The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0949 . . . . . RESOLUTIOl~ NO. 949 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMlUSSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RECOHMENDING DENIAL OF TEXT AHENDMEHT 76-7 WHICH HOULD PERMIT EXPAUSIOiI OF CERTAIN NONCONFORlUNG USES IN THE R-3 ZONE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia held a public hearing on June 8, 1976, to consider amending Section 9255.1.5 of the Arcadia Municipal Code to allow expansion to one-family dwelling units in the R-3 zone when there is more than one unit on a lot, at which public hearing all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, such an amendment would encourage investment into nonconforming uses and structures and thus prolong substandard conditions in the R-3 zone which in turn discourage proper development of the R-3 zone to its full potential; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That this Commission finds that the proposed text amendment is not justified by either public necessity, convenience, or general welfare, and therefore, recommends to the City Council denial of Text Amendment 76-7. SECTION 2. That the Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the city Council of the City of Arcadia. -1- 949 .~...... . . . I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of August, 1976, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Coghlan, Hegg, Huddy, Kuyper, perlis, Reiter, Clark NOES: None ABSENT: None ~~/-- ATTEST: . s~f(~d f . -')- OAO . . '. . . July 27, 1976 TO: FROM: PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: T.A. 76-7 LIMITED ADDITIONS TO ONE-FAMILY DWELLING IN R-3 ZONE The public hearing on this item was held June 8, 1976, The discussion was continued to tonight's meeting, Staff has surveyed other cities to find that their codes do not allow expansion of a single-family use in an apartment zone. The City of San Gabriel has the only code which allows a single- family use in any zone, The fire zone in the R-3 and R-l is the same and Building Department does not see great difficulty with enforcing the Building Code, The Building Code would, however, require any new construction in the R-3 zone to meet electrical standards which are more restrictive than R-l. The inflation of the cost for land and housing is partially due to high demand and low supply. The R-3 zone should be encouraged to develop to its full potential to put more dwelling units on the market. This text amendment will provide a large dwelling for a few, but it will not encourage the develop- ment of new dwelling units for the general public. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~~~ THOMAS W. MARTIN ASSISTANT PLANNER TWM/at , , . . . . . June 8, 1976 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. T.A. 76-7 ADDITIONS TO SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN ZONE R-3 WHERE THERE IS MORE THAN ONE UNIT ON A LOT At the Planning Commission meeting of April 13, 1976, Mr. Charles chila requested that the Planning Commission consider the adoption of a text amendment which would permit i~provements to be made to a single-family dwelling in Zone R-3 which is located on a lot containing other dwelling units. Currently the Zoning Ordinance (Section 9255,1.5) allows for certain limited improvements to be made to a single-family dwelling in Zone R-3 when it is the only dwelling unit on the lot, The Planning Commission requested that staff initiate a text amendment for their consideration. At the Planning Commission meeting of April 27, 1976, staff reported that the conditional use permit procedure would provide for consideration of each individual request and allow for consideration of the existing development of the property, The proposed amendment could possibly impact a substantial number of properties. Approximately 28% (237) of the R-3 zoned lots have one single-family dwelling and other dwelling units on the same lot. A text amendment which would allow for certain limited improve- ments would enable residents to make their dwelling units more modern and comfortable. However, there are a number of potential adverse impacts which could result from excessive numbers of older single-family dwellings (which are nonconforming) being improved. Staff has estimated that it would be possible for as much as $45,000 to be spent on improvements to what would essentially remain a nonconforming use (i.e., 1,000 square foot room addition = $20,000, 400 square foot garage = $5,000, interior remodeling = . . . o . . T.A. 76-7 2 $10,000, and swimming pool = $10,000). With the aforementioned improvements, the useful life of a nonconforming use could be extended by an additional 40 years, If there were other nonconforming uses or developments. on the property, such nonconforming conditions would also be extended. because of the increased investment on the property. Also, an additional side effect may be a loss of some low-income housing. By increasing the size and amenities of an'exis!ing older nonconforming dwelling unit, said unit would become more marketable and command a higher rent. The Planning Department does not believe that there would be a significant number of applications for such improvements, also that the conditional use permit process would allow for adequate individual assessment of the merit of each application. If the Planning Commission wishes to implement proceedings so as to allow for improvements (similar to what is permitted for a single-family dwelling unit in Zone R-3), staff recommends the following amendments to the Zoning Ordinance: "9255.1.5. NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES. No building permit shall be issued for any structure and no structure shall be erected upon any property regulated by this Division unless all nonconforming uses of the property are discontinued and abandoned and a statement of compliance with this provision is signed by the owner and occupant. No building permit shall be issued for any structure to be erected upon property regulated by this Division unless the plans accompanying the application include the removal or remodeling to conform to the provisions of this Division of all nonconforming structures and buildings on the property. Exceptions: A building permit may be issued for the limited improvements hereinafter listed for property with one (1) nonconforming one-family dwelling and for property which the use of is nonconforming solely by reason of such property having a one-family dwelling and one or more other dwelling units located thereon and for which a conditional use permit has been granted. Said limited improvements are: A. Five hundred (500) $quare feet of additional area (cumulative), including covered patios. The Modification Committee pursuant to modification procedures may permit an additional five hundred (500) square feet of area (cumulative). B, Other alterations which do not create additional space. . . . . . T.A. 76-7 3 C. Required parking facilities; D, A swimming pool, R-l setback standards shall apply to the above exceptions unle~s otherwise stipulated by the Planning Commission," Staff recommends that the following be added to the conditional use permit section of the Zoning Ordinance under Title I: "ONE-FAMILY DWELLING. Limited additions in an R-3 zone," It is also recommended that a new Title 6 be added to read as follows: "ARTICLE IX. CHAPTER 2. PART 7. DIVISION 5. TITLE 6. DIVISION AND USE OF LAND ZONING REGULATIONS OVERLAY AND SPECIFIC ZONES CONDITIONAL USES ONE-FAMILY DWELLING LIMITED ADDITIONS IN AN R- 3 ZONE 9275.6. GENERAL. A building permit may be issued for the limited improvements hereinafter listed for a single one- family dwelling on R-3 property which the use of is nonconforming solely by reason of such property having a one-family dwelling and one or more other dwelling units located thereon. Said limited improvements are: A. Five hundred (500) square feet of additional area (cumulative), including covered patios. The Modification Committee pursuant to modification procedures may permit an additional five hundred (500) square feet of area (cumulative), B. Other alterations which do not create additional space. C. Required parking facilities. D. A swimming pool. 9275.6.1, DETERMINATION. Such expansion of a nonconforming use may be conditionally granted by the Planning Commission if it makes the determination that such expansion will not significantly prolong any nonconforming conditions on the property and that such nonconforming conditions are minor in scope and do not deviate substantially from the existing Code standards. 9275.6.2. CONDITION OF APPROVAL. As a condition of approval, the property owner must first record with the, Los Angeles County . . . . . T.A. 76-7 4 Recorder an irrevocable covenant or declaration in a form approved by the City Attorney designating which dwelling unit is the one principal residence to be improved. Once such an election is made, it is irrevocable during the existence of such principal residence. Thereafter, a building permit may be issued for the limited improvements to the principal residence." Pursuant to the prOVlSlonS of the California Environmental Quali ty Act, the Planning Department reviewed theproposed text amendment and determined that the proposal would not have a significant effect on the environment, A Negative Declaration has been prepared and filed for this text amendment. The City Council in its approval or denial of the propsed text amendment must make the determination that the' proposed text amendment would or would not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~v~ THOMAS W. MARTIN ASSISTANT PLANNER TWM/at