includes a barbeque area and counter space abutting the rear property line leaving no setback. Approval of the variance will result in a special circumstance as a result of the action of the applicant since the required minimum rear yard setback from the main dwelling to the rear yard property line is 20 feet 4.That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this chapter to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Approving this variance (PLN-12-00261) will confer on the applicant a special privilege since properties in the vicinity maintain similar zoning and uses to the subject property, yet are able to comply with the City’s development standards. 5.The granting of such variance will be in harmony and not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The subject site has a General Plan Land Use designation of “LDR'’ (Low Density Residential), which the Zoning Code implements through the residential property development standards described in Downey Municipal Code Section 9312.08 (a) – R-1 Zone Property Development Standards. Section 9312.02 of the Downey Municipal Code (Residential Zones) explains that the intent and purpose of the R-1 Zone regulations are to provide for the development of single-family residential areas. The provisions of the zone are intended to ensure that the residential character of such areas will be stabilized and maintained. Additionally, the zone encourages residential development that retains the scale of the existing residential neighborhood while facilitating adequate air, light, privacy and open space for each dwelling unit (DMC Section 9312.02 (a) (5) & (6)). Finally, granting the proposed variance would allow the applicant to alter the property in ways that do not comply with the Table 9.3.3 – R-1 Zone Property Development Standards of Section 9312.08 of the DMC for properties in residential zones, and thereby would not be in harmony with the General Plan of the City, 6.That the reasons set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. The applicant is requesting approval of the variance (PLN-12-00261 ) because the illegally constructed patio cover and deck do not conform to the provisions of Table 9.3.3 - R-1 Zone Property Development Standards of Section 9312.08 of the Downey Municipal Code. Consequently, the structure encroaches into the required minimum 20-foot rear yard setback. Additionally, Section 9410 of the DMC prohibits this use’s RESOLUTION NO. 14-7461 PAGE 4 alteration in a manner that increases the current legal, non-conforming 10-foot rear yard encroachment of the main dwelling into the required rear yard setback. Finally, Section 9204 of the DMC requires the discontinuance and removal of illegal buildings or structures. As such, the reasons set forth in the application do not justify the granting of the variance SECTION 4. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 through 3 of this Resolution, the City Council of the City of Downey hereby denies PLN-12-00261 (Variance) SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of JanLbal G IDaPa Mayor ATTEST: Ea=',kId:L,a„.u City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Downey at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of January 2014, by the following vote, to wit AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN Council Members: Brossmer, Saab, Marquez, Mayor Vasquez Council Member: Guerra Council Member: None Council Member: None FD-Rn–a:aFNizlaaT City Clerk