Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Res 1338 - 1984-08-15 , , RESOLUTION NUMBER 1338 A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING VARIANCE APPLICATION 7-84, A REQUEST TO ALLOW DEVIATIONS FROM THE MUNICIPAL CODE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACK REQUI REMENTS (3580 TEABERRY CIRCLE) 'IHE PLANNING CCHUSSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH HEREBY RESOLVES: WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, mEREAS, WHEREAS, Whereas, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, mEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS , WHEREAS, an application was duly filed by Dan A. Newkirk, 3580 Teaberry Circle, Seal Beach, California 90740; and the property is described as, Lot 40 of Tract 6416 recorded wi th the Recorder of Orange County; and the subject property contains approximately 5,200 sq. ft. and is located 186+ ft. north of the centerline of Almond Avenue (3580 Teaberry Circle); and the subject property has approximately 52 feet of frontage on Teaberry Circle and a depth of 100 feet; and the subject property contains a 2800 sq. ft. two-story single family residence. the surrounding land use and zoning are as follows: North, East, South & West: Single family residences in the R-l (Low Density Residential) zone; and Teaberry Circle is a local street develoPed to its ultimate master planned width of 45 feet; and in late January, the City received a code enforcement complaint about the construction of a spa and gazebo. After insPection of the City records, it was found that this was constructed without permits. Then the Chief Building Official inSPected the property and left a notice that a building permdt must be issued; and on February 3, 1984, the staff sent a letter to the owner outlining the violation with a l4~ay period to correct; and on March 6th, staff received a letter from the property owner acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Violation stating that he would be in on March 12th to discuss the matter. (OWner did not show.); and on March 13, 1984, the applicant received a building permit. No insPections have been called for or approved to this date; and on April 16 and May 10, 1984, staff received additional complaint; and on May 18,1984, staff sent a second Notice of Violation; and on May 31, 1984, the property was inspected by City staff noting that nothing has been done to correct matters with red tag notice posted on property; and WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS , WHEREAS , WHEREAS , WHEREAS, , , on June 1, 1984, the Principal Planner talked to the owner on the matter at the counter. At that time the owner stated that he would be correcting the violation by June 18, 1984; and on June 28, 1984, the applicant brought in a plot plan showing the new "corrected" location of the gazebo, spa and deck. Staff noted to applicant that the new location was still in violation of the 10 ft. rear setback and that decks 18" above grade are considered by code to be structures and must also meet the code setback. He stated that he would be in the next day for a variance application; and on July 10, 1984, a variance application was filed with the Planning Department; and The applicant SPecifically proposed the following: SETBACK (COOE) REAR SIDE 1) 6 ft. x circular spa 2) 10 ft. x 10'x12' gazebo 3) 12 ft. x 12 ft. deck 6'(4') 5' (10) 2.5'(10') 6'(4') 5' (5' ) 2.5'(5') The applicant requested to deviate 5 ft. from the rear yard setback for the gazebo, and 7.5 ft. from the rear yard setback and 2.5 ft. from the sideyard setback for an elevated deck; and The Seal Beach Municipal Code defines structures as follows: "Section 28-278 Structures: Structure means anything constructed in the ground or anything which requires location on the ground or which is attached to sanething having location on or in the ground, but not including fences or walls as fences less than six feet in height. This definition excludes paved areas (Ord. #948);" and The structures are in violation of Section 28-240l(2)b Yard' Dimensions (Minimums): Setbacks: Rear yard not abutting street - District V - 10 feet; and On August 15, 1984 the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on Variance 7-84; and The Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the variance: 1. The proposal conflicts with the intent of Article 3, Section 28-300 to regulate and to limit the type, height and bulk of buildings and structures in the various districts and zones, and to regulate the areas of yards and other open areas about and between buildings and structures. 2. The gazebo is located in a required setback. 3. That the structures were constructed without a building permit and staff was made aware of this construction due to a code enforcement complaint. 4. That the applicant had been notified of the Municipal Code violation and after nmnerous contacts, has yet to make an effort to come into substantial compliance as of this date. , , 5. No special circumstances are applicable to the subject property that depri YeS such property of the pri vileges enjoyed by other property in the same vicinity and zone. 6. The variance would grant sPecial privileges inconsistent with the l~itations upon other properties in the same vicinity. 7. The proposal violates the intent of Section 28-401 (2) b of the Municipal Code. 8. That legal grounds for approval of a variance under Section 65906 of the California Government Code do not exist for this application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Camnission does hereby deny Variance 7-84. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Ccmmission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 15th day of AU8ust , 1984 by the following vote: AYES: Ccmnissioner Cnving:tnn, Gn1r1F!nbF!riT PF!rrin. Murphy. Jessner NOES: ccmnissioner Nnnp ABSENT: Oammissioner Nnnp