The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-54 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 06-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING VARIANCE DRC2006-00080,A REQUEST TO CONVERT AN EXISTING TWO-STORY STRUCTURE TOTALING 1,220 SQUARE FEET, INTO A SECOND DWELLING UNIT BY REDUCING THE REQUIRED 10,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZE, BY EXCEEDING THE ONE-STORY HEIGHT LIMIT (16 FEET), AND BY REDUCING REQUIRED PARKING WITHIN A GARAGE ON A 8,500 SQUARE FOOT LOT IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 9773 FERON BOULEVARD;AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 0209-061-10. A. Recitals. 1. Mr. Gonzalez filed an application for the issuance of Variance DRC2006-00080, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on June 14, 2006, including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at 9773 Feron Boulevard, improved with a one-story home and a detached two-story accessory structure; and b. The properties to the north, south, east, and west are single-family residences. The site is a standard rectangle shaped lot, with flat grades, that is common to the Low Residential District. Detached accessory garage structures are common to the applicant's Old Town neighborhood. Such neighborhoods were designed with alleyways that also allowed vehicular access to the site from the rear of the property and kept service vehicles such as sanitation, and power and electric utilities, off of the primary residential streets. This single-family residential neighborhood is designed and planned for less density. There are no exceptional or extraordinary conditions that merit a multiple-family dwelling unit on this property in an established single-family neighborhood; and C. The detached two-story accessory structure built in 1947, is a legal non-conforming structure because it does meet current Development Code standards including, but not limited to, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-54 DRC2006-00080— GONZALEZ June 14, 2006 Page 2 setbacks and height limits. As a non-conforming structure, it may have "routine maintenance and repairs,"but cannot be"altered or reconstructed so as to increase the discrepancy between existing conditions and the standards...for the district" pursuant to Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.02.130. The applicants desire to remodel the structure to a different use, a second dwelling unit, constitutes an alteration or reconstruction; and d. The applicant stated in a meeting with staff on December 13, 2005, that the two-story accessory structure had been unoccupied for approximately 10 to 15 years; hence, the use of this non-conforming structure must be in conformity with the regulations of the Low Residential District in which it is located pursuant to Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.02.130; and e. The applicants submitted floor plans proposing to remodel the two-story detached accessory structure into a different use, a second dwelling unit, constituting an alteration or reconstruction; hence, necessitating Variances to 1) reduce the required minimum lot size from 10,000 square feet to 8,500 square feet, 2), exceed the height limit of an accessory structure from 16 feet (essentially one-story), and 3) reduce the number and form of required parking; and f. The structure could be modified in other ways, without converting into a second dwelling unit, to conform to City regulations. The structure is large enough for permitted ancillary parking, storage, and as a guest residence (without a kitchen facility)for visitors or non-paying guest of the occupants of a dwelling unit on the same site. Such viable options give the applicants flexible opportunities that are already permitted and can be obtained. g. Documents submitted by the applicant from the County Tax Assessor's office indicate that the structure was built in 1947. This document indicates that the first floor contained only a darkroom and a garage, and a studio on the second floor. This same document clearly indicates that there were no bathroom fixtures, such as a toilet, bathtub or shower, nor was there any kitchen, living room, dining room, or bedrooms that are required for a dwelling unit. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations will not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code, because there are other viable options such as to lower the height of the structure, rehabilitate the structure as a garage with storage area, and the fact that there is even room for a guest residence; and b. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property because this single-family residential neighborhood is designed and planned for a lower density development. There are no exceptional or extraordinary conditions that merit a multiple-family dwelling unit on this property in an established single-family neighborhood; and C. Because there are no other known multi-family units within the established single-family neighborhood, and permitting one in such a neighborhood would be precedent setting; the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation will not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district; and d. The granting of this Variance will in fact be a special privilege by ignoring three Code development regulations, such as: minimum accessory building height, disregarding the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-54 DRC2006-00080 — GONZALEZ June 14, 2006 Page 3 e. minimum lot size, and impacting the public streets by not providing the required amount of on-site covered parking spaces; and f. The granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Existing Facilities, because the applicant is requesting a Variance for a second dwelling unit in an existing structure, and there will be no expansion to the existing building, and there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. In addition, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgment, concurs in the staffs determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby denies the application. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Eo "' ecretary ATTEST: I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2006, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, McPHAIL