HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Res 1339 - 1984-08-15
t
t
RESOLUTION NUMBER 1339
A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING VARIANCE 8-84
A REQUEST TO OBVIATE FROM THE REQUIRED
INTERIOR GARAGE WIDTH AT 212 3RD STREET
'!HE PLANNING C<J.1MISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE:
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS ,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS ,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
an application was duly filed by Robert and Gay Snyder, 234
6th Street, Apt. 17, Seal Beach, California 90740; and
the property is described as Lot 11 of Block 103 in Tract
698, as per map recorded in Book 31, Page 27 of Miscellaneous
Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said county;
and
the subject property is an irregular shaped parcel of land
containing 4,042 + sq. ft. and is located at 212 3rd Street;
and
the subject property has approximately 47.56 feet of frontage
on 3rd Street and 120.56 feet on the Central Way Alley; and
20.54 feet on the 4th Street Alley; and a depth of 117.48
feet; and
the surrounding land use and zoning are as follows:
North, east, south, west - A mixture of single-family residences,
legal nonconforming multi-family residences in the R-3 (High
Density Residential) zone; and
on April 30, 1984, the appl icant received "Concept Approval"
by the Planning Department for a 3,048.80 + sq. ft. new
singlefamily house; and
on June 5, 1984, the California Coastal Comnission approved
permit 5-894-330 for the removal of an existing single family
dwelling, demolish the foundations and construct a two-story
single family dwelling; and
as required for all construction within Surfside and "Old
Town", the applicant provided a topographic survey. At that
time it was found that the portion of the lot that fronts
onto the 4th Street Alley was 20.54 feet instead of the 23.0
feet that was shown on the approved plans; and
due to this discrepancy, the applicant has had to make
modifications in his plans; and
specifically, the applicant has had to modify the front of
the proposed garage from 18'7" to 16'7" creating an interior
garage dimension of 15.25 feet when an 18 foot interior
dimension is the required width for a two-car garage by Section
28-802 of the Municipal Code; and
the appl icant has taken advantage of an allowable exception
noted in Section 28-801 which reads "on lots of less than
thirty-seven and one-half feet in width, an encroadrnent into
the exterior sideyard for the length of the garage will be
permi tted provided that a setback of three feet is maintained.
The intent of this provision is to provide an interior garage
dimension of 18 feet. II The applicant has used this section
so to be able to provide the maximum interior garage width
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
t
'Il
.
possible without deviating fram the required 3 foot sideyard
setback; and
The lot is such an irregular shape that only thru the use
of tandem parking for which a variance would be required,
or thru the proposed substandard width garage for which this
variance is being requested, could the two-car covered garage
requirement of the Municipal Code be met.
Section 28-802 Parking Requirements for the R-3 (High Density
Residential) zone specifically reads:
Sec. 28-802. Parking Requirements.
District I
(1) Minimum dimensions per space
(interior dimensions) 9 feet x 20 feet
(2) Minimum number per
dwell ing unit
2 minimum, + 1 guest space
for each 7 dwelling units
(No guest parking required
for less than 7 dwelling
units. )
(3) Form
Open and accessible
(4) Type
Garage or carport (guest
spaces may be urrovered): and
On August 15, 1984 the Planning Commission held a public hearing
on Variance 8-84; and
The Planning Comnission makes the following findings regarding
the variance:
1. The property is required to provide two covered parking
spaces by the Municipal Code.
2. The property is of such an irregular shape and width that
the variance is requested.
3. Hardship due to lot shape and width which was not self
imposed by the applicant has been demonstrated which
deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other
property in the same vicinity and zone.
4. The variance will not adversely affect the General Plan.
5. The granting of such variance will not constitute a grant
of special privilege inconsistent with other limitations
upon other prOPerties in the same vicinity and zone.
6. That the neighborhood presently has a significant parking
problem.
7. That legal grounds for approval of a variance under Section
69506 of the California Government Code do exist for this
appl ication.
.
.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Cannission does hereby
approve Variance 8-84.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Conmission of the City of
Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 15th day of
August 1984 by the following vote:
AYES: Cannissioners
Covington, Goldenberg, Perrin, Murphv. Jessner
NOES: commissioners
None
ABSENT: Comnissioners
None
Chairman of