Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-50• RESOLUTION NO. 2005-50 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2005-43(A) TO ALLOW A SECOND DRIVEWAY THAT DOES NOT LEAD TO A GARAGE AND APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2005-43(B) TO ALLOW A DRIVEWAY THAT EXCEEDS THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2417 WEST LA VERNE AVENUE KO -08/23/05 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant is requesting approval of Variance No. 2005-43(a) to allow a second driveway that does not lead to a garage and Variance No. 2005- 43(b) to allow a driveway that exceeds the width of the garage for the property located at 2417 West La Verne Avenue. B. Variance No. 2005-43(a) and Variance No. 2005-43(b) came before the Planning Commission on August 22, 2005 for a duly noticed public hearing. C. The Planning Commission determines that for Variance No. 2005-43(a), to allow a second driveway that does not lead to a garage, the following findings, which must be established pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 in order to grant a variance from the provisions of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, have not been established: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The property in question has sufficient lot width to provide access to a two car garage if constructed in the rear yard. The property has 60 feet of street frontage and 7,380 square feet of lot area, which exceeds the minimum R-1 lot standards of 50 feet of frontage and 6,000 square feet of lot . size. There is approximately 10 feet between the house and Resolution No. 2005-50 Page 1 of 5 side property lines that could be used to access a garage if constructed in the rear yard. There are no special circumstances relating to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings that would prevent this property from meeting current Municipal Code parking requirements, and therefore a second driveway would not deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The applicants are requesting approval of a second driveway on their property so that they can park additional vehicles on their property. The property in question has an existing driveway. Additionally, this lot is larger than many properties in the City and has enough property to accommodate the construction of a two car garage in their rear yard, which would eliminate an existing legal nonconforming situation by bringing the property into compliance with City parking standards for single-family residential property. Because this property can meet City parking codes, the granting of the requested variance is not necessary for the preservation • and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. Limiting the number of driveways on single-family property has the affect of limiting the amount of pavement within a front yard setback, resulting in increased landscaping and a more aesthetic streetscape for the neighborhood. The granting of a variance for a second driveway decreases the amount of landscaping in front of a house and increases the number of cars that are likely to be parked within the front yard setback, which is an area that would otherwise be landscaped. Less landscaping and additional paving would affect property values which would be detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to surrounding property owners. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of a variance for a second driveway would not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The property in question is located within aSingle-Family Residential • neighborhood which is consistent with the General Plan Resolution No. 2005-50 Page 2 of 5 Designation of Low Density Residential for the area. Driveways are ancillary to the primary residential use of the property and would have no affect on the General Plan of the City. D. The Planning Commission determines that for Variance No. 2005-43(b) the following findings, which must be established pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 in order to grant a variance from the provisions of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, have been established: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The property in question was annexed from the County in April 1959 and was built as a two bedroom home with a one car garage and rolled curbs as part of original construction under County jurisdiction. Because this property was constructed with a one car garage, there is not enough parking to meet City parking requirements which deprives the subject property of privileges afforded other single-family homes in the City that were built with two car garages. The variance requested for a wider driveway would allow three to four cars to be parked on site bringing the property into closer compliance with City parking requirements which would meet the intent of the City's parking code. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The applicant is requesting approval to widen their driveway beyond the width of their garage so that they can have a safe and secure place to park their private vehicles on their property. City parking standards for asingle-family home require four parking spaces with two of those spaces provided in an enclosed garage. Since these properties were constructed with only a one car garage, the wider driveways are needed to provide additional on-site parking in keeping with other single-family homes in the City which is necessary for the preservation of their substantial property rights. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to • the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. Resolution No. 2005-50 Page 3 of 5 Although increasing the width of the driveway beyond the • width of the garage would increase the amount of pavement within the front yard setback, this property has 60 feet of street frontage which allows this increase in pavement to be offset by additional front yard landscaping. This additional landscaping would compensate for any increase in pavement and would therefore not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property owners. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of a variance for wider driveways would not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The property in question is located within aSingle-Family Residential neighborhood which is consistent with the General Plan Designation of Low Density Residential for the area. Driveways are ancillary to the primary residential use of the property and would have no affect on the General Plan of the City. E. This project was reviewed in accordance with the guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act. The recommendation is exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15301. This Class 1 exemption allows the repair and maintenance of existing public or private structures, or topographical features involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of determination. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2005-145 will be filed for this project. Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana after conducting the public hearing hereby: Denies Variance No. 2005-43(a) to allow a second driveway that does not lead to a garage for the property located at 2417 West La Verne Avenue. 2. Approves Variance No. 2005-43(b) to allow a driveway that exceeds the width of the garage for the property located at 2417 West La Verne Avenue. These decisions are based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes but not is not limited to: the Staff reports and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 22nd day of August, 2005 by the following vote: Resolution No. 2005-50 Page 4 of 5 AYES: Commissioners NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: ;~ Kylee O. Otto ~' Assistant Cit Attorney Cribb, De La Torre, Gartner, Lutz, Mondo (5) Leo, Nalle (2) None (0) None (0) CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY • I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Clerk of the Planning Commission, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2005-50 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on August 22, 2005. Date: '~,~" C~ Clerk of the Planning Commissio City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2005-50 Page 5 of 5 • Conditions for Approval for Variance No 2005-43(b) Variance No. 2005-43(b), to allow the driveway to exceed the width of the primary garage, is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform Building Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below rip or to exercising the rights conferred by this site plan review. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the site plan review. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the site plan review approval. A. Planning Division 1. The width of the primary driveway shall not exceed 20 feet. The primary driveway is defined as that driveway which leads to the original one car garage. Exhibit A