Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3. PLN-15-00133 - 11899 Woodruff AveSTAFF REPORT PLANNING DIVISION DATE: AUGUST 19 2015 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION SUBMITTED BY: ALDO E. SCHINDLER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVIEWED BY: WILLIAM E. DAVIS, CITY PLANNER PREPARED BY: DAVID BLUMENTHAL, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: PLN-15-00133 (VARIANCE) – A REQUEST TO DEVIATE FROM MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9520.08(L)(3) TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR A WALL WITHIN THE STREET SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM THREE (3) FEET TO EIGHT (8) FEET. LOCATION: 11899 WOODRUFF AVE ZONING: M-2 (GENERAL MANUFACTURING) AND P-B (PARKING BUFFER) REPORT SUMMARY The applicant is requesting to construct an eight (8) foot tall block wall in the street side yard of the existing building; however, Municipal Code Section 9520.08(L)(3) limits the height of walls within this area to no more than three (3) feet tall. Accordingly, the applicant has requested the variance to deviate from the code section. Notwithstanding this, staff’s analysis of the required findings resulted in the fact that not all of the findings can be made in a positive manner. As such, staff is recommending the Planning Commission adopt the following titled resolution: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DENYING A VARIANCE (PLN-15-00133), A REQUEST TO DEVIATE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR A WALL WITHIN THE STREET SIDE YARD ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11899 WOODRUFF AVE, ZONED M-2 (GENERAL MANUFACTURING) AND P-B (PARKING BUFFER). BACKGROUND The subject site is 1.2-acre rectangular shaped parcel that is located on the northwest corner of Woodruff Ave. and Stewart and Gray Rd. The parcel is approximately 132’ wide and 414’ deep. The property has a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Manufacturing and is zoned M-2 (General Manufacturing); except the eastern 30’ of the parcel is zoned P-B (Parking Buffer). The site is currently improved with a 26,297 square foot two-story industrial building, which is adjacent to the western property line. Originally built in 1989, the building has 13,597 square Agenda Page 1 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 2 feet of office area and 12,700 square feet of warehouse/storage area. A parking lot with 49 parking spaces surrounds the north, south, and east side of the building. Vehicle access to the parking lot is available from two driveways on Woodruff and a single driveway on Stewart and Gray. View of property from Woodruff and Stewart & Gray View of property from Woodruff The property is in the heart of the City’s largest industrial area. All of the surrounding properties are zoned M-2 (General Manufacturing) and contain a variety of industrial/manufacturing uses. The property is currently being converted to a paint and body shop. The applicant submitted a request for the subject Variance on June 17, 2015, to allow an eight (8) foot tall wall within the street side yard. The intent of the wall is to create an outdoor storage area for vehicles. This application was deemed complete by staff on July 15, 2015. Notice of the pending public hearing was published in the Downey Patriot and mailed to all property owners within 500’ of the subject site on August 6, 2015. DISCUSSION Municipal Code Section 9520.08(l)(3) states, “Walls, fences, and hedges within front yards, street side yards, and/or within required landscape planters shall not exceed three (3) feet” in the manufacturing zones. For all other portions of the lot, the maximum height for walls, fences, Agenda Page 2 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 3 and hedges is ten (10) feet. The applicant is requesting to deviate from this standard to construct an eight (8) foot tall block wall between the building and Woodruff Ave. As proposed, the wall will be set back five (5) feet from the property line, leaving the existing landscape planter in place. Figure 1 below demonstrates the fence location and the portions that are within the street side yard, which are the subject of this request. It is important to distinguish between the setback and yard requirements in the Municipal Code. A setback is the required minimum distance from the property line to a building, whereas a yard is the actual separation of the building and property line. In the case of the subject property, the minimum street side setback is ten (10) feet; however, the provided street side yard is 53’-5”. The intent of this distinction is to maintain an open streetscape enhanced by building architecture and landscaping, not walls or fences. As part of the review of the applicant’s request, staff conducted a windshield survey of the surrounding area. This survey did find several properties that have fences constructed in the front or street yard of the property. A review of the City’s files indicated that about half of the fences on the properties are installed without the benefit of permits, while the other half were permitted under older codes. Further review of the City’s files show that several other variances have been approved in the area, but are mainly for setbacks. Staff’s analysis of the variances did not find any deviations granted for fence heights. It should be further noted that all of these variances were approved before the adoption of the current Zoning Code in 2008. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the proposed application for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Upon completion of this review, it has been determined that this request is categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Guideline Section No. 15305 (Class 5 - Minor Alteration in Land Use Limitations). Class 5 exemptions consist of alternations to land use limitations in areas that have a slope of less than 20% and do not result in changes to the land use or densities. Since the request is to changes a land use limitation on the subject site, staff believes it qualifies for the Class 5 exemption under CEQA. Figure 1 Agenda Page 3 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 4 FINDINGS In order to approve the Variance, the Planning Commission shall adopt all of the required findings set forth in Municipal Code 9826.08. Should the Planning Commission find that any one of the findings cannot be made, then the application shall be denied. 1. An 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 1.2-acre rectangular shaped parcel that is approximately 132’ wide and 414’ deep. The site is located in the M-2 zone, which has a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet and restrictions on width or depth. A review of the areas indicates that other properties range in size including being larger, smaller, and similar size lots. Further review of the parcel shows it is flat and all existing improvements comply with current development standards. There are no geological or design features that prevent the property from being developed in manner that complies with the Zoning Code. Considering this, staff is of the opinion that an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance does not exist on this property; therefore, this finding cannot be adopted. 2. The literal interpretation of the provisions of zoning code would deprive the applicant of rights under the terms of the zoning code commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The subject property is a 1.2-acre site that is improved with a 26,297 square foot two- story building. In addition to the building, there is a 49-space parking lot and approximately 4,200 s.f. of landscaping. The building is currently being converted into a paint and body shop, with all repairs occurring within the building. The applicant is proposing to enclose portion of the parking lot with an eight (8) foot tall wall, where the code limits the height of walls to no more than three (3) feet. It is staff’s opinion that regardless if the wall is constructed and regardless at what height, the applicant will be able to utilize the building for the paint and body shop. The parking spaces that will be enclosed by the applicant will need to remain available for parking to allow the use. As such, staff feels that the literal interpretation of the zoning code will not deprive the applicant of any rights enjoyed by others, thus this finding cannot be adopted. 3. That exceptional or extraordinary conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. As noted in the first finding, staff believes that there is not an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance to warrant approval of the variance. However, the applicant wants to construct an eight (8) foot tall block wall around a portion of the existing parking lot. Staff believes the need for the variance directly results from the applicant’s desire to construct the wall, thus this finding cannot be adopted. 4. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by zoning code to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same vicinity and zone in which the property is located. While a windshield survey that was conducted in the area found other properties had fences in the front and/or street side yards, they either were constructed illegally or were Agenda Page 4 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 5 permitted under older zoning codes. Under the current zoning code, walls over three (3) feet in height are prohibited in the front or street side yards. It is staff’s opinion that should the Planning Commission approve the Variance, they would be granting a special privilege to the applicant since other properties in the M-2 zone would not be allowed to construct similar walls. As such, staff believes that this finding cannot be adopted. 5. Granting of such variance will be in harmony and not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. It is a goal of the General Plan (8.3) to “Promote the enhancement of the streetscape.” This goal is partially implemented by General Plan Program 8.3.1.5, which states, “Discourage security devices and fence/wall designs that portray an image that the community is unfriendly and uninviting.” The intent of prohibiting tall walls in the front and street side yards is to allow an open streetscape that is enhanced by building architecture, not walls. Staff is of the opinion that approval of the eight (8) foot tall wall that is only five (5) feet from the street property line is in direct conflict with the open streetscape concept. Staff is of the further opinion that the proposed wall will be contradictory to the aforementioned General Plan Goal and Program. As such, staff feels that this finding cannot be adopted. 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. As noted in the previous findings, it is staff’s opinion that approval of the Variance is not justified. The proposed fence is not needed in order to use the building for the auto body repair business since work on vehicles can be done within the building. As such, staff feels that no variance is need for the reasonable use of the land or building, thus this finding cannot be adopted. CORRESPONDENCE As of the date that this report was printed, staff has not received any correspondence regarding this application. CONCLUSION In order for the Planning Commission to approve a Variance, they are required to adopt six findings justifying the approval. As noted in the analysis approve, it is staff’s opinion that none of the required findings can be adopted. As such, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission deny the Variance (PLN-15-00133). EXHIBITS A. Maps B. Draft Resolution C. Project Plans Agenda Page 5 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 6 MAPS Location Aerial Photograph Agenda Page 6 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 7 Zoning Agenda Page 7 RESOLUTION NO. _________ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DENYING A VARIANCE (PLN-15-00133), A REQUEST TO DEVIATE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR A WALL WITHIN THE STREET SIDE YARD ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11899 WOODRUFF AVE, ZONED M-2 (GENERAL MANUFACTURING) AND P-B (PARKING BUFFER). 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: A. On June 17, 2015, the applicant submitted a Variance (PLN-15-00133), requesting to deviate from Municipal Code 9520.08(l)(3) to deviate from the maximum allowable height for a wall in the street side yard; and, B. On July 15, 2015, staff completed a review of the application and deemed it complete; and, C. On August 6, 2015, notice of the pending variance was published in the Downey Patriot and mailed to all property owners within 500’ of the subject site; and, D. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 19, 2015, and after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearings, adopted this resolution. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares the requested Specific Plan Amendment has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Upon completion of this review, it has been determined that this request is categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Guideline Section No. 15305 (Class 5 - Minor Alteration in Land Use Limitations) based on the fact that it will not alter densities or parking requirements. SECTION 3. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said public hearing, the Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares that: 1. An exceptional or extraordinary conditions or circumstances does not exist which is 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 1.2-acre rectangular shaped parcel that is approximately 132’ wide and 414’ deep. The site is located in the M-2 zone, which has a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet and restrictions on width or depth. A review of the areas indicates that other properties range in size including being larger, smaller, and similar size lots. Further review of the parcel shows it is flat and all existing improvements comply with current development standards. There are no geological or design features that prevent the property from being developed in manner that complies with the Zoning Code. 2. The literal interpretation of the provisions of zoning code would not deprive the applicant of rights under the terms of the zoning code commonly enjoyed by other properties in the Agenda Page 8 Resolution No. ___________ Downey Planning Commission 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 2 same vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The subject property is a 1.2- acre site that is improved with a 26,297 square foot two-story building. In addition to the building, there is a 49-space parking lot and approximately 4,200 s.f. of landscaping. The building is currently being converted into a paint and body shop, with all repairs occurring within the building. The applicant is proposing to enclose portion of the parking lot with an eight (8) foot tall wall, where the code limits the height of walls to no more than three (3) feet. Regardless if the wall is constructed and regardless at what height, the applicant will be able to utilize the building for the paint and body shop. Furthermore, the parking spaces that will be enclosed by the applicant will need to remain available for parking to allow the use. 3. That exceptional or extraordinary conditions or circumstances not result from the actions of the applicant. As noted in the first finding, there is not an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance to warrant approval of the variance. However, the applicant wants to construct an eight (8) foot tall block wall around a portion of the existing parking lot. The need for the variance directly results from the applicant’s desire to construct the wall. 4. Granting the variance requested will confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by zoning code to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same vicinity and zone in which the property is located. While a windshield survey that was conducted in the area found other properties had fences in the front and/or street side yards, they either were constructed illegally or were permitted under older zoning codes. Under the current zoning code, walls over three (3) feet in height are prohibited in the front or street side yards. Approval of this Variance, would be granting the applicant the ability to construct a taller wall that would be denied to others, which would be considered a special privilege. 5. Granting of such variance will not be in harmony and not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. It is a goal of the General Plan (8.3) to “Promote the enhancement of the streetscape.” This goal is partially implemented by General Plan Program 8.3.1.5, which states, “Discourage security devices and fence/wall designs that portray an image that the community is unfriendly and uninviting.” The intent of prohibiting tall walls in the front and street side yards is to allow an open streetscape that is enhanced by building architecture, not walls. Approval of the eight (8) foot tall wall that is only five (5) feet from the street property line is in direct conflict with the open streetscape concept and would be contradictory to the aforementioned General Plan Goal and Program. 6. That the reasons set forth in the application does not justify the granting of the variance and that the variance is not the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. As noted in the previous findings, approval of the Variance is not justified. The proposed fence is not needed in order to use the building for the auto body repair business since work on vehicles can be done within the building. As such, no variance is need for the reasonable use of the land or building. Agenda Page 9 Resolution No. ___________ Downey Planning Commission 11899 Woodruff Ave – PLN-15-00133 August 19, 2015 - Page 3 SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of August, 2015. Hector Lujan, Chairman City Planning Commission 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 19th day of August, 2015, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Mary Cavanagh, Secretary City Planning Commission Agenda Page 10 Agenda Page 11 Agenda Page 12 Agenda Page 13 Agenda Page 14 Agenda Page 15 Agenda Page 16 Agenda Page 17 Agenda Page 18