HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 4827 2000-08-14
RESOLUTION NUMBER ;/8.2 7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, SUSTAINING
THE APPEAL OF MICHAEL HARDING,
APPROVING VARIANCE 00-3, PERMITIING
THE ADDITION OF 237 SQUARE FEET TO AN
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED ON A NON-CONFORMING
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT 220 SEVENTH
STREET, SEAL BEACH
I
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOL VB, DETERMINE AND FIND:
Section 1. On April 5, 2000, Meg Littlefield and Michael and Deborah
Harding submitted an application for Variance 00-3. The applicants seek to construct a
9' by 26'-4" addition (approximately 237 square feet) to the rear of an existing single
family residence.
Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15025(a) and ~ 1 LA of the
City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff has determined as follows: The application for
Variance No. 00-3 is categorically exempt from review pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15305 (Minor
Alterations in Land Use Limitations) because the request is for a minor alteration in land
use limitations in an area with an average slope of less than 20% and no changes in land I
use or density are involved; and, pursuant to ~ 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the project may have a significant effect on the
environment.
Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Pla111ling
Commission on May 17,2000, and continued to June 14, 2000, to consider Variance 00-
3. At the public hearing the Planning Commission received written and oral testimony.
Section 4. The record of the hearings on May 17 and June 14, 2000, and the
Planning Commission action of July 19,2000, indicate the following:
(a) On April 5, 2000, Meg Littlefield and Michael and Deborah
Harding submitted an application for Variance 00-3. The applicants seek to construct a
9' by 26'-4" addition (approximately 237 square feet) to the rear of an existing single
family residence.
(b) The applicants request a variance from the following section of the
Code of the Citv of Seal Beach:
D Section 28-2407.2.h.2 - permitting an addition when a minimum of one parking
space per unit is not provided.
(c) The subject property is legally described as:
I
Lots 18 (the north 12.5 feet thereof) and all of Lot 20 in Block 107 of
Tract Bay City, in the City of Seal Beach, County of Orange, California as
per map recorded in Book 2, Page 19, of Miscellaneous Maps in the
Office of the County Recorder of said County.
(d) The subject property is 37.5 feet by 117.5 feet in area, comprising
approximately 4,406.25 square feet of land area.
Resolution Number~
I
(e) The subject property is non-conforming due to density, parking,
and existing building setbacks. The property is large enough to provide two residential
structqres under current development standards of the city; three residential units
currently exist. A total of six parking spaces would be required currently for a total of
three housing units on the property. The existing two-story garage and apartment
structure at the rear of the property would be required to have side yard setbacks of 3' -9",
and 3' is provided along the southerly property line. No structural additions or
modifications are proposed to the existing two-story garage and apartment structure at the
rear of the property.
(t) Due to the existing age of the structures, 1947 and 1949, the
current development standards of the City are not complied with.
(g) The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH, SOUTH, EAST & WEST: Residential
Residential High Density (RHD) zone
housing
in
the
SOUTH-EAST: City Hall in the Main Street Specific Plan (MSSP) zone
(h) At the public hearing the applicants spoke in favor of the request
and persons spoke in opposition to the request.
(i) The Planning Commission determined on June 14, 2000, to deny
the requested variance, without prejudice, and requested staff to prepare the appropriate
resolutio~ for adoption by the Planning Commission.
(j) On July 19, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution
00-14, denying the requested variance without prejudice on a 4-0 vote.
I
Section 5. An appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of
Variance 00-3 was timely filed. On August 14, 2000 the City Council held a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the appeal. The Council considered all oral and written
testimony and evidence presented at the time of the public hearing, including the staff
reports.
Section 6. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those
stated in ~ 4 and 5 of this resolution and pursuant to n 28-2500 through 28-2502 of the
City's Code, the City Council hereby finds as follows:
(a) Variance 00-3 is consistent with the provisions of the Land Use
Element of the City's General Plan, which permits residential uses on the subject
property. Although this property is legal non-conforming due to previously permitted
development in 1947 and 1949, the proposed project wiII maintain the existing number of
residences and parking upon the subject property. The requested variance wiII not result
in an additional intensification of use above the present non-conforming situation of three
residential units existing on a parcel adequate in size for two residential units, resulting in
non-conformance with current development standards of the City. The requested
additions are to provide reasonable accommodation in accordance with the requirements
of the Federal Fair Housing Act.
I
(b) The use is also consistent with the remaining elements of the
City's General Plan as the policies of those elements are consistent with, and reflected in,
the Land Use Element. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General
Plan.
./
. ., (c) There are special related circumstances, which, through the strict
application of this Chapter; would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by
other property in the same vicinity and zone. Specifically, the variance request wiII
provide "reasonable modification" and "reasonable accommodation" to the proposed
occupant's of the existing single-story residential structure, one of which is physically
Resolution Number t/8~7
handicapped. The federal Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 (FHAA) has as one of
its principal airns the prevention of "discrimination" against persons with "handicaps" in
the use and enjoyment of a "dwelling."
(d) The granting of this variance would not be the granting of a special
privilege inconsistent with other limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and
rone. Specifically, the subject request meets the "reasonable modification" and
"reasonable accommodation" standards of the Fair Housing Act, and in addition:
IJ the future residents face burdens in using or occupying the subject dwelling that
are not faced by non-handicapped individuals;
IJ the accommodation for the applicant's facility will not impose administrative or
financial costs on the city; and
IJ the accommOdation for the applicant's facility will not undermine the
fundamental purpose of it city's land use controls.
I
Section 7. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby sustains the
appeal of Michael Harding, reverses the decision of the Planning Commission, and
approves Variance 00-3, subject to the following conditions:
1. Variance 00-3 is approved for the construction of a 9-foot by 26'-4" addition
(approximately 237 square feet) to the rear of an existing single family residence.
IJ The proposed addition will expand the size of two existing bedrooms within
the existing single family residence from approximately 100 and 157.5 square
feet, to approximately 189 and 262.5 square feet, respectively.
IJ An additional bathroom of approximately 48 square feet would be provided
for the larger new bedroom.
IJ The size of the existing single-story residence would be increased from
approximately 870 square feet to approximately 1,106 square feet.
2.
All construction shall be in substantial compliance with the plans approved
through Variance 00-3.
I
3. This Variance shall not become effective for any purpose unless an "Acceptance
of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence of the
Director of Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning
Department; and until the ten (10) day appeal period has elapsed.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Coun~the City of Seal
Beach f! a ~ng thereof held on the /- - day of
Q./-<? , 2000, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmem
"iJa1k~d t-~
MAYOR
I
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABST AlN: Councilmembers
Resolu~ion NUmber~
STATEOFCALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH )
I
I, Joanne M. Yeo, City Clerk of Seal Beach, Californi~fJ7bY certify that the foregoing
resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number on file in the office of the
City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of th~ of Seal Beach, at
. ~ ""1'- """'" hcld 00"" ;. - MY of
'(LA , 2000.
I
I
Resolution NUmber~~1
PROOF OF PUB~
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
This space is for the County
Clerk's Filing Stamp
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of Orange
I am a citizen of the United States
and a resident of the county afore-
said; I am over the age of eighteen
years, and not a party to or inter-
ested in the above-entitled matler.
I am the principal clerk of the printer
of the SEAL BEACH SUN, a
newspaper of general circulation,
printed and published weekly in the
City of Seal Beach, County of
Orange and which newspaper has
been adjudged a newspaper of
general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of Orange, State
of California, under the date of
2/24/75. Case. Number A82583; that
the notice of which the annexed is a
printed copy (set in type not smaller
than nonpareil), has been published
in each regular and entire issue of
said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof pn the following
dates, to-wit~
'/ 7
,
all in the year 2000.
Proof of Publication of
...............................................
I
...............................................
I certify (or declare) under penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
.. NOTICEOF - '.-
PUBLIC HEARING '
NonCE IS HEREBY GIVEN thai
the City CounCil of the' City of Seal
Beach WIn hold a publIC hearing on
Monday, August 14,2000. at 7'00
pm," the City Counctl. Chambers
211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach. 10
conSider the follOWing rtern ...
. APPEAL OF OENIAL OF
. VARIANCE 00.3
220 7TH STREET. SEAL BEACH
APPELLANTS REQUEST: Addllton
'of approximately 237 square feet to
_8 legal non-conforming bUIlding
SpeCifically, the applicant 18
requesting 10 add to a bUildIng on
~ a property that has 3 units and only
2 parking. spaces A vanance IS
reqUIred SInCe the SUbJect proper-
ty does not provide a m,nrmum of
1 parking space per resldentlalllv_
rng Unit _
ENVIRON-MENTAL REVIEW: ThiS
project IS .categorlcally elCempt
farthe reqUirements of CEOA
CODe SECTIONS: 28-2407. 28-
.2500.28-2501,28-2502.28_801,
~PPLlCANT" Meg Littlefield' . ._
O!lN~R:' Michael &. Deborah Ha;d: '
'"g ~. "....
At the above time and' piace.ail
Interesled persons may be heard If
so desired If you challenge the pro-
posed Counctl"actlons In court you
may be limited to r,alsmg only those
Issues you or soml!!one else raised
at the pUblIC hearing described In thiS I.
nOlrce, or In wnllen correspondence
dehvered to the Ctty of Seal Beach
~t. or prior to, ~he pUblic hearmg ,
DATED. '"':'t"S 2~th day of July; 2000.
JoanneYeo' .' .....
d'tyClerk.,' ,
Published In the Seal Beac';' Sun
Journal, 7L?JJ90: _ _
I
Dated at Seal Beac~
this ;; 7day of C 1',2000.
-;Y
Signat e
PUBLICATION PROC ED BY:
THE SUN NEWSPAPERS
216 Main Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
(562) 430-7555 . (949) 759-7726
I