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