HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/03/1990, 2 - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF A REQUEST TO ALLOW A REDUCED STREET YARD SETBACK FROM 20 FE ^ �I�In�l��llAl„n�l — MEETING DATE:
'uIIW II In�u�l I'VII cityo san LUIS OBISPO July 3, 1990- y•Oo .
Slags COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ”N
FROM: Arnold Jonas�Community Development Director;
BY: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner pIt
SUBJECT:
Appeal of Planning Commission denial of a request to allow a
reduced street yard setback from 20 feet to 14.5 feet for a carport
on Del Norte Way, between Ramona Drive and Foothill Boulevard.
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Draft Resolution No. 1 denying the appeal and upholding the
decisions of the Planning Commission and the Hearing Officer to
deny the request for a reduced street yard of 14.5 feet for a
carport, based on findings.
BACKGROUND:
Proiect Description
The applicants want to construct a carport in front of their house
to provide a second covered parking space. The carport would be
supported by 6-inch columns and have a corrugated fiberglass roof.
The proposed carport would encroach 5 feet, 6 inches into the
required 20-foot street yard, and would be set back 14 feet, 6
inches from the street property line.
Data Summary
Address: 132 Del Norte Way
Applicants/Appellants: Howard and Shirley Walker
Representative: Frank Lee, Martin And Steele Associates
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low Density Residential
Environmental Status: Categorically exempt under Section 15305.a.
of CEQA Guidelines, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations.
Site Description
The irregularly-shaped site consists of about 8,100 square feet.
It is developed with a house with attached garage. The bulk of the
site is fairly flat, but there is a steep bank at the rear. A
sidewalk has not yet been installed along the site's street
frontage. The surrounding neighborhood consists of older single
family residential homes.
o '
041124111 city of san Luis osispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Use Permit A 40-90
Page 2
DISCUSSION
1. Staff Analysis of Street Yard Exception Request
An administrative use permit was requested to allow the carport to
encroach into the required 20-foot street yard setback. Staff's
main concerns with the request have been that it would set an
undesirable precedent for the neighborhood since other structures
in the vicinity comply with street yard setback standards, and that
a parking space in front of the house would not be aesthetically
pleasing.
The applicants' representative has submitted a series of
photographs of structures in the vicinity. The photos are intended
to provide examples of other sites in the vicinity where parking
in the setback has been allowed. The distinction between these
examples and the subject request are that the parking spaces in the
setback shown are unenclosed and uncovered and allowed as shown.
All of the structures shown in the photographs conform with the
required 20-foot street yard setback.
Section 17.16.020 of the zoning regulations states that "yards are
intended to help determine the pattern of building masses and open
areas within neighborhoods" and "to help provide air circulation,
views and exposure to sunlight for both natural illumination and
use of solar energy". To be consistent with these outlined
objectives, enclosed or covered parking spaces in required street
yards are not normally allowed. Generally, staff and the
Architectural Review commission have not supported requests for
parking spaces in the street yard because they are visually
imposing and add to the clutter of the streetscape.
To address visual concerns with the structure in the street yard,
plans indicate that a tree and a hedge would be planted in the
street yard in front of the carport. In staff's opinion, it will
take some time for these proposed plants to become established to
the point where they will actually provide the desired screening
benefits. However, if the council chooses to support the appeal
and allow the setback exception for the carport, staff would
suggest a condition that a landscaping plan for the street yard,
showing substantial screening of the parking space, return to
planning staff for review and approval. .
i��d�U city of San Luis OBISpo
INIGN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Use Permit A 40-90
Page 3
2. Appellants' position
The appellants' representative indicates in his attached appeal
statement that the carport is needed to provide a second covered
parking space for the Walkers. He disagrees with staff that the .
proposal will set a neighborhood precedent because of the many
vehicles that are parked within the street yards of homes in the
residential area. He concludes that the carport will be
architecturally compatible with the house and neighborhood.
3. Previous Review of the Use Permit Request
The request was first scheduled for a public hearing on February
16, 1990. It was continued because neither the applicant nor the
representative was present at the meeting. It was again scheduled
for a hearing on March 30, 1990. On that date, the Hearing Officer
took an action to deny the request based on staff's recommendation.
Again neither the applicant nor the representative attended the
meeting. No other public testimony was received at either meeting.
An appeal letter was received by the city from the applicant's
representative on April 6,1990. The appeal was considered by the
Planning Commission on April 25, 1990. The Commission discussed
the possibility of having an uncovered parking space within the
setback constructed of an textured paving or brick with
landscaping. However, the Planning Commission on a 6-0-1 (Rourakis
absent) vote denied the appeal and upheld the Hearing Officer's
original action to deny the use permit request for a reduced street
yard.
An appeal to the City Council was filed with the City Clerk on May
4, 1990.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Council may adopt Resolution No. 2 which would uphold the
appeal and approve a 14.5-foot street yard for the requested
carport.
This action would indicate support for the appeal . It would
allow the applicants to build the carport in the street yard
as they would like to do. In staff's opinion, the main
disadvantages of supporting the street yard reduction are the
aesthetics of a carport in front of the house and the
precedent-setting nature of allowing a covered parking space
in the street yard.
01141 city of Sa►n tUls o81Spo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Use Permit A 40-90
Page 4
2. The Council may continue review with direction to the
appellants and staff.
This alternative would be appropriate if the council feels
there is additional information needed, or if they would like
to see changes made in plans.. prior to rendering a decision.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council should adopt Draft Resolution No. 1 denying the appeal
and upholding the decisions of the Planning Commission and the
Hearing Officer to deny the request for a 14.5-foot street yard
setback for the proposed carport.
Attached: Draft Resolution No. 1 (deny the appeal)
Draft Resolution No. 2 (uphold the appeal)
vicinity Map
Site Plan
Front Building Elevation
Council appeal form/letter
Letter of Appeal dated 4-6-90
Use Permit A 40-90 approval letter dated 4-2-90
Minutes of 3-30-90 administrative hearing
Minutes of 4-25-90 Planning Commission meeting
d:a40-90-2.wp
P
ORESOLUTION NO. (1990 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 TO ALLOW A
STREET YARD REDUCTION FROM 20 FEET TO 14.5 FEET
FOR A CARPORT AT 132 DEL NORTE WAY
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 40-
90, the appellants' statements, the Planning Commission's action,
staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following
findings:
C
1. The exception will set a precedent for the neighborhood since other structures in the vicinity conform with
required street yard setback standards.
2. The exception is not necessary for the applicant's full
enjoyment and use-of his/her property.
3. The exception is not appropriate at the proposed location
and will not be compatible with surrounding development.
SECTION 2. The request for approval of an administrative
use permit to allow a reduced street yard setback from 20 feet to
14.5 feet is hereby denied.
On motion of
seconded by and on the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
OABSENT:
a -5
City Council Resolution No.
Page 2
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day
of , 1990.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
(:City inistrative Officer
C' y A ey
k6, 1-
Community Devel ment Director �
0
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S ACTION TO DENY A REQUEST
TO ALLOW A STREET YARD REDUCTION FROM 20 FEET TO 14.5 FEET
FOR A CARPORT AT 132 DEL NORTE WAY
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 40-
90, the appellants' statements, and the Planning Commission's
action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the
following findings:
1. The exception will not adversely affect the health, safety
and welfare of persons residing on the site or in the
vicinity.
2. The exception is appropriate at the proposed location and
will be compatible with surrounding land uses.
SECTION 2. Conditions. The proposed street yard reduction
from 20 feet to 14.5 feet at 132 Del Norte Way, A 40-90, is hereby
approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicants shall submit a landscaping plan for the
street yard to planning staff for review and approval
showing substantial screening of the proposed carport.
2. The applicants shall submit a sample of an alternative
roofing material for the carport to planning staff for
review and approval.
3. The applicants shall install sidewalk along the property's
frontage that meets city standards. Installation of the
o sidewalk may be deferred if the property owner submits a
covenant for recordation agreeing to install the sidewalk
within 30 days of written notice from the City Engineer.
J
City Council Resolution No.
Page 2
4. The applicants shall , install a street tree to city
standards to the approval of the City Arborist.
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 , 1990.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
City Adm nistrative Officer
t ne
Community Deve o ment Director
d:aplres.wp
VICINITY MAP,-
1.32 DEL NORTE
C' A40-90
y /%' iso
'� ��• 9. -U+ A11.h
• n(P1A� W
w� 4
W-1—PD '�V�
n.,. O= .O
M �► � HI.111s p/N p Nw Q
0
I.1 1�
its
0 F O O
O Y~
w`i
r
r
S [jl O yam' aiz _
O 0 0 0 101010
lov
O
1
o
DE�L NORTE
O O Q
v ® `" O
o
O
O o O . 0 0 0 0 0 0
fit /ta ,.
/s •R�Amc3NA
log 14Y es-T. los
a
O O O O O O O O
4
R _ 1 • R..1 O ' O
O O
\ J
O Q O O O
Q '� .ae a �e ru iss
OEL SUR
O 00% s _
--9
-_- -1L. - .•ger,:,�. �•a-- _
Oltla
y ^ '� O.pnDur .700 �:.a l i Ar,;
1.
.�
• I 290
•9•ire ,
t ' X"m
% I' 91tG
zt-
1•M/Idaw.
� Id'NN
e!
''\ \ N x •�
Arnow
Single Story
House
-
IF.F. � sBb.B � •:�
SCALE
Cma Pm
' • ------ =�; -- -; `' Required 20-foot
Street Yard Setback
' ^-` \ \,; ,:. •\\ cr..wewc;v.d•sta a ae a. &VIntb aeud MW Mg r Wo a b
old
R a u:�r minr::r a�'.°we.+.�.erte�w:c�r�
a,d Rwnww m
tf 1\/ ofl J-177a..•vm•J01"
IN.... .. . .. itOb
- ��-- —f• Ab IrwOs2.wwwp.d•,•pfp(r ad war
IF—
. _p
M A R T I N S T E E L E
ARCHITECTURE • CONSTRUCTION • INTERIORS
846 •IGUSSA •S.SAM LUIS OSIS►O.GA 91.01 • 003.564.6795 ��
-rtea
m14wC4rhe titer-oto r "040P
744.
,lct� /^APLB TPSO
4X9 - �a
m"o Couim ° 1'{ WvW oz vrnot4
� ,J I N f'�►F
w
"ICT06mv 4F Hie" NB*E ��a11 a IIs
PR0Nr eL- V ^ TIoN
32 PEL N o F- Ta WaY
M A R T I N • S T E E L E
ARCHITECTURE • CONSTRUCTION • INTERIORS
246 MIGUERA •S.SAN LUIS OSISPO.CA 93441 • S03.164.479a
all cityO San ' [ IS OBIS'PO
�134.01113 .
, iI� 990 Palm Street/Post Office Boz 8100 • San Luis Obispo.CA 93403.8100
APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedure as authorized by Title 1. Chapter
1.20 of the San Lula Obispo Municipal Code. the undersigned hereby appeals
from the decision of Ale &M/r &6i4& rendered
on &�- !ge jqV
which decision Consisted of the following (i.e.
set forth factual situation and the grounds for submitting this appeal.
Use additional sheets as needed) :
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed from with:
on
Appellant:
—Pg. 5#14EK Ar4Lkj&:?- .
Name/Title
RECEIVED Nie cis Z7W_040 MMar/N
Representative
MAY 4 1990 /y1WL41-t 5rWl.JF PRO ff F&II&M #;r
CRY CLERK Address S. (,� t7 .
SAN LUIS OB1SP0,CA
i�44 - 43q 22
Phone
Original fnr City Clerk
Cupy to City Attorney
Copy to City Administrative Officer /
Copy two the following department(s) :
T7
ity Clerk A, -WeR4164;_
IN 111 1111111
M A R T I N S T - E E L E
ARCHITECTURE. CONSTRUCTION-- • INTERIORS
846 H IGUERA u5, SAN LUIS OBI SPO, CA 93401 805.544.4398
May 4, 1990
City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
SUBJECT: Use Permit A 40-90
132 Del Norte Way
Dear members of the Council,
I would very much like to take this opportunity to appeal the
Planning Commission's decision made on Wednesday, April 25 to
deny our request to allow reduced front yard setback from 20 feet
to 14.5 feet for a carport at the subject location. But first, let
me introduce some background information on the matter.
The subject itself is a house with an attached, one-car garage; and
it is located in an irregular, pie-shape lot at the bend of Del
C Norte Way. There is no sidewalk. The surrounding neighborhood
consists of similar older single family residential homes.
The applicants are an elderly couple who have contributed to the
City for a long time and who will continue to play an active role
in this community. Dr. Shirley Walker heads her own practice here
in town. Mr. Howard Walker is a professor of Chemistry at Cal. Poly.
They each own and drive a car to and from work.
Not everyone is blessed with the modern convenience of a two-car .
garage. And in an old neighborhood as such, parking space is
especially at a premium. The applicants are not asking for a new
two-car garage, nor do they need one. All they need and ask for is
a covered parking space- for their second car- with easier and
safer access to and from the house. It is, therefore, necessary
for the applicant's enjoyment of their property.
(cont. )
1
j
M -A R -i I N S T' - - E E - L E
ARCHITECTURE CONSTRUCTION INTERIORS
846 H IGUERA # 5, SAN LUIS 08151`0, CA 93401 805.544.4398
(cont. )
The staff reports presented in the previous hearing suggest that
the proposal is incompatible with surrounding development and will
set a precedent for the neighborhood. As you can see from the
photographs presented in the planning commission hearing, there are
a few houses in the neighborhood that have similar, if not worse,
encroachment problem; there are many more that are borderline
cases. It shall also be noted that most of these structures have
been erected without a permit. But legal or not, there can be no
denial. of their existence in the same neighborhood. Therefore, the
proposal will not set a precedent and definitely not incompatible
with surrounding developments.
There is no argument the proposed covered parking space will alter
the exterior look of the house. Every remodel does. - But I
strongly feel that I have done my best in preserving the character
of the house and in addressing the context of the neighborhood.
Please reconsider this request. Thank You.
Sincerely,
Frank Lee
Martin and Steele
846 Higuera Street $5
San Luis Obispo
I
2
. M A R I N S
'%ARCHITECTURE CONSTRUCTION INTERIORS
846 H IGUERA # 5, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 • 805.544.4398
O
AtCEIVEt,
APR 0 6 gggp
April 6, 1990
-^M•rd De.ebor
Planning Commission
City of San Luis Obispo
SUBJECT: Use permit Appl. A 40-90
132 Del Norte Way
Dear members of the Commission,
I would like to take this opportunity to state the reasons
for appealing the public hearing decision made on Friday,
March 30, to deny our request to allow reduced street yard
setback from 20 feet to 14.5 feet for a carport at the
subject location.
My clients are in their early 60's and both have contributed
C, to this community for a long time. She, -Dr. Shirley Walker,
has a psychiatric practice in town. He, Howard Walker, is a
Professor of Chemistry at Cal Poly. All they want is to
provide a shelter for the other car from the elements that
can prove extremely difficult to the elderly.
For the record, all properties on Del Norte and Del Sur Way
share a common property line which is measured 8 feet from
the face of the curb (City's Engineering Department) . The
front yard setback line is located 20 feet in from the pro-
perty line. That makes it 28 feet from the curbface. This
proposal will encroach 5.5 feet or less into the setback.
There are a few houses in the neighborhood that have similar
encroachment problem (Plate 1: center and bottom photos) and
several that are borderline cases. Therefore, this is not at
all a precedence setting case.
(cont. )
. M A R _l. I N S T ,_ E E L .E
ARCHITECTURE CONSTRUCTION INTERIORS
846 H IGUERA # 5, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 • 805.544.4398
(cont. )
It is rather ironic that the very system, which denies
someone who takes the time to go through the process in his
request for a covered space for his car, can somehow
overlook a boat docked in front of his neighbor's yard
(Plate 2. )
There is no arguement that the proposed carport will alter
the look of the house, but I strongly feel that I have done
my best in preserving the character of the house and in
addressing the context of the neighborhood.
Please reconsider this request. Thank You.
Sincer ly,
Frank
Martin and Steele
846 Higuera Street 05
San Luis Obispo
i
�I crcy o s. An tuts omspo
CJ = 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 •San Luis Obispo,CA 93403-8100
April 2, 1990
Shirley Walker
132 Del Norte Way
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 40-90
132 Del Norte Way
Dear Ms. Walker:
On Friday, March 30, 1990? I conducted a public hearing on your
request to allow reduced street yard setback from 20 feet to 14 .5
feet for a carport, at the subject location.
After reviewing the information presented, I denied your request,
O based on the following findings:
Findings
1. The exception will set a precedent for the neighborhood since
other structures in the vicinity conform with required street
yard setback standards.
2. The exception is not necessary forthe applicant's full
enjoyment and use of his/her property.
3. The exception is not appropriate at the proposed location and
will not be compatible with surrounding development.
My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission
within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any
person aggrieved by the decision.
If you have any questions, please call Pam Ricci at 549-7168.
Sincerely,
&15w�
Ken Bruce cc: Thomas Martin
C Hearing Officer 846 Hguera ' Street 15
SIA, CA 93401
drs
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING - MINUTES
FRIDAY .MARCH 30, 1990
132 Del Norte Way. Use Permit Appl. A 40-90; Request to allow
reduced street yard setback from 20 feet to
14.5 feet for carport; R-1 zone; Shirley
Walker, applicant.
Jeff Hook presented the staff report, noting that staff is
recommending denial of the request, based on three finding which
he outlined.
The public hearing was opened.
No one was present to speak for or against this request.
The public hearing was closed.
Ren Bruce noted this is the second hearing on this item, and no one
appeared at the first meeting to speak either in support of or
against the request.
Ken Bruce denied the request, based on the following findings:
Findings
1. The exception will set a precedent for the neighborhood since
other structures in the vicinity conform with required street
yard setback standards.
2. The exception is not necessary for the applicant's full
enjoyment and use of his/her property.
3. The exception is not appropriate at the proposed location and
will not be compatible with surrounding development.
It was explained to those present that this decision can be
appealed to the Planning Commission within ten calendar days of the
action by any person aggrieved by the decision.
1
P.0. Minutes
April 259 1990
Page 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item 2. Public Hearing: Use Permit A 40-90. Appeal of Hearing Officer ' s
action denying a request to allow reduced street yard
setback from 20 feet to 14 .5 feet for carport ; 1.32 Del norte Way;
R-1 zone; Shirley Walker, applicant and appellant .
Dave Moran presented the staff report and recommended upholding the Hearing
Officer 's action to deny the request, subject to findings.
Chairman Schmidt opened the public hearing.
Frank Lee, 846 Higuera, applicant ' s representative, did not believe that
other neighborhood structures conformed to setback standards. He discussed
the request and did not feel it set a negative precedent , given the fact
that boats and trailers were being stored in the streetyards of
neighborhood houses.
Shirley Walker, 132 Del Norte, applicant , discussed the changes in the
neighborhood houses due to upgrades , and her own desire to improve her home
and comply with setbacks. She felt the request was justified, due to the
evidence of other non-conforming structures in the neighborhood.
Tom Martin, 846 Higuere, applicant ' s represent.ive, discussed the narrow
width of the garage door and felt the carport would offer better access and
mobility for the applicant. He discussed the proposed project and felt it
would enhance the neighborhood.
Chairman Schmidt closed the public hearing.
Commrs. Hoffman and Gurnee suggested carport alternatives, using textured
pavement or bricks with landscaping that could serve as a parking area
without a cover.
Commr. Gurnee moved to deny the appeal and uphold the Hearing Officer ' s
action, subject to findings. He further suggested the applicant
investigate the use of textured paving and landscaping to screen a parking
space in the streetyar.d.
Commr. Peterson seconded the motion, Resolution No. 5013-90.
VOTING: AYES - Commr.s. Gurnee, Peterson, Billington, Hoffman, Karleskint ,
and Schmidt.
NOES - None.
ABSENT - Commr. Kourakis.
The motion passed.
C