Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 15-7547-Denying PLN-14-00140 (Variance)RESOLUTION NO. 15 -7547 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DENYING PLN -14 -00140 (VARIANCE) — A REQUEST TO ALLOW A NON - PERMITTED 497 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO A SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE TO EXIST WITHIN THE REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13506 GUNDERSON AVENUE AND ZONED R -1 5,000 (SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) 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: James Alvarez (hereinafter "Appellant ") filed a Land Use Permit Application (hereinafter referred to as PLN -14- 00140) seeking the Planning Commission's approval of a variance from the development standards for single - family dwellings, to maintain a non - permitted 497 square foot addition to the rear of his home. The illegal structure places the main dwelling within the required rear yard setback area. 2. The subject property is located at 13506 Gunderson Avenue in Downey and it is zoned R -1 5,000 (Single - Family Residential). 3. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 6, 2014, and, after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing, adopted Resolution No. 14 -2885, denying PLN -14- 00140. 4 In a letter dated August 19, 2014, the Appellant filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's approval, along with a filing fee, requesting that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission's action. 5. The City Council opened a duly noticed public hearing on February 10, 2015, and after fully considering all oral and written testimony, facts, and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing denied the appeal, thereby upholding the Planning Commission's action. 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. 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities). SECTION 3. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said public hearing, the City Council further finds, determines and declares that: 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. The subject site is located on the east side of Gunderson Avenue, in an area that is west of Lakewood Boulevard and north of Rosecrans RESOLUTION NO.15 -7547 PAGE 2 Avenue. It covers 5,000 square feet of land with lot dimensions measuring fifty feet at the front property line with a depth of 100 feet. This lot is zoned R -1 5,000 and its General Plan land use designation is LDR (Low Density Residential). Prior to the illegal construction, the one- story, single - family dwelling comprised three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a kitchen and a living room within 1,144 square feet of floor area. The rear yard measured twenty -five feet in depth, which is greater than the twenty -foot minimum rear yard depth required by the Downey Municipal Code for properties in the single - family residential zone. The subject site borders the rear of a "Food 4 Less" store that is part of a 6.3 acre commercial development at 13535 Lakewood Boulevard. The rear of the store is only thirty -two feet (32') from the rear property line of the shopping center and a ten foot (10') high concrete block wall separates the shopping center from the residence. In 1999, the Planning Commission approved zoning changes that allowed construction of the commercial center. Those approvals involved a change of zoning on the property from R -1 (Single - Family Residential) and M -1 (Light Manufacturing) to C -2 (General Commercial), and a zone variance to allow the retail center with less than the required rear and side yard setbacks in the C -2 zone. The Code requires a 46 foot building setback for commercial properties that abut residential uses. Nevertheless, this condition is not unique and does not make the subject property extraordinarily different from other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The size and configuration of the subject property are sufficient to enlarge the house in a manner that is compliant with all of the City's development standards, including minimum rear yard setback for properties in the R -1 zone throughout the City. 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. Section 9312.08 of the Downey Municipal Code establishes that the minimum rear yard setback for properties in the R -1 5,000 zone is twenty feet (20'). The Appellant's request for approval of PLN -14 -00140 (Variance) would allow the Appellant to maintain a non - permitted addition to the rear of his home only 10' -5" from the rear property line. This distance is roughly half of the Code requirement. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the R -1 zone development standards would not deprive the Appellant of any rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, because other properties in the vicinity and zone were developed under the R -1 standards. 3. That exceptional or extraordinary conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Denial of the variance will not result in a special circumstance as a result of the action of the Appellant because the size and configuration of the subject property are sufficient to enlarge the house in a manner that is compliant with all of the City's development standards, including minimum rear yard setback for properties in the R -1 zone throughout the City. RESOLUTION NO.15 -7547 PAGE 3 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 PLN -14 -00140 will establish a precedent in the vicinity R -1 Zone because several properties nearby maintain lot areas and lot widths that are similar to the subject property, yet they were able to comply with the City's prevailing development standards. Granting the variance would also confer on the Appellant the privilege of having a structure in place prior to obtaining City Planning approvals and building permits, as Section 9208 of the Downey Municipal Code requires. 5. The granting of such variance will be in harmony and not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The subject site is located within the R -1 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. Section 9312.02 of the Code explains that the intent and purpose of the Residential Zone regulations are to facilitate the provision of adequate light, air, privacy, and open space for each dwelling unit. The plan to legalize the 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 it would allow the Appellant to alter the property in ways that do not comply with the residential property development standards described in Section 9312.02. 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 submitted a Land Use Permit Application (hereinafter referred to as PLN -14- 00140) seeking the Planning Commission's approval of a variance from the development standards for single - family dwellings to maintain a non - permitted 497 square foot addition to the rear of his home. The illegal structure places the main dwelling within the required rear yard setback area. Prior to this illegal addition, the house was twenty -five feet (25) from the rear property line. Now that distance measures only 10' -5 ", or roughly half of the Code requirement. The structure exists without Planning Department approvals or the benefits of inspections or permits by the Building and Safety Department. PLN -14 -00140 represents an attempt by the Appellant, to legalize the non - permitted, 497 square foot addition through the variance process. They prefer to maintain the building as it is configured even though the building encroaches into the required rear yard setback. He seeks to maintain the same rear setbacks as other homes in his neighborhood; however, this request does not justify the granting of a variance because the City issued building permits that authorized the construction of buildings on other properties on Gunderson Avenue that exist RESOLUTION NO.15 -7547 PAGE 4 within the required rear setback, thereby defining them as legal nonconforming uses. The Appellant's project is not a legal nonconforming use, and it does not comply with the City's development standards for residentially -zoned properties. The Appellant neglected to obtain City any permits from the City to construct the room addition. As a result, they violated Section 9110 of the Downey Municipal Code, which states that no building, structure, or lot shall hereafter be used or occupied, and no building or part thereof shall be erected, moved, or altered, unless in conformity with the regulations specified in this article for the zone in which such building, structure, or lot is located and then only after securing all permits and licenses required by law and ordinances. The Appellant constructed a 497 square foot addition to his home without Planning approval or building permits; therefore, they built the structure unlawfully. Consequently, the Appellant's reasons for requesting a variance do not justify the granting of the variance. SECTION 3. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 through 6 of this Resolution, the City Council of the City of Downey hereby denies the appeal, thereby upholding the Planning Commission's decision on PLN -10 -00140 (Variance). SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of February, 2015. ATTEST: ADRIA M. JIMENEZ, MC City Clerk LUIS H. MARQU Mayor 6 HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Downey at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of February 2015, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members: NOES: Council Member: ABSENT: Council Member: ABSTAIN: Council Member: Ashton, Brossmer, None. None, None. �Ji>. A M. JIMENEZf CMC City Clerk Vasquez, Saab, Mayor Marquez