HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.PLN-12-00201 - 7328 DinwiddieSTAFF REPORT
DATE:
DECEMBER 5, 2012
TO:
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
BRIAN SAEKI, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
WILLIAM E. DAVIS, CITY PLANNER
SUBJECT: PLN-12-00201: (APPEAL OF A MINOR MODIFICATION) – AN APPEAL
OF THE CITY PLANNER’S DECISION TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A
MODIFICATION TO THE SIDE SETBACK AREA, TO PERMIT THE
EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING BU ILDING LINES FOR AN ADDITION
TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7328
DINWIDDIE STREET AND ZONED R1-5,000 (SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL)
CEQA
Staff has reviewed the proposed use in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Guidelines and determined that it is categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant
to Guideline Section No. 15305 (a) Class 5, (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations).
Categorical Exemptions are projects which have been determined not to have a significant
effect on the environment and have been exempted from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act. Exempt activities under Class 5 consist of minor alterations in
land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in
any changes in land use or density, including minor side yard and setback variances not
resulting in the creation of any new parcel. Staff feels that extending the building lines of an
existing single-family residence to accommodate a room addition with a 3’-6” side yard
setback, will not result in any changes in land use or density.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following titled resolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY
DENYING PLN-12-00201 - AN APPEAL OF THE CITY PLANNER’S DECISION TO
DENY A REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE SIDE SETBACK AREA, TO
PERMIT THE EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING LINES FOR AN ADDITION TO
A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDE NCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7328 DINWIDDIE
STREET AND ZONED R1-5,000 (S INGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)
CODE AUTHORITY
The City Planner denied the Applicant’s request for approval of an Administrative Permit
(PLN-12-00201) to allow a proposed room addition to maintain the 3’-6” building setback
PLANNING DIVISION
CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA
from the side property line, and thereby continue the existing building lines of a single-
family residence. Downey Municipal Code Section 9806.02 states that decisions of the City
Planner and other Administrative Officials of the City may be appealed to the Commission,
and the decisions of the Commission may be appealed to the Council. Also, Code Section
9814.06(f), which describes the Administrative permit process, provides that the applicant
may appeal the decision of the City Planner to the Planning Commission.
PROPERTY LOCATION
7328 Dinwiddie
BACKGROUND
On July 24, 2012, Sarbjit Singh, the Applicant and owner of the subject property (7328
Dinwiddie Street), submitted an Administrative Permit Application (PLN-12-00201)
requesting approval of a minor modification of the side setback area required for properties
in the R-1 5,000 (Single-Family Residential) zone. His proposal involved extending the
building lines of an existing residence for a room addition.
Mr., Singh submitted this application after the City’s Code Enforcement staff initiated legal
actions against him to abate numerous Code violations on the subject property, including:
an un-permitted 1,200 square foot addition to the main dwelling that was demised into
several rental units; an unpermitted addition at the rear of the garage and a portion of the
garage that was converted into habitable spac e; electrical and plumbing work performed
without permits; and paving a concrete slab on the rear yard without City approval or
permits.
In an effort to bring these substandard conditions into compliance with the City’s
development standards and the Building Code, Mr. Singh prepared plans and submitted
them to the Planning Department for review. Those plans proposed restoring the garage to
its original dimensions, constructing a guest house at the rear of the garage, and converting
the illegal units at the rear of the house into a 1,040 square foot room addition.
As proposed, the room addition, which is the subject of PLN-12-00201, would maintain all
but 165 square feet of the illegal structure; however, the distance from the side property line
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 2
to the side of the addition is only 3’-6”. This measurement does not comply with Section
9312.08 of the Downey Municipal Code, which requires a minimum side yard setback of
five feet (5’) for properties in the R-1 Zone. PLN-12-00201 is a request to allow the reduced
building setback for the addition to Mr. Singh’s house. This request is pursuant to Section
9814.04 of the Code, which allows the City Planner to render a decision on an
administrative permit, subject to specific findings and procedures. A minor modification to
the City’s development standards and Code requirements is among the types of
administrative permits the City Planner may consider. Section 9814.04 (a) (6) describes a
modification of the side yard setback as follows:
“(6) The modification of the setback area to permit the extension of existing
building lines for additions or minor building modifications for alignment
purposes, except that no modification shall reduce the required setback
closer than three (3) feet to a property line;”
ANALYSIS
The City Planner may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an Administrative Permit,
subject to the findings listed in Section 9814.08 of the Code. After considering the
Applicant’s Administrative Permit Application in light of those findings and in light of the
existing Building Code violations associated with this proposal, the City Planner determined
that:
1. The proposed activity or use will not be consistent with the objectives,
policies, and general land uses and programs specified in the City’s General
Plan.
The subject site is located within the R1-5,000 (Single-Family Residential)
zone and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of Low Density
Residential. Goal 1.4 Downey Vision 2025, the Downey General Plan seeks to
protect and enhance the residential neighborhoods and includes Policy 1.4.2, which
reads: Promote residential construction that compliments existing neighborhoods.
Programs designed to fulfill this policy seek to discourage residential construction not
in harmony with surrounding neighborhoods, encourage developments to consider
impacts to privacy, views, and sunlight on adjacent properties, and maintain the
single-family character of the low density residential areas. The plan to legalize the
addition by creating a single dwelling is consistent with the purpose and intent of the
R-1 zone, but the proposed addition is not consistent with the objectives and policies
of the General Plan because it was constructed illegally, it does not comply with the
Building Code, and because the architectural design of the addition does not match
the existing residence. Consequently, the r oom addition will not be in harmony with
homes in the surrounding neighborhood, nor will it enhance property values in the
neighborhood.
2. The proposed activity or use is not consistent with other provisions of this
article.
PLN-12-00201 proposes to legalize a multi-dwelling structure at the rear of
the main dwelling by converting the illegal units into a 1,040 square foot room
addition, while maintaining the existing three foot-six inch (3’-6”) side yard setback.
That distance is less than the Downey Zoning Code requires; however, Section
9814.04 (a)(6) of the Code allows for a modification of the setback area to permit the
extension of existing building lines for additions or minor building modifications for
alignment purposes, provided that no modification reduces the required setback
closer than three (3) feet to a property line. The addition PLN-12-00201 proposes is
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 3
consistent with this article of the Code but the proposal is not consistent with other
provisions of the Downey Municipal Code because it proposes to legalize structures
built before obtaining a building permit. This is in direct conflict with Downey
Municipal Code Section 8014 (Unpermitted Structures), which reads as follows:
“ No person shall own, use, occupy, or maintain an unpermitted
structure. For purposes of this Chapter, “unpermitted structure” shall be
defined as any building or structure, or portion thereof, that was erected,
constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, moved, improved, removed,
connected, converted, demolished, or equipped, at any pointing time by
any person, without the required permit(s) having first been obtained
from the Building Official or with a valid permit as issued by the Building
Official which subsequently expired and became null and void.”
The proposed activity or use will result in conditions or circumstances
3.
contrary to the public health, safety, and general welfare.
PLN-12-00201
proposes to extend the existing building line of the house and thereby maintain the
existing three foot-six inch (3’-6”) side yard setback for the room addition. The
proposed room addition (as well as the proposed guest house) will create a condition
or circumstance that is contrary to the general public health, safety, or welfare,
because both structures were constructed illegally and do not satisfy the health and
safety standards, nor the levels of structural integrity established by the Downey
Building Code. The City of Downey Building Official determined that both structures
must be demolished.
Through this analysis, staff determined that the proposed addition is not consistent with the
provisions of the Downey Zoning Code. Mr. Singh built the structure illegally; therefore, it
exists without the safeguards afforded by proper inspections of the foundation, framing,
electrical components, and structural integrity. The addition is detrimental to the public
health, safety, and general welfare. For these reasons, staff denied his request for approval
of an Administrative Permit (PLN-12-00201) to allow the proposed room addition to
continue the existing building lines of the main dwelling on the subject property, and
maintain the 3’-6” building setback from the side property line. The City Planner also
determined that any future proposals to expand the house shall meet the required five foot
side yard setback distance and comply with the Building Code.
APPEAL
In a letter dated August 14, 2012, the City Planner notified Mr. Singh of the decision to deny
PLN-12-00201. The denial letter also explained Mr. Singh’s right to appeal the City
Planner’s decision. Understandably, the City Planner’s pronouncement was contrary to Mr.
Singh’s desire to keep the illegal, multiple-unit structure and convert it into an addition to the
single-family dwelling, especially because the Building Official directed him to demolish the
illegal structures.
Section 9814.06 (f) of the Code describes the appeal process for administrative permits. It
reads:
“ Appeal . If the applicant is dissatisfied with the decision of the City Planner,
the applicant may appeal in writing to the Commission within fifteen (15)
days after the City Planner’s decision.”
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 4
On August 29, 2012, Mr. Singh submitted a timely letter to the City, requesting to appeal
the City Planner’s decision on his application to the Planning Commission. Upon receipt of
his letter, staff responded with a letter on August 30, 2012 advising Mr. Singh that the
Planning Commission would consider his appeal during a public hearing on October 3,
2012. However, in a letter dated September 4, 2012, Mr. Singh’s wife (Rapinder Kaur)
informed staff that he was out of the country and would not return until late November.
Hence, staff scheduled the public hearing on Mr. Singh’s appeal for December 5, 2012. Mr.
Singh’s appeal stays all proceedings on this matter, so long as the stay does not cause
imminent peril to life and property.
CONCLUSION
Based on the information contained in this report, staff believes that there is no evidence
that warrants overturning City Planner’s denial. The proposed addition is not consistent
with the provisions of the Downey Zoning Code and the unpermitted structures are
detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare. In addition to this concern, staff
has the following issues with Mr. Singh’s proposal:
1. It is conceivable that if the structure remains in its current location and 3’-6’ from the
side property line, Mr. Singh would convert it back into multiple units.
2. The existing single-family house is a nonconforming use, because the side yard
setback area is only 3’-6” wide, whereas, current development standards require
not less than five feet (5’). Section 9410.12 of the Code provides that a legal
nonconformity shall not be enlarged or extended beyond the area it occupies;
however, the Code allows the structure to be enlarged or extended under certain
provision. The pertinent condition found in Section 9410.12 (a) reads:
“All additions shall be constructed in a manner that is conforming to the
provisions of this article.”
Since the Code requires additions to nonconforming structures to comply with the
current development standards, the side yard building setback of the proposed
room addition must not be less than five feet (5’). The City Planner could not make
any of the findings necessary to approve the minor modification PLN-12-00201
advocates, which eliminates the opportunity for Mr. Singh to avoid this requirement.
3. The proposed plans do not eliminate the fact that Mr. Singh carried out significant
construction on the subject property illegally. Code enforcement staff is anxious to
see these issues resolved, and the Building Official wants Mr. Singh to demolish the
illegal structures. The appeal provides a stay of proc eedings and allows Mr. Singh
to delay the inevitable Code compliance.
As such, staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the
City Planner’s decision to deny PLN Case No. 12-00201.
ATTACHMENTS
Zoning Map
Site Photographs
August 14, 2012 Denial Letter
Letter of Appeal
Letter of Appeal Regardin g Date of Public Hearing
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 5
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
ZO NING MAP
Zoning Legend
R-1 Single-Famil y Residential
R-3 Multiple-Fam ily Residential
R-3-O Multiple-Family Residential Ownership
C1 Neighborhood Commercial
C-2 General Commercial
C-M Commercial Manufacturing
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 6
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
SITE PHOTOGRAPH
(EAST ELEVATION OF ILLEGAL ADDITION, SHOWING 3’-6” SIDE YARD SETBACK)
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 7
SITE PHOTOGRAPH (WEST ELEVATION OF ILLEGAL ADDITION)
SITE PHOTOGRAPH (INCONSISTENT ROOF DESIGN)
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 8
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal of Minor Modification) – 7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 9
RESOLUTION NO. 12-____
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DOWNEY DENYING PLN-12-00201 - AN APPEAL OF THE CITY
PLANNER’S DECISION TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION
TO THE SIDE SETBACK AREA, TO PERMIT THE EXTENSION OF
THE EXISTING BUILDING LINES FOR AN ADDITION TO A SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7328 DINWIDDIE
STREET AND ZONED R1-5,000 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
The Planning Commission of the City of Downey does hereby find,
determine and declare that:
1. Mr. Sarbjit Singh (hereinafter "Applicant") filed an Administrative Permit
Application requesting approval of a minor modification of the side setback area
required for properties in the R-1 5,000 (Single-Family Residential) zone, as set
forth in 9312.06 of the Downey Municipal Code.
2. The subject property is located at 7328 Dinwiddie Street.
3. May 22, 2012, the City of Downey Code Enforcement staff initiated legal actions
against the Applicant to abate numerous Code violations on the subject property,
including: an un-permitted 1,200 square foot addition to the main dwelling that
was demised into several rental units; an unpermitted addition at the rear of the
garage and a portion of the garage that was converted into habitable space;
electrical and plumbing work performed without permits; and paving a concrete
slab on the rear yard without City approval or permits.
4. In an effort to bring these substandard conditions into compliance with the City’s
development standards and the Building Code, Mr. Singh prepared plans that
proposed restoring the garage to its original dimensions, constructing a guest
house at the rear of the garage, and converting the illegal units at the rear of the
house into a 1,040 square foot room addition to the house on the subject
property.
5. The proposed “room addition” would maintain all but 165 square feet of the illegal
structure; however, the distance from the side property line to the side of the
addition is only 3’-6”, which does not comply with the minimum side yard setback
of five feet (5’) Section 9312.08 of the Downey Municipal Code requires a for
properties in the R-1 Zone.
6. On July 24, 2012, the Applicant submitted the Administrative Permit Application,
seeking the City Planner’s permission to extend the building lines of the existing
residence for the proposed room addition.
7. Section 9814.04 of the Downey Municipal Code allows the City Planner to render
a decision on an administrative permit, subject to specific findings and
procedures. A minor modification to the City’s development standards and Code
requirements is among the types of admin istrative permits the City Planner may
consider.
Resolution No.
Page 2
8. After considering the Applicant’s Administrative Permit Application in light of
those findings and in light of the existing Building Code violations associated with
this proposal, the City Planner determined that:
a. The proposed activity or use will not be consistent with the objectives,
policies, and general land uses and programs specified in the City’s
General Plan.
The subject site is located within the R1-5,000 (Single-Family
Residential) zone and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use
Designation of Low Density Residential. Goal 1.4 Downey Vision 2025, the
Downey General Plan seeks to protect and enhance the residential
neighborhoods and includes Policy 1.4.2, which reads: Promote residential
construction that compliments ex isting neighborhoods. Programs designed to
fulfill this policy seek to discourage residential construction not in harmony
with surrounding neighborhoods, encourage developments to consider
impacts to privacy, views, and sunlight on adjacent properties, and maintain
the single-family character of the low density residential areas. The plan to
legalize the addition by creating a single dwelling is consistent with the
purpose and intent of the R-1 zone, but the proposed addition is not
consistent with the objectives and policies of the General Plan because it was
constructed illegally, it does not comply with the Building Code, and because
the architectural design of the addition does not match the existing residence.
Consequently, the room addition will not be in harmony with homes in the
surrounding neighborhood, nor will it enhance property values in the
neighborhood.
b. The proposed activity or use is not consistent with other provisions of
this article.
PLN-12-00201 proposes to legalize a multi-dwelling structure at
the rear of the main dwelling by converting the illegal units into a 1,040
square foot room addition, while maintaining the existing three foot-six inch
(3’-6”) side yard setback. That distance is less than the Downey Zoning Code
requires; however, Section 9814.04 (a)(6) of the Code allows for a
modification of the setback area to pe rmit the extension of existing building
lines for additions or minor building modifications for alignment purposes,
provided that no modification reduces the required setback closer than three
(3) feet to a property line. The addition PLN-12-00201 proposes is consistent
with this article of the Code but the proposal is not consistent with other
provisions of the Downey Municipal Code because it proposes to legalize
structures built before obtaining a building permit. This is in direct conflict with
Downey Municipal Code Section 8014 (Unpermitted Structures), which reads
as follows:
“ No person shall own, use, occupy, or maintain an unpermitted
structure. For purposes of this Chapter, “unpermitted structure” shall
be defined as any building or structure, or portion thereof, that was
erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, moved, improved,
removed, connected, converted, demolished, or equipped, at any
pointing time by any person, without the required permit(s) having
first been obtained from the Building Official or with a valid permit as
issued by the Building Official which subsequently expired and
became null and void.”
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal – Minor Modification)
7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 2
Resolution No.
Page 3
c. The proposed activity or use will result in conditions or circumstances
contrary to the public health, safety, and general welfare.
PLN-12-00201
proposes to extend the existing building line of the house and thereby
maintain the existing three foot-six inch (3’-6”) side yard setback for the room
addition. The proposed room addition (as well as the proposed guest house)
will create a condition or circumstance that is contrary to the general public
health, safety, or welfare, because both structures were constructed illegally
and do not satisfy the health and safety standards, nor the levels of structural
integrity established by the Downey Building Code. The City of Downey
Building Official determined that both structures must be demolished.
9. Through this analysis, the City Planner determined that the proposed addition is
not consistent with the provisions of the Downey Zoning Code because the
Applicant built the structure illegally; therefore, it exists without the safeguards
afforded by proper inspections of the foundation, framing, electrical components,
and structural integrity. The addition is detrimental to the public health, safety,
and general welfare.
10. In a letter dated August 14, 2012, the City Planner denied PLN-12-00201 to allow
the proposed room addition to continue the existing building lines of the main
dwelling on the subject property, and maintain the 3’-6” building setback from the
side property line.
11. The City Planner also determined that any future proposals to expand the house
shall meet the required five foot side yard setback distance and comply with the
Building Code.
12. On August 29, 2012, Mr. Singh submitted a timely letter to the City, requesting to
appeal the City Planner’s decision on his application to the Planning
Commission.
13. The Planning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing on December 5,
2012, and, after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and
opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing, adopted Resolution No. 12 -____
denying the Applicant’s appeal of the City Planner’s decision to deny PLN-12-
00201.
SECTION 2.
The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED th is 5th day of December 2012.
Michael Murray, Chairman
City Planning Commission
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal – Minor Modification)
7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 3
Resolution No.
Page 4
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Downey at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15h day of
5th day of December, 2012, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
Theresa Donahue Secretary
City Planning Commission
H:\Community Development\Davis\c ases\Admin Permits\PLN-12-00201 ( 7328 Dinwiddie Minor Mod)\RESO.doc
PLN-12-00201 (Appeal – Minor Modification)
7328 Dinwiddie Street
December 5, 2012 - Page 4