HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1993/06/23 (7)
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993
Page 1
3.
PUBLIC HEARING:
ZA V -93-11: request to construct a second stOry addition on
a corner lot at 993 Paseo La Cresta. within the Casa Del
Rev Planned Communitv - Carol Thomas
A. BACKGROUND
The proposal is to construct a second story addition on a corner lot at 993 Paseo La
Cresta, within the Casa Del Rey Planned Community, a single family planned community
north of Telegraph Canyon Road, east of Paseo Ladera. The regulations for this planned
community generally restrict second story additions on corner lots. The Environmental
Review Coordinator has determined that this proposal is exempt from environmental
review as a class (e)( 1) exemption.
Originally, this application was to be processed by the Zoning Administrator as
Conditional Use Permit 93-40. However, objections to the project were received from
seven neighbors, and, with the applicant's concurrence, the proposal has been forwarded
to the Planning Commission for consideration as ZA V -93-11. Since being advised of the
original objections, the applicant has met with several neighbors to explain the project,
and reports that three residents have retracted their original objections to the project.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution approving ZA V -93-11.
C. DISCUSSION
Adiacent zoning and land use
North
South
East
West
PC
PC
PC
PC
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Existing site characteristics
The 7,480 sq. ft. site is located at the northwest corner of Paseo La Cresta and Paseo
Verde: the lot currently contains a single-story residence. The neighborhood is
comprised largely of two-story single family homes. The southerly (across the street),
westerly (adjacent), and easterly (across the street) single family residences are at
approximately the same grade as the subject site, while the northerly adjacent single
family residence is at a significantly lower elevation.
--
-
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993
Page 2
Proposed use
The proposal involves the construction of a 923 sq. ft. three bedroom, two bath second
story addition to the existing single story residence.
The addition will be located over the westerly portion of the existing home, on the
interior side of the lot. The maximum building height of the residence after the addition
will be approximately 24', compared to the existing building height of 18' (measured to
top of the ridge). The addition has been designed to match the architectural character
of the existing residence and neighborhood.
D. ANALYSIS
The original development standards for the single family homes within the Casa Del Rey
Planned Community were adopted along with the subdivision map (PCS- 77 -9) by the City
Council in 1978, and included the restriction of all corner lots to single-story structures
in order to avoid a walled-in effect and open up the intersections within the
neighborhood. Specifically, the restriction limits dwellings on corner lots to one and
one-half stories or 21 feet in height.
In 1985, the regulations were amended by the City Council to pennit the development
of two-story homes on 50% of the remaining corner lots within the as yet undeveloped
portion of this subdivision (178 remaining lots, 25 of which are corner lots). It was
believed that limiting second-story construction to 50% of corner lots, along with the use
of sloping roof lines and staggered elevations in the building designs, would preserve the
intent of keeping an open appearance at intersections.
In this case a hardship can be argued in that the overwhelming majority of lots within
the subdivision, including many of the corner lots, are developed with larger two-story
homes. Although the lot in question contains almost 7,500 square feet, the deep street-
side setbacks restrict the ability to add single-story floor space to increase the square
footage comparable with surrounding dwellings and still maintain appropriate private
open space in the rear yard.
Also, the development standards did not distinguish between which corner lots would or
would not be appropriate for two-story homes, only that no more than 50% would be so
developed. Consequently, it can be reasoned that the use of sloping roof lines and
staggered elevations in the building design, as called for by the standards, would
ameliorate the visual impact at intersections regardless of which particular intersection
the second story condition occurred.
The second story addition in this instance is proposed to be located over the north-
westerly portion of the existing structure, along the interior area of the lot. As such, it
1-
-
A
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993
Page 3
largely preserves the open feeling desired along the street sides of the property.
Furthermore, the proposed design, in addition to providing the sloping roof lines and
staggered elevations called for by the standards, also incorporates materials and
architectural treatments intended to match the existing residence, as well as the
surrounding neighborhood character. The addition is also only three (3) feet higher than
what would be allowed under the present standards.
For these reasons, we are recommending that the request be granted in accordance with
the findings contained in the attached resolution.
(zav-93-11.rep)
,-
RESOLUTION NO. ZAV-93-11
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A ZONING VARIANCE TO PERMIT
A SECOND STORY ADDITION AT 993 PASEO LA CRESTA
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a zoning variance was filed with the Planning
Department on April 30, 1993 by Carol Thomas, and
WHEREAS, said application requested permission to construct a second story addition
on a comer lot located at 993 Paseo La Cresta, within the Casa Del Rey planned community,
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said zoning
variance application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners
within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing,
and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m.,
June 23, 1993 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project was exempt from environmental
review as a class (e)( 1) exemption.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
hereby grants the zoning variance ZA V -93-11, based on the following findings:
1. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the
owner exists. Said hardship may include practical difficulties in developing the property
for the needs of the owner consistent with the regulations of the zone; but in this context,
personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits, and neighboring
violations are not hardships justifying a variance. Further, a previous variance can never
have set a precedent, for each case must be considered only on its individual merits;
The second story addition is desirable in that it will allow the property owners to expand
their existing home in order to accommodate their needs in a manner consistent with the
intent of the development standards for Casa Del Rey.
The single-story limitation in combination with the deep street side setbacks on the
property create a practical difficulty in developing a square footage on this property
consistent with the vast majority of surrounding homes within the Casa Del Rey project.
2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in
the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege
of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors.
The building addition has been designed to be well integrated with the architectural
character of the existing residence and the neighborhood, and is responsive to the concern
with comer lot conditions.
The authorizing of this variance will grant the owners of this property the right to
develop their property in a manner consistent with other properties within this planned
community.
3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property, and will not materially impair the purposes of this chapter or the public
interest.
The proposed addition will be required to comply with all applicable development,
building, and zoning requirements.
The authorizing of this variance will maintain the open appearance at the corner
consistent with the intent of the Casa Del Rey development standards.
4. That the authorizing of such variance will not adversely affect the general
plan of the city or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
The approval of this permit is consistent with City policies and the General Plan.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 23rd day of June, 1993, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Susan Fuller, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
(zav-93-1Lres)
\
....
t: ,
,
.
"
" ,
""0"'''
,.~..
,t1I'
\
,
,
,
,
,
\
,
,
o
...
5Ji
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
C!) APPLICANT: CAROL THOMAS PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Second story addition.
ADDRESS: 993 PASEO LA CRESTA
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH 1" = 400' PCC - 93 - 40
~'(p
EJ
VlS3~:J Y1 03SYd tee
NOI1IOOY ONY 1300~3~
~I ~~ :: . z
. ""
.j .. _0 ~ ..J
.. ..
0 ., o. c. : II.
~ - :! -. o.
. '. o. . t-
. 0- .. ;. . 0
0 z " ..
; .~ : u . ..J
0 ~ . u . II.
. -= .. . ~ . .
u . .. c ~ ,
0 u "" 0 :. . . .
. ~ > ~ .. ~ ; . ; VJ
~ W . .. c Z
. 'i .. . ~ 0 ~
c . ..J 0 c . 0
. w 0 ..~ ~ u -=
0 . c c
. . t- ""
. .
. . z >
. - 0 10.U OilY.. W
. . a: ..J
0 u ... W
. .
- c
0 .
\~ :
.
0
0
u
'L. :
~
.
c
.
!i ,
__,_ '~,CI.\~!JO......o-
,,'
t&-Ot-.
~. n ~
SIIIIJOSS\ 1000Hor W MlIHI
.~
',i'~
z
, 0
B~ -=
""
>
W
..J
I w
w
I c
z 8 c;;
0
-= t-
"" :t
> "
w r--- a:
..J
w 1---
a: ......~.
"" ~m
w
a:
"
~'7
-
~.
EJ
_ _,_. L",~,""'~'dO~
Ct.oc-.
,... " ... ~<.
_.,. ...",
SII\IJOSS\ IOSIHOr W ~~IHI
~~
~ ~
VJ.S3~:J Vl 03SVd t66
NOIJ.IOOV ONV 130m'i3~
".
..J
W
>
W
..J
0:
W
~
~ 0
..J
J
~ r~
"
0 ~~
. ~
r- ~ ~ ~ :
, 11
I
I ~ . II
I -
, :$
____ so;
==
..J
W
>
W
..J
0:
W
"-
"-
:J
~
~ ~
3...8
z
<
..J
"-
0:
o
o
..J
U.
May 14, 1993
Patty Nevins
Planning Technician
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Case # PCC-93-40
Dear Ms. Nevins:
\
,<""
. .i',./
- . ./
("'.
/'
\0,0.::
\~ .
v.~'\ . .~",,".
,~' .....'
,?\}..,
Regarding the construction of a second story addition at 993 Paseo
La Cresta, we, the undersigned,believe it would definitively change
adversely our community's image.
Being a corner lot, it would stand out from the rest and break the
community's overall look.
Based on the above, we strongly request a denial of this construc-
tion permit.
Name /7
~-1J.q~~--
t " ( 6
~~~~~~---
----------------------
~~ ,-..i'&<t~ _fILlltr02J.;!/l~Z)LL_____
- -- 2~~_-t~-~
- - ~-9-q~ ~ ---------
Cordially,
Address
_~1{_~~_~________
:.tJ(.t fA-!.~_fA -"~j) A___
100 I ,P-1-S~ E.~4"1
-------------------------
Telephone
___1~Lg~~____
__~a'_~_-_t;l_<{:J~L_
<l-?2. - If) c~-
-----------------
_H6:.__.It2@j_____
_~~(:_Z_LZL__
__tf~L=~Ef~
---------------------- ------------------------- -----------------
---------------------- ------------------------- -----------------
---------------------- ------------------------- -----------------
---------------------- ------------------------- -----------------
---------------------- ------------------------- -----------------
---------------------- ------------------------- -----------------
3'1
.
.
"'d
",.-
s - 15-'13
....-.- .
J D -+ 'h e. C I.\.-..]' 0 PC, tI.
r:rLA ~t,)I"-'l> Oe..fA12-+M.o.J-I-
:r: h~v.. (l..c.c...e,'vc.d 1+ Lc:.~1t IN ..}h, MAIL
C'/2...0"" -I-he. (..1+'1 0 P C.V. 9LA-I\)IU'W1 Dc..l't. POlL
f!.tz..tv1ISSIOIU +u c.o"'~+n..Uc..+ .4-,>ccoJ...l1.) S+ote...'!
~ A-i)/)/t-IUt.) O}0 A c.o)t..lJ<e.tL Lo+-, +hc C2.-A-~4
dd.. '(2.e.y pLA/.J~IJ,)<:' c..OMtvJt...\IVI..\.-y fC.e'7--'-4Lt4-+/0/.)S
~ OVE..rtfUl1Jr +J--.;.s t~oferz.~l ~ervLt<.ALL';I
((e.S-tfL,c.+$ 5Cc.o1Jb S,J.."'tt.y A-dd/~/"1JS C) r0
c. 0 tL I\) c tL L () +~ .
:r \...uOi.),L~ Like -fu J:::cc...p 1+ +h.\~ WAY,
L c:. .} 5 1< t:. e.. f .J- J.... .... IJ ,,"'s c S Lj tv / -f c> fL tvI .
q q :3 7u....5 G Q L AC1?c.d. A
C. V. C 4
---
/hAf-JJ: '104
P. CONCe..I2.NC.d Ne;1J-Bolt.
~ ....1t!!:J
TIlE Ct.. OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STA..,:MENT
You ~,e required 10 file a Statement of Disclosure of cenain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign
ntributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Qluncil, Planning Qlmmission, and
_.1 other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
C1I/)1~ ~ &/Gf,/6 AI1i:J O~?
1lf/114 ?,~~ AlrSW U ~~
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning
more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
3. If any person' identified pursuant 10 (I) above is non-profit organ~tion or a trust, list the names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or truslOr of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Qlmmittees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No+-.- If yes, please indicate person(s):_
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
,
.J.; .j -'
<
-.J {"J.", )/, l;:C 1-'
6.
Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggr~ate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the
current or preceding election period? Yes_ No lfyes, state which Councilmember(s):
· . . (NOTE:
Attach additional pages as ~) . · . ~
"-!lLLuL(r( I ~,Y,'fi~
Signature of contractor/applicant
Date:
10; I..
~ -.
1_( ...:;;
(). .' '1',
,O-l-U {I
....,--,
l f1 ,:'1,//1 (I. <:
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
. person i.J tkfUu:d as: "Any indivi.du41. finn, co-pamu:rship, joint v....AUt, lJSSOCialion, social club, frazml41 organiz.alio~ corporDlion, eSJQ~ DWt, receiver,l)'fIdictue.
zhis and mlJ other cowu)', ciry and cOunD)', dry rnunidpaJily, districl, Or other polilicaJ subdivision, Of' CU'I)' other ,-oup or combination <<ling as Q unit..
3--1/
June 16, 1993
From:
Chair Fuller and Members of P1anning~OmmiSSion
Ken Lee. ...i.'.n' Planning Direo'orf!~
To:
At the Planning Commission meeting of May 12, 1993, Commission
members discussed the prior joint GMOC/P1anning Commission Workshop
to review and accept the GMOC report for 92-93. The Planning
Commission requested that certain concerns raised by various
Commission members be brought back at the next available Planning
Commission meeting and placed on the agenda for consideration.
If there are any specific research or questions that individual
Commissioners would like responses to prior to the June 23 meeting,
please contact me as soon as possible.