Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1 3.1 TOWN OF Los ALTOS HILLS March 25, 1998 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW REQUIRED PARKING WITHIN A REQUIRED SETBACK; LANDS OF LOUGHMILLER; 25309 LA LOMA DRIVE; FILE#26-98-VAR. FROM: Suzanne Davis, Planner SD APPROVED BY: Curtis S. Williams, Planning Director RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: Make the findings as required by Section 10-1.1107(2) of the Zoning Ordinance for the granting of a variance and approve the application, subject to the recommended conditions of approval in Attachment 1. BACKGROUND A site development permit for a new residence and related actions was approved by the Planning Commission on December 10, 1997. The City Council approved the project on January 7, 1998. During the December 10 Planning Commission hearing, the parking issue was discussed informally and the Commission indicated general support given the constraints on the site. The applicants were directed by the Commission to come back with the required request for a variance. DISCUSSION Pursuant to Section 10-1.1107(2), the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a required parking space to be located within the front setback. The variance is needed since required parking is not allowed within building setbacks. The area where the parking space would be provided is off the private driveway that is used to reach the applicant's property and the adjacent Purissima Hills Water District tank site, and is already graded out. The proposal would not result in any additional development area beyond what was approved by the Commission since the proposed parking configuration was shown on the approved plans and was included in the overall development area. At the time of approval a condition was included requiring the parking scheme to be modified to provide four parking spaces outside the setbacks. The applicants subsequently decided to pursue the variance option and filed a formal application. Variance The applicant is requesting a variance to Section 10-1.505(a) of the Zoning Ordinance (setback lines). Although the Code does not specifically prohibit parking within setbacks,this has been a long term Town interpretation, and the setback provisions do not specifically allow parking spaces in setbacks. In order to grant a variance the Planning Commission must make four findings, as required by Section 10-1.1107(2) of the Zoning Ordinance. The most important of these findings requires specification of unusual or unique characteristics of the property that would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. This finding generally relates to the physical properties of the site. The applicant's proposed findings state that the topographic constraints and design of the residence and driveway Planning Commission March 25, 1998 Lands of Loughmiller Page 2 make it difficult to provide a fourth parking space in this area. There is a limited area around the residence where a fourth parking space with adequate backup space can be placed without additional grading and likely higher retaining walls. Since the proposed parking space is in a location that is already graded out, no additional disturbance of the site would be necessary. Also, without the access easement that runs through the site to the adjacent Purissima Hills Water District property, the parking space would not be within the setback. The setback would typically be measured from the property line. However, since the easement is for vehicular access, the setback is measured from the edge of the easement instead. The last two findings can be made, as the variance would not adversely impact adjacent properties, given the extent of existing screening, and the proposed parking bay is clearly incidental to the primary residential use. If the Commission cannot make one or more of the findings, the variance should be denied. If the Commission so directs, staff will prepare written findings reflecting its decision to deny the variance for review at the April 8, 1998 meeting. Staff is available to answer any questions from the Commission or the public. ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval (one page) 2. Recommended findings for variance (one page) 3. Applicant's variance findings (one page) cc: Bert& Kaye Loughmiller 801 Church Street, Suite 1323 Mountain View, CA 94041 Fred Herring Herring & Whorley, Inc. 1741 Broadway Redwood City, CA 94063 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW PARKING WITHINT HE FRONT SETBACK LANDS OF LOUGHMILLER- 25309 LA LOMA DRIVE File #26-98-VAR A. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 1. Any revisions or additions to the approved grading plan shall be submitted by the project engineer for review by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The plan shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department and approved prior to commencement of the grading changes. The approved plan shall be stamped and signed by the project engineer and shall supersede the previously approved grading plan; 2. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (November 1 to April 1) except with prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within ten feet of any property line except within locations approved with this variance. 3. All previous conditions attached to the site development permit for the new residence are still applicable other than the requirement to provide a fourth parking space outside the building setbacks. Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with the Engineering Department two weeks prior to final building inspection approval. NOTE: The modification to the site development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until March 25, 1999). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. ATTACHMENT 2 FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW PARKING WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK LANDS OF LOUGHMILLER- 25309 LA LOMA DRIVE File #26-98-VAR Pursuant to Section 10-1.1107(2), the following findings are made for the proposed variance: 1. Because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, including the size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the ordinance is found to deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications. Due to existing topography_ and the steep slopes on the site, it is difficult to achieve the required four parking spaces and backup. The lot also has an unusual configuration and the parking bay is already established. If there were not an access easement on the property the parking space would not be within the setback. The parking space will be more than 30 feet from the property line. The granting of the variance will allow the property owner to develop the property in a similar manner to development on other properties in the neighborhood and would not constitute a special privilege. The proposed location for the fourth parking space appears to be the most appropriate given the topography and mature trees on the site, and would not result in any additional disturbance to the site. 2. That upon granting of the Variance, the intent and purpose of the ordinance will be served and the recipient of the Variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners. The intent of the zoning code is the avoidance of situations where parking within setbacks adversely affects the adjacent property owners or is a visual impact from the street. This request would allow the applicants to have a better parking arrangement in an area where it would not be seen by neighbors or by vehicles driving on La Loma Drive. 3. That granting of the Variance will not be mate:^ially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate vicinity and within the same zoning district. The proposed parking bay is already graded and is not anticipated to have any adverse or detrimental effects on either the public welfare or other properties in the immediate vicinity. 4. That the Variance will not allow a use or activity which is not expressly authorized by the Zoning Ordinance: The variance will not change in any way the use of activity of the subject property and therefore will not cause use or activity to occur which is outside of permitted uses authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. In fact, the variance will bring the project into compliance with the parking regulations. ATTACHMENT RE: Loughmiller Residence 25309 La Loma Road, Los Altos Hills FINDINGS The findings for a Variance are as follows: 1. ' Because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the ordinance is found to deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications: Exceptional (topographic) circumstances make the strict application of the zoning ordinance (no guest parking within setback areas) to this project impractical without significant design degradation (i.e., without creating the appearance of a residence for autos with human habitation of secondary importance). The privilege of a graceful entry for residents and guests which is enjoyed by neighboring properties can be enjoyed on this site without detriment to the public or to other property owners (see #2 below). 2. That upon granting of the Variance, the intent and purpose of the ordinance will still be served and the recipient of the Variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners: The intent and purpose of ordinance is to prohibit parking near (within 30 feet of) neighboring properties. The requested Variance is to allow parking±80 feet from nearest neighboring structure and 30-50 feet from nearest common property line. 3. That granting the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate vicinity and within the same zoning district. Granting this Variance will not be detrimental to public welfare since fire/emergency access will not be impeded by this proposal nor will neighbors be negatively impacted (see #2 above). 4. That the Variance will not allow a-use or activity which is not expressly authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. This Variance will allow compliance with a use (four cars on-site parking) expressly required by the Zoning Ordinance.