Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/06/1992, 4 - APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION INTERPRETATION OF A TRACT MAP CONDITION FOR TRACT 940, LIMITING DEVELOPMENT ON EACH PARCEL TO ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE STRUCTURE. �IIIN�I�III�uIIIOIIIi� IIUIN 'h/ � MEETING DATE: I►j city o San .-AIS OBISpo /0-&- IN!; COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director o PREPARED BY: Whitney McIlvaine, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Appeal of a Planning Commission interpretation of a tract map condition for Tract 940, limiting development on each parcel to one single-family residence, developed as a single structure. CAO RECOMMENDATION: Uphold the appeal subject to findings and conditions as noted in draft resolution No. 2 DATA SUMMARY Applicants: Louis and Christine Zimmerman Representative: Ruel Czach, Architect Zoning: R-1-S General Plan: Low density residential with a sensitive site overlay Environmental Status: Categorically exempt DISCUSSION On August 12th, the Planning Commission reviewed a density- exception request to construct a main house, and guest quarters over a separate garage. As originally designed, the guest quarters constituted a separate dwelling because full kitchen facilities were included. Zoning regulations only allow one dwelling per acre on sites with slopes exceeding 26%. The project site is just over an acre in size with an average cross slope of 35%. The Planning Commission denied the request for two dwellings, finding it inconsistent with density standards in the Zoning Regulations, and also inconsistent with a condition of approval for the underlying tract map. The applicant is not appealing the denial of the density exception. The appeal is focused on the Commission's interpretation of the tract map condition, , which reads as follows: Each lot may be developed with one - single-family residence, subject to all applicable Zoning Ordinance and Building Code Regulations. Nothing in the Zoning Regulations prohibits a multi-structure dwelling. However, the Commission interpreted the tract condition to limit development to a single structure, reasoning that merely removing the guest quarters kitchen does not preclude problems associated with converting the living space above the garage to a rental in the future. The appellant understands the second kitchen p)I city of San OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT will need to be removed to be consistent with density standards. A modified floor plan is attached to this report. Planning Commission restriction of development on lots in this subdivision to single structures only is understandable in view of - the history of conversion of separate structures to unauthorized j uses. Unfortunately, such restriction would prohibit separate garages and similar service structures as well, and could actually prohibit development plans on sloping lots that would benefit from separate structures for some purposes. It appears desirable to provide some flexibility for one separate structure in addition to the residential structure on each parcel for garage , storage or work space uses. These would be subject to all applicable site development standards, but would not increase the density on a j given site. i This broader interpretation would appear consistent with the intent of the subdivision condition, which was most likely included to limit the density of development in the tract, given the sensitive site designation and the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Without this condition, some of the lots - by virtue of their size and more gentle slopes- could otherwise be developed with as many as four homes. In the present case, the appellant could simply connect the two separate structures into a single unit and subvert the intent of the condition. Thus the narrower interpretation of the regulation doesn't appear to be an effective means of addressing the potential problems associated with illegal conversions. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION At the Planning Commission hearing, Mr. and Mrs. Young of 1846 i Conejo objected to creating separate living space over the garage. They cited previous problems with use of a similar space over a garage at 1860 Conejo. In 1987, the Architectural Review Commission approved design of a new residence at 1860 Conejo that included storage area over a separate three-car garage. The storage area was subsequently remodeled into living space, with associated problems related to overlooking adjacent properties. ALTERNATIVES The Council may continue review of the appeal, with specific direction given to the appellant and staff. I The Council may deny the appeal, allowing the Planning Commission's j action and tract condition interpretation to stand. r �������i>I►►iI►IIIIIIIIIIIp1 IIIIIII city o� san Js mspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Attachments: draft resolutions vicinity map tract map site plan floor plans for area above garage Planning Commission Resolution and minutes I �f�3 Draft Resolution No. 1 - Appeal Denied RESOLUTION NO. (1992 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A GUEST QUARTERS / WORK STUDIO TO BE CONSTRUCTED ABOVE A SEPARATE GARAGE AT 1857 CONEJO AVENUE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public testimony, the applicants' request A 138- 92, the appellants' statements, the Planning Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed project is not consistent with the Use Permit U0914 as it pertains to development of parcels in Tract 940. Specifically, the multi-structure design conflicts with a condition of approval limiting development on each parcel to "one single-family residence. " - SECTION 2 . The request for approval of a planning commission use permit, A 138-92 , to allow a guest quarters / work studio to be constructed above a separate garage at 1857 Conejo Avenue, is hereby denied. On motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1992. y-� Draft Resolution No. 1 Appeal Denied Page 2 Mayor Kon. unin ATTEST: City Clerk Diane Gladwell APPROVED: City A 'nistrative Officer C' to ne Community Deve o went Director J Draft Resolution No. 2 Appeal Upheld RESOLUTION NO. (1992 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A GUEST QUARTERS / WORK STUDIO TO BE CONSTRUCTED ABOVE A SEPARATE GARAGE AT 1857 CONEJO AVENUE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of public testimony, the applicants' request A 138- 92, the appellants' statements, and the Planning Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed design will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working in the vicinity. 2. The proposed design is consistent with Condition 1 of Use Permit U0914 , as it pertains to Tract 940, of which the project site is a parcel. The condition states: Each lot may be developed with one single-family residence, subject to all applicable Zoning Ordinance and Building Code Regulations. 3 . The proposed use conforms to the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. 4. The proposed use is categorically exempt from environmental review (CEQA Section 15303) . SECTION 2 . Conditions. A multi-structure residence is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: Lt,l Draft Resolution No. 2 Appeal Upheld Page 2 1. The applicant shall submit a covenant to the Community Development Department for review, approval, and recordation, which limits the density of the property to one dwelling unit, consistent with Use Permit U0914 and the Zoning Regulations. 2. The single-family residence shall be housed in no more than two structures. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1992 . Mayor Ron Dunin ATTEST: City Clerk Diane Gladwell 5OVED: inistrative Officer t or (y, IBJ Community Dev4jopment Director �-r Draft Resolution No. 1 Appeal Denied RESOLUTION NO. (1992 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A GUEST QUARTERS / WORK STUDIO TO BE CONSTRUCTED ABOVE A SEPARATE GARAGE AT 1857 CONEJO AVENUE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public testimony, the applicants' request A 138- 92, the appellants' statements, the Planning Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed project is not consistent with the Use Permit U0914 as it pertains to development of parcels in Tract 940. Specifically, the multi-structure design conflicts with a condition of approval limiting development on each parcel to "one single-family residence. " SECTION 2 . The request for approval of a planning commission use permit, A 138-92 , to allow a guest quarters / .work studio to be constructed above a separate garage at. 1857 Conejo Avenue, is hereby denied. On motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1992. Draft Resolution No. 1 Appeal Denied Page 2 Mayor Ron Dunin ATTEST: City Clerk Diane Gladwell APPROVED: City A nistrative Officer C' to ne Community De-veioibment Director �- 9 Draft Resolution No. 2 Appeal Upheld RESOLUTION NO. (1992 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A GUEST QUARTERS / WORK STUDIO TO BE CONSTRUCTED ABOVE A SEPARATE GARAGE AT 1857 CONEJO AVENUE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of public testimony, the applicants' request A 138- 92, the appellants' statements, and the Planning Commission's action, staff ' recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed design will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working in the vicinity. 2 . The proposed design is consistent with Condition 1 of Use Permit U0914 , as it pertains to Tract 940, of which the project site is a parcel. The condition states: Each lot may be developed with one single-family residence, subject to all applicable Zoning Ordinance and Building Code Regulations. 3 . The proposed use conforms to the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. 4 . The proposed use is categorically exempt from environmental review (CEQA Section 15303) . SECTION 2 . Conditions. A multi-structure residence is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: Draft Resolution No. 2 Appeal Upheld Page 2 1. The applicant shall submit a covenant to the Community Development Department for review, approval, and recordation, which limits the density of the property to one dwelling unit, consistent with Use Permit U0914 and the Zoning Regulations. 2. The single-family residence shall be housed in no more than two structures. On motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1992 . Mayor Ron Dunin ATTEST: City Clerk Diane Gladwell OVED: ty A inistrative Officer I t or Community Dev opment Director _ r /4C R-1 O` L`( O e ,° C/ OS -40 lb R-1-S Si VICINIW MHP �� (/ .� 7 � NORTH =V7�:scr '�■ /�• -• .�....•.�... . . rtrrw�w- a � II,�1�� 'I I I I I 1 I F � I I � _ r MC.SM CC mm za ,:•:_a / "' Ise W 1p ( V _ �. .', 1 � ' .� I i:is._i � � :;cam. � ;l. �. i "... + s/ •. .. .. , v%�.• I ,* tt W o :•' LU LLJ Luj `�'i-'• 'i'' •, i' � ., 1 � - _ '..- .. .'moi'• Nk cc a CL 6 _r i. t � I ,i J / fiee. ; /; t.•- •i. --/ i=� < I - I'I; 04, �,-;mow •::.1\I` 1 / � 1 c t '' ri�Si•.�./ ; j' ,...=.,. .� ;, j .. �1•ia.t I1I I I I I 14I 111 I I I 1 I I I I :... . .. -• .:.:- t _ '. o ' r ! 1 ko IT lqo rN L 21 ey C- 110-zsf +ilc-A WSE Or-liefts; �. U6 . rj r N ` Y PLOT PLAN SCALE: �—..--�----t- �•-�-�--rT,- - -,_-. .—. .. (FEET) �''� Z�I-p'I / /" m s • N` JL �,�,?°' . •/ ') JJJf•••111, 1 .� �.,_ r � a/ On �r 9 �lar� hr arm ahav� 9arl��v /1 —, � •w ti 2Y! ' IP lk IX -Topr ILIA It a. arae , '� �•, .�. ` of // �• �. 1 � 1� Jl� I L:J SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5104-92 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo did conduct a public hearing in the City Council Chamber of the San Luis Obispo City Hall, San Luis Obispo, California, on August 12, 1992, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application No. A 138-92 by Louis & Christine Zimmerman, applicants. USE PERMIT REQUESTED: . To allow two dwellings on an R-1 lot where a tract condition would otherwise allow only one unit. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: On file in the office of Community Development, City Hall. GENERAL LOCATION: 1857 Conejo Avenue. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT: Low-density Residential with a Sensitive Site Overlay. PRESENT ZONING: R-1-S. WHEREAS, said commission as a result of its inspections, investigations, and studies made by itself; and in behalf and of testimonies offered at said hearing, has established existence of the following circumstances: 1. The proposal is inconsistent with the condition of the tract map which limits development on each lot to one single-family residence and with density standards in the Zoning Ordinance. Resolution No. 5104-92 Use Permit A 138-92 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application No. A 138-92 be denied. The foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo upon the motion of Commr. Settle, seconded by Commr. Peterson, and upon the following roll call vote: AYES: Commrs. Settle, Peterson, Cross, Williams, Karleskint NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Hoffman VACANCY: One Arnold B. Jonas, Secretary Planning Commission DATED: August 12, 1992 CLr4�+ P .C. Minutes August 12 , 1992 Page 4 VOTING: AYES - C/skin le, Cross , Williams , and K NOES - Crson. ABSENT - Cman. The motion passed. Commr. Cross suggestedits be discussed at a future meeting. Arnold Jonas said notluded an applicant from trading property for a parkinion. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Item 2 . Use Permit A 138-92 : A request to allow two dwellings on a lot where a tract condition would otherwise allow only one unit ; R-1 zone; Louis & Christine Zimmerman, applicants . ----------------------------------------------------------------- Whitney McIlvaine presented the staff report and asked for direction from the Commission on whether or not it was willing to grant the exception and for interpretation of the condition precluding guest units . In answer to a question by Commr . Cross , Whitney McIlvaine explained staff believes an accessory unit would be allowed. Arnold Jonas explained state legislation would override a tract map condition precluding accessory apartments , as long as the proposed accessory apartment conformed to local regulations requiring it to be attached and share the living space of the primary unit . In answer to a question by Commr. Cross , Whitney McIlvaine explained that the greater the slope, the less density allowed. Chairman Karleskint opened the public hearing. Ruel Czach, 850 Pacific Avenue, Cayucos , applicant ' s representative, said the conditions of the tract map seemed to allow a subdivision of the tract . He said the guest quarters would be approximately 500 square feet . He said the one-acre site was surrounded by a density of five houses per acre. He said an exception had already been granted for an adjacent lot . He showed an overhead of the site showing the area allowed to be developed because of grading, and explained the topography of the site and the designated building envelope prompted the proposed design , including development over the garage. In answer to questions by Commr . Cross , Mr. Czach said the main house was approximately 3 , 500 square feet . He explained the �/ 9 P .C. Minutes August 12 , 1992 Page 5 guest house could be built to 450 square feet if the size was the problem, and the location above the garage was being requested because of building restraints on the property due to the slope. Commr . Cross expressed concern that in the future, the guest house could become a rental unit . Mr . Czach said the original architect , who was semi-retired, was not aware of all zoning codes at the time of design , but he felt the request met the intent of the code . Commr. Settle asked if the applicant would agree to eliminating a kitchen and thereby avoid the problem staff has pointed out . Mr . Czach asked if the kitchen was eliminated , would there be no problem with the request . Whitney McIlvaine explained if the guest house did not have a kitchen, the proposed development would be considered a single unit for density purposes , but that there was also a question as to whether or not separate guest quarters were allowed for this tract . Commr . Settle felt a variance might be appropriate because of the slope, density, and topography. Joseph Young, 1846 Conejo, said he wanted to be assured the second unit would not become a rental unit . He said the accessory unit on an adjacent lot referred to by the applicant , was an- approved attached granny unit . Mrs . Young, 1846 Conejo, said that a storage unit above a garage adjacent to her property was being used as a rental , but believed it was now used for business purposes , and that a granny unit was converted to a rental . She said three residential dwellings could be considered to be adjacent to her property. She said sarcastically that the intention of the developer was probably to make multi-residential dwellings of the R-1 area, and the zoning of the area should be changed. Chairman Karleskint closed the public hearing. Commr. Cross expressed concern that even without a kitchen, the unit could become a rental . He said developer-s should realize there are constraints on sloped property. Commr . Settle said he questioned staff to hear options , not because he supported a separate unit on a R-1 lot . He said a request for a zoning change to multi-family would allow two separate units . He said he was not a supporter of state legislation allowing granny units , because they could evolve into rental units . He said he supported a single family unit with an .f-�D P . C. Minutes August 12 , 1992 Page 6 attached granny unit . He felt the restriction on a separate unit , irregardless of slope density, should be required. He expressed concerned about variances for such proposals . Commr. Williams said she sympathized with Mrs . Young, and if property at 1860 Conejo is being used for commercial or rental purposes , the City should know. She said she could not support the proposal because an R-1 neighborhood should require single residences . Commr . Peterson felt unless a zoning change was requested, the R- 1 restrictions should apply. Commr . Settle moved to recommend denial of a second dwelling unit at the location and that the site development be limited to a single family residence . Commr . Peterson seconded the motion, Resolution No . 5104-92 . Whitney McIlvaine asked Commr. Settle if one single-family residence meant one single structure? Commr . Settle said yes . Chairman Karleskint said a letter had been received from Dr. & Mrs . Joseph Boone, 1312 Woodside Drive, requesting that the request be denied. Commr. Cross suggested a condition to prevent storage units from becoming rental units . Arnold -Jonas advised conditions not be placed on dentals , but that that recommendation could be made to the Architectural Review Commission for consideration. Commr. Karleskint asked if staff ever conditioned a secondary unit to 10-amp circuits to prevent a secondary residence. Arnold Jonas said he did not know if that would be possible, but that it might be if the addition was a storage unit . Commr . Settle said a legal limitation allowing granny units might be a factor. Arnold Jonas explained the intent of the State action was to generate affordable housing by allowing a second unit on a lot precluded by R-1 zoning. He said state standards would override single family zoning. He explained the City adopted standards in conformance with state standards , when it required granny units to be attached to main structures . sf-�� P. C. Minutes August 12 , 1992 - Page 7 VOTING: AYES - Commrs . Settle , Peterson, Cross , Williams , and Karleskint . NOES - None. ABSENT - Commr . Hoffman . The motion passed. Commr. Cross suggested that a recommendation be sent to the Architectural Review Commission regarding the review of the project . Commrs . Settle and Karleskint agreed. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Item 3 . Rezoning R 132-92 . Considation of an amendment to the Zoning Regulations reg _ding day care facilities ; City of San Luis Obispo , pplicant . -------------------- -=--------------------------------- --------- Whitney McIlvaine presented the s aff report and recommended the Commission approve the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which would ensure that City regulati n of large day care homes would be consistent with State law a d City child care policies . Commr. Cross expressed concer that increased traffic might be a concern and the Circulation lement should be considered . Whitney McIlvaine explaine that staff examined the Circulation Element and determined th t large day care homes would not cause traffic to significantly increase . She explained that the highest increase in tra is per day would be 24 trips , if each child arrived and left he day care home individually, which was not a high enough volu a to impact daily trips on the street . She said the spacing equirement for large day care homes would help to alleviate c lative traffic impacts . Commr . Karleskint f It the increased traffic driving past the homes of other residents was not as significant a problem ( for adjacent neighbor ) as 24 stops at the center to drop and pick up children. Whitney McIlvai e. said carpooling would be encouraged and some children who I 've nearby might be able to walk to the day care center. Cindy Clemen said as proposed, the Zoning Regulation Amendment complied wi State standards . Arnold Jon s said that the amendment was unclear as to whether the 200-f of spacing between large day care facilities should be measured from property lines or from buildings containing day care fac lities .