Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 16-7610-Planning Comm Appeal-Deny PLN-15-00161-Approve Zone Variance No. 369 (PLN-85-2515)RESOLUTION NO. 16 -7610 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: 1. January 10, 1985 ,Charles Treat submitted an application for a zone variance to retain a second driveway that was being used for off - street parking on a residential property. 2.< On February 6, 1985, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 838, which granted Zone Variance No. 369 (also referred to as PLN -85 -2515) to retain a legal nonconforming second driveway on a single - family lot, at 8622 Fontana Street, Downey, California. 3.. The approval for retaining the second driveway and approach required the recordation of a covenant with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office, to remove said driveway and approach upon the sale, lease, or renting of the subject property. 4. The subject property is zoned R -1 ( Single - Family Residential), and its General Plan land use designation is LDR (Low Density Residential). 5. On July 27, 2015, Tom Morris submitted a Land Use Permit Application (PLN -15- 00161) on behalf of the Treat Family Living Trust, seeking approval of a variance to retain the secondary driveway. According to Mr. Morris, Mr. Treat's descendants are eager to sell the property but the driveway covenant has made it difficult for them to do so. 6. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 7, 2015, and after fully considering all oral and written testimony, facts, and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing, denied PLN -15- 00161. 7q In a letter dated October 20, 2015, the applicant 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. 8.; The City Council a duly noticed public hearing on January 12, 2016, and after fully considering all oral and written testimony, facts, and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing granted the applicant's appeal, thereby overturning the Planning Commission's action and allowing the secondary driveway to remain directed staff to prepare a resolution that reflects the basis of their decision to approve PLN -15- 00161 along with a condition of approval that directs the City Manager to execute the appropriate legal instrument to release the driveway covenant. RESOLUTION NO. 16 -7610 PAGE 2 9. On January 26 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 16 -7610, thereby approving PLN -15- 00161. 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: 1. 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 property is identified as 8622 Fontana Street in Downey. Fontana Street borders the front of this site and a public alley abuts the rear yard. In 1950, the property was developed with a single- family dwelling with a one -car garage. In 1952, this garage was converted into habitable space legally and the homeowner constructed a new garage that was accessible from the alley. The driveway that served the original garage remains. After the City's incorporation in 1956, Downey initiated new development standards that no longer allowed more than one driveway on single- family residences; however, the improvements on the subject site were lawful, which categorized the secondary driveway as a legal nonconforming use. Downey established a compliance date to bring such uses into compliance with the City's standards and eventually took action to resolve this condition in 1985. In response, the property owner applied for and received the Planning Commission's approval of Zone Variance 369 to retain the legal nonconforming driveway; however, the Planning Commission imposed a condition of approval that required the applicant to record a covenant with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office to remove said driveway and approach upon the sale, lease, or renting of the subject property. The applicant prefers to retain the secondary driveway because it makes the house more attractive to potential buyers. The secondary driveway has not created a nuisance in the neighborhood, it reduces parking problems on Fontana Street, and several other properties nearby are legal nonconforming uses due to off - street parking. These properties have existed this way for more than sixty years. The covenant imposed by Zone Variance 369 represents an exceptional circumstance that is peculiar to the subject property that is not applicable to other properties in the vicinity because the neighboring legal nonconforming properties were not required to record a covenant that stipulated an instance when said nonconformities must comply with the City's current standards and requirements for off street parking. Instead, all of the other nonconforming properties have been existed under the provisions of Section 9410 of the Downey Municipal Code, which controls the enlargement, reestablishment, or alteration of nonconforming uses. RESOLUTION NO. 16 -7610 PAGE 3 2. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the 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. Subsection 9710 of the Downey Municipal Code establishes a standard that properties within the R -1 (Single- Family Residential) zone shall not have more than one (1) driveway except that parcels or lots having a street frontage of seventy (70) feet or more may be permitted to have two (2) driveway openings, but both the primary and secondary driveway openings shall serve the same driveway. It also allows a secondary driveway for access to a recreational vehicle storage pad, as approved by the Commission, but the recreational vehicle storage pad must be located outside all required front, side, and street side setbacks. The legal nonconforming driveway does not satisfy any of these conditions. Section 9312.08 of the Code requires the front yards in all residential zones to be landscaped, free of stored items, and unpaved except for pedestrian walkways, driveways, and approved patios. Only temporary parking of vehicles pursuant to Section 9710.02(h) shall be allowed in the front yard. By approving Zone Variance No. 369, the Planning Commission granted the applicant rights that other persons in the same vicinity and zone would not be afforded under the City's development standards; however the Commission granted that approval with the understanding that the nonconforming driveway would be removed when the property is sold, leased, or rented. The literal interpretation of these off- street parking provisions of the Zoning Code will deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity because several other residents are able to park their vehicles on properties that do not meet these standards and none of them were impacted by a recorded covenant to comply within a specific time frame or under specific circumstances. In addition to these concerns, the streets in the surrounding area are inundated with parked cars. The aforementioned property owners are able to park their cars on their properties; however, the persons residing at the subject site would be unable to enjoy that privilege if the nonconforming driveway is removed. 3. Special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The City Council's approval of the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny the proposed variance will not result in special conditions and circumstances caused by the applicant because the secondary driveway and approach existed before the City was incorporated in 1956. Approval of the variance will allow a legal nonconforming driveway to exist beyond the time constraints established by the Zoning Code in effect in 1985, and beyond the stipulation established by Condition No. 1 of Zone Variance No. 369, which required the secondary driveway and approach to be removed upon the sale, lease, or renting of the subject property. Instead, approval of the applicant's appeal will cause the release of the covenant and allow the secondary driveway and approach to remain. RESOLUTION NO. 16 -7610 PAGE 4 4 Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant special privileges that are denied by the Zoning Code to other lands,_ structures or buildings in the same vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The subject property was developed as a single- family residence with an attached garage in 1950. Two years later, the garage was converted into habitable space, and a new garage was constructed at the rear of the site: A driveway from an alley adjacent to the rear of the lot provided access to the new garage, while the original driveway remained as a secondary driveway. The property exists as a legal nonconforming use, subject to the provisions of Zone Variance No. 369, which includes a condition that requires the applicant to record a covenant with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office to remove said driveway and approach upon the sale, lease, or renting of the subject property. The proposed variance would authorize release of the covenant and allow the applicant to maintain the secondary driveway and approach. 5. The granting of such a variance will be in harmony and will not adversely affect the General Plan. The applicant seeks approval of PLN -15- 00161, to allow a nonconforming secondary driveway to remain. Granting this variance would be in harmony with General Plan Program 2.5.1.4 (Maximize off- street parking to minimize demands on on- street parking) because doing so will allow automobiles to park on the subject property and thereby reduce the vehicular parking on the heavily impacted Fontana Street. 6. 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 requested a variance to eliminate the condition of approval of Zone Variance No. 369 that requires removal of the secondary driveway when the property is sold leased, or rented. The applicant wants to retain the legal nonconforming driveway because it makes the house more attractive to potential buyers, the secondary driveway has not created a nuisance in the neighborhood, the nonconforming driveway reduces parking problems on Fontana Street, and several other properties nearby have a similar condition. These reasons justify approving the variance because it allows the applicant (or future owners of the property) to Use the property as a in a manner that is consistent and consistent with similar nonconforming properties nearby. As such, by allowing the secondary driveway to remain, the variance makes it possible to use the subject property reasonably. 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 grants the applicant's appeal, thereby overturning the Planning Commission's decision on PLN -15 -00161 (Revision "A" to PLN -85- 2515) and allowing the secondary driveway to remain, subject to the conditions of approval attached hereto as Exhibit A, which are necessary to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the community and enable the City Council to make the findings set forth in the previous sections. The conditions are fair and reasonable for the accomplishment of these purposes. W I I 10 • • +•, it SECTION 5. The City Manager is directed to execute the appropriate legal instrument to release the Covenant and Agreement by and between Charles L. Treat and Evelyn L. Treat, and the City of Downey, a Municipal Corporation, dated February 22, 1985. SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of January, 2016; �w ALEX SAAB, Mayor ATTEST: 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 26th day of January, 2016, by the following vote, to wit: RESOLUTION NO. -16 -7610 PAGE 6 EXHIBIT A — CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLN -15 -00161 (REVISION "A" TO PLN -85- 2515) PLANNING 1) This approval of PLN -15 -00161 (Revision 'A' to Zone Variance No. 369) is for retaining a legal nonconforming secondary driveway and its approach on the Fontana Street frontage on property located at 7622 Fontana Street. 2) Condition No. 1 of the previously approved conditions of approval from Planning Commission Resolution No. 836 is hereby revoked. 3) The City Manager is directed to execute the appropriate legal instrument to release the Covenant and Agreement by and between Charles L. Treat and Evelyn L. Treat, and the City of Downey, a Municipal Corporation, dated February 22, 1985. 4) Approval of this PLN- 15- 00161_shall not be construed to mean any waiver of applicable and appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County, and City laws and regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the City of Downey Municipal Code shall apply. 5) The Owner /Applicant agrees, as condition of approval of this resolution, to indemnify, defend and hold harmless, at Applicant's expense, City and City's agents, officers and employees from and against any claim, action or proceeding commenced within the time period provided in Government Code Section 66499.37 to attack, review, set aside, void or annul the approval of this resolution, to challenge the determination made by City under the California Environmental Quality Act or to challenge the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached hereto. City shall promptly notify Applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding to which City receives notice, and City will cooperate fully with Applicant in the defense thereof. Applicant shall reimburse the City for any court costs and attorney's fees that the City maybe required to pay as a result of any such claim, action or proceeding. City may, in its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve Applicant of the obligations of this condition. 6) The Applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval set forth in this resolution before the Variance becomes valid.