Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutV 347; Burmeister; Variance (V)STAFF REPORT APPLICt- ION SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 24, 1983 DATE : Flay 25, 1983 TO : Planning Commission 0 FROM : Land Use Planning Office SUBJECT: V-347 - Burmeister - Request for four variances to the Zoning Ordinance for a proposed condominium conversion at 4555 Cove Drive in the R-W zone. I. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 2116 DENYING V-347 based on the findings contained therein. 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting four variances, which, if granted, would allow the conversion of a three-unit apartment house into a three-unit condominium. The variance requests are for: a) Two tandem parking spaces b) One compact car space c) Parking encroachment into the front-yard setback d) Parking encroachment into the side-yard setback The zoning ordinance stipulates that all condominium conversions must meet the requirements of the Planned Development Ordinance. As such, eight parking spaces are required for a three-unit condominium. The subject lot is too narrow to fully accomodate this requirement width-wise, across its frontage. Previously, the R-W zone possessed its own parking standards (one space per unit). On March 17, 1981, however, the City Council approved ZCA-129, which required all discretionary development in this zone to meet the same parking requirements as other zones. This Zone Code Amendment was an outgrowth of City Council recognition that the Bristol Cove parking situation was becoming increasingly difficult and hazardous. As such, the proposed condominium conversion must now meet the stricter parking requirements. The existing three-unit apartment currently has four parking spaces each of which extend to the 10 foot front yard setback line. The applicant plans to convert part of the living quarter to garage area to recess space numbers 2 and 4 to allow room for tandem numbers 1 and 3 (as shown on Exhibit "A"). In addition, two bedrooms will be converted into parking area for vehicles number 7 and 8. Space numbers 5 and 6 presently exist. Space number 8 is proposed as a compact space. The property is irregularly shaped, and is somewhat larger than most lots in the vicinity. The structure is set back ten feet from the front property line. 111. ANALYS IS Planning Issues 1) Can the four mandatory findings for a variance be made as they relate to this case? Specifically: a) Are there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other property in the same vicinity and zone? b) Is the granting of this variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone? c) Will the granting of this variance be detrimental to the public welfare? d) Will the granting of this variance adversely affect the General Plan? Discussion The applicant has submitted a supplemental information form to address the issues above. This form has been attached to this report as Exhibit I'B". Staff believes that exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not exist on this property. This finding refers to physical features of a property which may hinder development to a greater degree than surrounding properties. As shown on the Location Map, the shape of this lot actually has a wider frontage than the majority of those in the area. The applicant points out that he is being denied a property right that others in the vicinity possess. This right is the ability to convert his property to condominiums and enjoy a raise in property value equal to condominiums in the area. He further refers to individual condominium projects with less parking than he is being required to provide. Staff has investigated each of these projects and found that three of them were converted to conominiums prior to the new parking requirement which was approved on March 17, 1981. The fourth project is not a condominium conversion and is required to meet apartment requirements only. Staff beleives that anytime the zoning ordinance is amended and stricter requirements are adopted, subsequent development will be denied the same rights of development as those built prior to the Code Amendment. As a result, staff cannot make the finding that the owner is being denied a property right. -2- From a practical standpoint, one additional legitimate, safe parking space would be added to the property. While it is desirable to increase the number of safe spaces whenever possible, staff believes that three of the requested spaces would not result in an improvement in safety. Our office has noted that tandem spaces create problems and should be avoided. Vehicles parking in tandem back out into the street much more frequently to allow the innermost vehicle to exit. Also, the Fire Department has stated their reluctance to recommend approval of a side setback reduction because it would hinder fire access to the rear units. From a visual standpoint, the tandem spaces will allow for no front yard setback, and will preclude the use of an existing garage door. The garage for spaces 1, 2, 3, and 4 will be open to the street. In summary, staff believes that the request does not meet the four required findings for approval of a variance. In addition, staff would feel very uncomfortable recommending approval of reduced parking standards (tandem, compact, etc.) when these new standards were adopted at the request of the Council, Planning Commission, and citizens group from Bristol Cove. Staff is, therefore, recommending denial of this request. Our office has received thirteen letters in support of the requested variance. IV . Envi ronmenta 1 Revi ew This project is exempt from environmental review per Section 19.04.070(6)(D)(i) of the Environmental Ordinance. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2116 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Exhibit I'B", dated April 11, 1983 5. Disclosure Form 6. Exhibit "A", dated May 5, 1983 PJK:bw 5/19/83 -3- LOCATION MAP Park Dr. CASE NO. v-347 . APPLICANT BURMEISTER -- BACKGROW DATA SHEET -- CASE JSO: V-347 APPLICANT: Bumeister REQUEST AND LEATION: Four variances at 4555 Cove Drive. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 35 of Map No. 5162 in Carlsbad, California, according to map thereof filed on April 23, 1963. APN: 207-150-19 Acres .10 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 3 units Land Use Designation R€-I Density Allow& Existing Density praposed Existing Existing Zone R-W Proposed Zone N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Site R-W North R-W South R-W East R-W West R-W Land Use 3 unit apartment waterway Vacant Vacant Vacant PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EW's 3 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued E.I.R. Certified, dated other, Exenpt per 19.04.070(6) (D) (i) SW'PLEMENTAL INFVRMATION FORM VARIANCE 4. a) This is an existing structure. It is physically impossible to provide the required number of parking spaces without allowing for tandem parking and minor encroachment into setback areas. The lot is shallow in depth and irregular in shape. The width of the structure is 51 feet, which facilitates a maximum of six parking spaces across with two in tandem. by expensive and substaintial alteration of the existing structure can the owner provide the proposed eight spaces with two in tandem. It is physically impossible to provide the required eight spaces without the granting of a variance. This is the only lot with an existing structure that is shaped in such a manner. No other currently existing building has the width to provide six parking spaces across. b) The following recent condominium conversions enjoy substan- tially less parking requirements than are proposed for the subject property: Only 4543 Cove Drive 3Condominium units 3 tandem parking spaces 4599 Cove Drive 2 Condominium units 3 enclosed garages and No guest parking exists. No guest parking exists. 3 open parking spaces 4603-4605 Cove Drive 6 Condominium units 10 parking spaces No guest parking exists. 4719 Park Drive 14 units (presently under construction) 7 parking spaces and 7 tandem parking spaces No guest parking proposed. The quality of this development is reasonably consistent with other forms of development intended for separate ownership. The zoning ordinance (as applied for parking requirements) ties the use of this property to a specific use, that of apart- ments, and limits the flexibility of the owner in making changes that are currently available to -.other property owners. The restriction further inhibits the owner by reducing the value of his property thereby imposing an economic hardship upon the owner. Other owners who converted to condominiums prior to each change in the parking requirements now are enjoying a rise in property value that is being denied to this applicant. Denial of this variance request limits the owner's use to apart- ments and substaintially reduces the income from and the value of the property. Other property owners within the same zoning class are currently enjoying the right to convert to condominiums thereby increasing their income and the value of their property. c) burden placed on those persons in proximity to the subject and one 2 bedroom unit; a total of nine bedrooms currently exist. and by decreasing the number of bedrooms from 9 to 7, the owner is attempting everything feasible to alleviate the current parking problem. element that currently exists will be lessened. The owner is attempting to provide more parking spaces than is provided by any existing three (3) unit structure. By adding four spaces to the property in question, other owners in proximity will benefit. Automobiles that normally would be parked on the street will now have off-street parking. additional parking spaces will relieve current congestion and contribute to a more orderly flow of traffic and add to the safety and well-being of the residents of the neighborhood. d) By providing eight parking spaces the owner is meeting the intent of the General Plan, from setback requirements and for tandem parking. The owner is not requesting a reduction in the number of parking spaces. The proposed renovations contributes to the safety and well- being of the area by removing four (4) automobiles from the street. The proposed changes are necessary and desirable in order to provide proper parking in the area. well-being of the neighborhood is a major consideration in adding four (4) additional parking spaces. The general purpose and intent of the requirement for off-street parking spaces is to lessen the congestion on the streets of the city. The granting of the variance from strict application of Section 21.165.090 will result in four (4) fewer automobiles parked on the street than there would be if the present use as apartments were continued. will result in the continued use of the property as three (3) apartments with nine (9) bedrooms and only four (4) parking spaces, thereby perpetuating the present shortage of parking. The proposed renovations will relieve an unreasonable roperty. Presently the building and lot in question provide enclosed spaces for 3 units; one 4 bedroom, one 3 bedroom, By doubling parking spaces, from 4 spaces to 8 spaces, The disharmonious and disruptive currently Four The variance requested is relief The general Failure to grant the requested variance APPLICANT: Rory K. ' Rohan, individual - Nme (individual, partnership, joint venture, cor-wration, syndication) Box 99521, 'San Diego, CA 92109 -- Business Address 272-5244. Telephaia NumbeX AGENT : James W. Burmeister u Nme - -~ 2810 Pi0 Pic0 Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92008 LI u Businsss Address 729 -3072 TeI.c?phoiX? Nk?&er J' -- - . mm3BBiXs: Nmr *(individual, partner, joint Hame Address venture, coqoration, syndication) --, - I- Bisiness Address ._-"-.-_I --- .- - II - (Attach more sheets if necessary) .. - Rory K. Rohan Appl ica n t