HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 86-19; Duff Medical Office; Redevelopment Permits (RP)REVISED STAFF REPORT
DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 1987
TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
FROM: REDEVELOPMENT OFFICE
SUBJECT: RP 86-19 - DUFF - Request for a minor redevelopment
permit for a proposed addition and remodel to an
existing doctor's office located 2690 Roosevelt St.
to include a reduced front yard setback and
side yard setback.
I. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Design Review Board ADOPT
Resolution No. 093 , RP 86-19 DUFF based on the findings
therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting a minor redevelopment permit for
a proposed addition and remodel to an existing doctor's
office located at 2690 Roosevelt Street. Site renovation
will include the addition of thirteen (13) parking spaces.
The office space addition of 1386 square feet will produce a
twelve (12) foot front yard setback and a five (5) foot side
yard setback. The project is located within Sub-area 6 of
the Village Redevelopment Area.
II. MfKLYSlS
1. ) Does 1:he project conform to the goals of the Village
Design Manual?
2. ) Does the project meet the standards of the zoning
ordinance?
3. ) Can the required findings for an exception be made;
to wit,
A. The application of certain provisions of
this chapter would result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships
which would make development inconsistent
with the general purpose and intent of
the Carlsbad Village Area Redevelopment
Plan
B. There are exceptional circumstances or
conditions unique to the property or the
proposed development which do not
generally apply to other properties or
developments which have the same
standards, restrictions, and controls,
C. The granting of an exemption will not be
injurious or materially detrimental to
the public welfare, other properties or
improvements in the project area; and
D. The granting of an exemption will not
contradict t:he standards estsQ)lished in
the Village Design Manual?
From a zoning perspective the existing medical office
building is nonconforming by reason of inadequate yards. The
zoning ordinance allows for enlargement of such structures as
long as it is to the same degree of nonconformity as may
exist and that any such enlargement shall not increase the
floor space more than fifty percent of that existing prior to
such enlargement (Municipal Code 21.48.090). The existing
side yard setback is six (6) feet, where ten (10) feet would
normally be required. The applicant is requesting a five (5)
foot side yard setback. The enlargement increases floor
space thirty seven (37) percent.
The existing front yard setback is seventeen (17) feet, where
twenty (20) feet would normally be required. The proposed
setback is twelve (12) feet. To approve this proposal the
required findings for an exception need to be made. These
findings are based on practical difficulties, unnecessary
hardships, exceptional circumstances, that the granting of
the exemption will not be materially detrimental to other
properties, and that the granting of an exemption will not
contradict the standards established in the Village Design
Manual.
Staff is unable to make these findings. While it may be
argued that there are existing structures along Roosevelt
Street in the vicinity of the project that maintain such
reduced front yard setbacks, those sites were nonconforming
at the adoption of the Village Design Manual. Rather than
being precedent setting they serve to demonstrate the need
for a uniform application of the established standards.
The project is an existing medical office which may enlarge
2
to the same degree of nonconformity as existing (six (6) foot
side yard, seventeen (17) foot front yard) without requiring
a variance. While designing such an addition around the
existing office may be viewed as a practical difficulty,
staff cannot make the finding that this would be an
unnecessary hardship that would make development inconsistent
with the Redevelopment Plan. This is due to the amount of
the lot available for development behind the structure (over
ten thousand (10,000) square feet) when compared to the
amount of the encroachment requested (one hundred five (105)
sguare feet).
The applicant has stated that the increased encroachment is
necessary due to the desire to enhance accessibility for
those whose mobility is impaired. Staff agrees that this is
a desirable quality but maintains that this is substantially
a state wide goal rather than an exceptional circumstance or
condition unique to the property. The desirability of a
proposed development does not preclude the necessity of being
able to justify the required findings for an exception.
Granting of the exemption would contradict the standards
established in the Village Design Manual. The design
guidelines of redevelopment in subarea 6 support additional
landscaped setbacks along Roosevelt Street to buffer the
residential uses from office/professional uses, not an
expanded encroachment into an already reduced required yard.
Staff therefore, has conditioned the approval of RP 86-19 to
respect the existing setbacks of a six (6) foot side yard and
a seventeen (17) foot front yard as well as provide a
landscape and irrigation plan to the satisfaction of the
Redevelopment Manager.
Complementary design elements and materials are proposed to
integrate the addition with the existing structure. Staff is
able to support the request for a minor redevelopment permit
(without the exception of the increased yard encroachments)
as this project will provide required off street parking at
an existing use that is presently lacking same, the addition
is compatible with the existing and surrounding buildings,
and as conditioned the project is in accord with the
development standards required by the zoning ordinance.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined this project qualifies
for Class III Categorical Exemption under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Design Review Board Resolution No. 093
2. Location Map
3. Vicinity Map
4. Disclosure form
5. Exhibit C
OCATION MA
SITE
RP 86-19 DUFF
^ Co
STATE ST.
fygpft ItAPIUS MAP
DISCLOSORB PORN
APPLICANT
AGENT:
Nam§ (individual^ partnership, joint venture, corporation.
MEMBERS:
Busuiess Address 2S cur lication)
3 ^ —
Name
Business A3dress ^ —
Telephone Nunber
le (individual. Name (individual, partner, joint
venture, corporation, syndication)
Bome Address
Business Mdress
Telephone Number Telephone NuRter
Name Home iVSdress
Business Address
Telephone Nunber Telephone Number
(Attach more sheets if necessary)
The applicant is reqaired to apply for Coastal Cossiissioii Approval
if located in the Coastal Sone.
I/Vfe declare under penalty of perjury that the infonnation contained in this
disclosure is true and correct and that it will reroayr"€n% agfin^rr^gct and^may be
relied i:^n as being true and correct until aniended.
^||M|P-«IIMRPqFMMr
ITEM 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: JANUARY 21, 1987
TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
FROM: REDEVELOPMENT OFFICE
SUBJECT: RP 86-19 - DUFF - Request for a minor redevelopment
permit for a proposed addition and remodel to an
existing doctor's office located 2690 Roosevelt St.
to include a reduced front yard setback.
I. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Design Review Board ADOPT
Resolution No. 093 RP 86-19 DUFF based on the findings
therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting a minor redevelopment permit for
a proposed addition and remodel to an existing doctor's
office located at 2690 Roosevelt Street. Site renovation
will include the addition of thirteen (13) parking spaces.
The office space addition of 1386 square feet will produce a
twelve (12) foot front yard setback. The project is located
within Sub-area 6 of the Village Redevelopment Area.
II. ANALYSIS
1. ) Does the project conform to the goals of the Village
Design Manual?
2. ) Does the project meet the standards of the zoning
ordinance?
3. ) Can the required findings for an exception be made;
to wit,
A. The application of certain provisions of
this chapter would result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships
which would make development inconsistent
with the general purpose and intent of
the Carlsbad Village Area Redevelopment
Plan
B. There are exceptional circumstances or
conditions unique to the property or the
proposed development which do not
generally apply to other properties or
developments which have the same
standards, restrictions, and controls,
C. The granting of an exemption will not be
injurious or materially detrimental to
the public welfare, other properties or
improvements in the project area; and
D. The granting of an exemption will not
contradict the standards established in
the Village Design Manual?
From a zoning perspective the existing medical office
building is nonconforming by reason of inadequate yards. The
zoning ordinance allows for enlargement of such structures as
long as it is to the same degree of nonconformity as may
exist and that any such enlargement shall not increase the
floor space more than fifty percent of that existing prior to
such enlargement (Municipal Code 21.48.090). The existing
and proposed side yard setback is five (5) feet, where ten
(10) feet would normally be required. The enlargement
increases floor space thirty seven (37) percent. Therefore,
no exception is required.
The proposed front yard setback does not meet these
standards. The existing setback is seventeen (17) feet,
where twenty (20) feet would normally be required. The
proposed setback is twelve (12) feet. To approve this
proposal the required findings for an exception need to be
made. These findings are based on practical difficulties,
unnecessary hardships, exceptional circumstances, that the
granting of the exemption will not be materially detrimental
to other properties, and that the granting of an exemption
will not contradict the standards established in the Village
Design Manual.
Staff is unable to make these findings. While it may be
argued that there are existing structures along Roosevelt
Street in the vicinity of the project that maintain such
reduced front yard setbacks, those sites were nonconforming
at the adoption of the Village Design Manual. Rather than
being precedent setting they serve to demonstrate the need
for a uniform application of the established standards.
The project is an existing medical office which may enlarge
to the same degree of nonconformity as existing (five (5)
foot side yard, seventeen (17) foot front yard) without
requiring a variance. While designing such an addition
around the existing office may be viewed as a practical
difficulty, staff cannot make the finding that this would be
an unnecessary hardship that would make development
inconsistent with the Redevelopment Plan. This is due to the
amount of the lot available for development behind the
structure (over ten thousand (10,000) square feet) when
compared to the amount of the encroachment requested (one
hundred five (105) square feet).
Granting of the exemption would be detrimental to the
standards established in the Village Design Manual. The
design guidelines of redevelopment in subarea 6 support
additional landscaped setbacks along Roosevelt Street to
buffer the residential uses from office/professional uses,
not an expanded encroachment into an already reduced required
yard. Staff therefore, has conditioned the approval of RP
86-19 to respect the existing setbacks of a five (5) foot
side yard and a seventeen (17) foot front yard.
Complementary design elements and materials are proposed to
integrate the addition with the existing structure. Staff is
able to support the request for a minor redevelopment permit
(with the exception of the increased front yard encroachment)
as this project will provide required off street parking at
an existing use that is presently lacking same, the addition
is compatible with the existing and surrounding buildings,
and as conditioned the project is in accord with the
development standards required by the zoning ordinance.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined this project qualifies
for Class III Categorical Exemption under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Design Review Board Resolution No. 093
2. Location Map
3. Vicinity Map
4. Disclosure form
5. Exhibits A&B