Loading...
CC RESOLUTION 3844RESOLUTION NO. 3S44 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA UPHOLDING AN APPEAL, THEREBY DENYING VARIANCE 93 -1, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 93 -2, SUBDIVISION 93 -2 AND VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 51656 FOR THE is CONVERSION OFAN EXISTING 9 UNITAPARTMENTBUILDINGTO CONDOMINIUMS AT 512 WEST IMPERIAL AVENUE ( ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -308). PETITIONED BY CHARLES BELAK - BURGER WHEREAS, on April 21, 1993, an application was received from Charles Belak- Burger for EA -308, CUP 93 -2, Variance 93 -1, Subdivision 93 -2 and Vesting Tentative Map 51656 to allow the conversion of an existing nine (9) unit apartment building to condominiums at 512 West Imperial Avenue in the Multiple - Family Residential (R -3) zone; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment has been prepared and circulated for interdepartmental comments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applications and supporting evidence with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act, State CEQA Guidelines and the City of El Segundo Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Resolution 3805); and WHEREAS, on July 29 and August 26, 1993, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, • duly advertised public hearings on such matter, and notice of hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, at said hearings opportunity was given to all persons to present testimony or documentary evidence for or against the findings of EA -308, CUP 93 -2, Variance 93 -1, Subdivision 93 -2 and Vesting Tentative Map 51656; and WHEREAS, on August 26, 1993, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2343 approving EA -308, CUP 93 -2, Variance 93 -1, Subdivision 93 -2 and Vesting Tentative Map 51656; and WHEREAS, on September 3, 1993, within the ten day appeal period, an appeal to the City Council . of the Planning Commission approval was filed by Willard E. W. Krick, President of the El Segundo Residents Association; and WHEREAS, on October 5, 1993, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on the appeal, and notice of the hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, at said City Council hearing the following facts were established: 1. The applicant is proposing to convert an existing nine (9) unit apartment building to condominiums at 512 West Imperial Avenue in the Multi - Family Residential (R -3) zone. 2. The project site is 10,887.5 sq. ft. in area and is developed with a two -story building over a subterranean garage. 3. The surrounding land uses are multiple- family residential to the east, a club lodge to the west, single - family residential to the south, and a landscaped parkway and LAX, in the City of Los Angeles, to the north. 4. Eight (8) units of the apartment building are currently rented out. 5. The building meet all the zoning criteria for apartments when it was constructed. The density and lot coverage standards were revised in 1989 which now makes the building legal non- conforming in these two areas. 6. The applicant is requesting two variances from the R -3 Development Standards, (1) allowing a density of nine units instead of seven units and (2) allowing 65.7% lot coverage instead of 53 %. 7. The zoning code at the time of original approval of the building required 1,500 sq.ft. of lot area per dwelling .alit for condominiums and 1,000 sq.ft. of lot area for apartments. The project provides 1,210 sq.ft. of lot area per unit, which complies with the standards for apartments. 1 8. The zoning code at the time of original approval of the building allowed 40% maximum lot coverage for condominiums and 60% maximum lot coverage for apartments. The project as originally constructed provides 60% lot coverage which complies with the apartment standards. New balconies, to provide the required open space, would increase the lot coverage to 65.7 %. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after consideration of the above facts of Environmental Assessment EA -308, Conditional Use Permit 93 -2, Variance 93 -1, Subdivision 93 -2 and Vesting Tentative Map No. 51656, the City Council makes the following findings on variance 93 -1: VARIANCE 1. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone since: the size, shape, topography and construction on the site are typical of other properties in the same vicinity and zone; 2. That variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question, since: the property was not developed to the zoning code condominium standards at the time of original construction. The granting of the variance would be a special privilege and provide increased profits for the property owner since the building provides a higher density and lot coverage than other condominiums in the same vicinity and zone; 3. That the granting of the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located since: other condominium projects provide for more stringent standards than • apartments; and condominium owners in the vicinity and zone expect all condominium projects to maintain these more stringent development standards; 4. That the granting of the variance will adversely affect the comprehensive general plan since: the general plan goals, policies and objectives require preservation and maintenance of the city's low- medium density residential nature with minimum development standards and the project does not meet the minimum development standards for condominiums at the time of original construction or the current code minimum development standards SECTION 1. NOW, THEREBY, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby upholds the appeal, thereby denying Variance 93 -1, Environmental Assessment EA -308, Conditional Use Permit 93 -2, Subdivision 93 -2 and Vesting Tentative Map No. 51656 for the conversion of an existing 9 unit apartment building to condominiums at 512 West Imperial Avenue. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall enter the same in the book of original resolutions of said city; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said city, in the minutes of the meeting which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of November, 1993. I A`1'TESTED: ��4 dy Mort, en, pity Clerk (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney 2 axl Jacob 5n, Mayor City of Et /segundo, California EA308•CC.RES STATE OF CALIFORNIA ] COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ] SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ] I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the whole number of members of the City Council of the said City is five; that the foregoing resolution, being RESOLUTION NO. 3844 was duly passed and adopted by the said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor or said City, and attested by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of the said Council held on the 2nd day of November, 1993, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mayor Jacobson, Mayor ProTem Wise, toCouncilman West, and Councilman Robbins. NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Switz WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this 23rd day of November, 1993. P CIND RTESEN City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California (SEAL)