HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 02-14
RESOLUTION NO. 02-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DECISION DENYING USE
DETERMINATION NOS. 00-001 AND 00-002 AND
DETERMINING THAT THE USES AT 14511 AND 14512
CARFAX DRIVE ARE NOT APARTMENT HOUSES AND
ARE BOARDING HOUSES WHICH REQUIRE APPROVAL
OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS SUBJECT TO SECTION
9228(b)(5) OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find as follows:
A.
That applications, Use Determination Nos. 00-001 and 00-
002, were filed on February 17, 2000, by Marc Kassof
requesting a determination that the uses at 14511 and
14512 Carfax Drive (Lots 14 and 15 of Tract 5028) are
apartment houses.
B.
That the properties are located within the "Suburban
Residential" zoning district and "High Density Residential"
land use designation of the General Plan.
C.
That pursuant to Sections 9228(a) and 9298(b) of the Tustin
City Code, the Planning Commission is authorized to
determine whether uses are similar in character to the
permitted and conditionally permitted uses of a particular
zoning district.
D.
That on March 12, 2001, the Planning Commission denied
Use Determination Nos. 00-001 and 00-002 by adopting
Resolution No. 3772.
E.
That on March 15, 2001, the applicant appealed the
Planning Commission's decision.
F.
That a public hearing on the appeal was duly called, noticed,
and held on April 16, 2001, by the City Council and continued
to July 16, 2001, October 15, 2001, and February 4, 2002, at
the request of the appellant.
G.
The City Council has considered the Planning Commission
staff report dated March 12, 2001, the minutes of the March
12, 2001, Planning Commission meeting, Planning
Commission Resolution No. 3772, the City Council staff
report dated March 4, 2002, and the evidence and testimony
presented at the public hearing held on March 4, 2002.
Resolution No. 02-14
Page 2
H.,
That the uses that have been established at 14511 and
14512 Carfax Drive are not consistent with the definition of an
apartment house for the following reasons:
I.
The use of the property is inconsistent with the
definition of an "Apartment House" which is a building,
or portion thereof, designed and built for the
occupancy of three (3) or more families living
independently of each other. A family is an individual
or two (2) or more persons living together as a single
housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit.
2.
Each dwelling unit at 14511 and 14512 Carfax Drive is
used and occupied in a way that accommodates eight
(8) persons who are individually and separately
responsible for the payment of rent. In addition, each
person/resident is individually responsible for
complying with the rules of the house.
3.
Although residents would share bedrooms and
dwelling units, the eight (8) individuals in each unit
would function independently and would not comprise
a single housekeeping unit since they would reside at
the properties for various lengths of times and pay rent
as separate individuals.
4.
Each resident would be solely responsible for abiding
by the terms of residency, including remaining sober,
participating in drug testing, observing curlew,
performing chores, and cooking his own food.
5.
An individual could be expelled for non-compliance
with the terms of residency without an eviction process
or affecting the residency of any other individuals in the
same dwelling unit or bedroom.
6.
To meet the definition of an apartment house, a single
individual or family functioning as a single
housekeeping unit would need to inhabit each dwelling
unit.
I.
That the uses that have been established at 14511 and
14512 Carfax Drive are consistent with the definition of a
boarding house and constitute boarding house uses within the
definition and meaning of the City's ordinances. Boarding
house uses are permitted in the zoning district applicable to
the subject properties, subject to the approval of a conditional
Resolution No. 02-14
Page 3
use permit in accordance with Section 9228(b)(5) of the
Tustin City Code. Under the City's land use regulatory
program which would be applicable to the subject properties:
I.
Lodging would be provided for compensation for more
than three (3)individuals on each property, each
dwelling unit, and each bedroom consistent with the
definition of a "Boarding House" which states, "A
dwelling other than a hotel or motel, where lodging
and/or meals for three (3) or more persons is provided
for compensation." In addition to a resident manager,
a total of four (4) single beds could be provided in each
room, eight (8) single beds could be provided in each
dwelling unit, and thirty-two (32) single beds could be
provided in each four-unit complex. Residents would
not be entitled to use garage spaces; residents could
be able to rent garage spaces under separate financial
arrangements.
2.
Residents could be supervised in a structured living
environment which includes signing an agreement to
remain sober during their length of stay, participating
in mandatory periodic off-site drug testing, observing
a 10:00 p.m. curlew; agreeing to having no visitors,
allowing searches of personal property, performing
house chores, buying and cooking their own food,
and other types of rules. Residents would not select
their bed assignment nor select other individuals to
reside with in a room or unit. Female residents could
be excluded from residing at these properties.
Although this type of occupancy may be found in
boarding houses, individuals or families residing in
apartment houses and acting as single housekeeping
units are not typically subject to such restrictions or
limitations.
3.
Residents would reside at the properties as
independent persons and would not form single
housekeeping units. Although residents could be
required to perform house chores, they could buy and
cook their own food and operate as individuals rather
than as single housekeeping units. All of the
residents could reside within a particular dwelling unit
or property for various lengths of time under separate
agreements, pay rent as individuals, and individual
residents could be asked to leave for non-compliance
with the terms of residency without initiating an
Resolution No. 02-14
Page 4
eviction process or affecting the residency of other
individuals in their unit. The actions of each resident
would affect only his or her residency, and an on-
going turnover of individuals is customary.
4.
The desired residents are individuals who wish to
remain sober and are willing to share bedrooms with
others; families have been asked to move out of the
properties. Females are referred to other housing
opportunities. In December 1999, families who had
lived in Units C and D of 14511 Carfax Drive and Unit
A of 14512 Carfax Drive were told they would need to
find other housing. Managers of apartment houses
typically contract with individuals regardless of
gender, and families as desired tenants for separate
dwelling units.
5.
Although the application indicates that the rent would
be $1,600.00 for a two-bedroom unit and $1,800.00
for a three-bedroom unit, the applicant has indicated
in the past that residents would pay approximately
$400.00 per person per month and staff has learned
that some individuals have paid $15,000.00 for a 90-
day term in rent for the use of a single bed and
common areas. The Sober Living Rental Agreement
indicates that each individual would pay $500.00 per
month. The amount of rent for some individuals may
exceed the average market rents in Tustin which are
approximately $400.00 to $500.00 for the use of an
entire bedroom with kitchen privileges and $1,251.00
per month for a two-bedroom, two-bathroom unit and
$1,641.00 for a three-bedroom, two-bathroom unit
(per the Preliminary Draft Housing Element Technical
Memorandum). In addition, insurance coverage
would be accepted as compensation which is not
typically accepted for apartment rental payments.
6.
There is an off-site commercial component that is
integral to the uses at 14511 and 14512 Car[ax Drive.
The office located at 14151 Newport Avenue is used
as a point of mail collection for residents, as a
counseling center for the residents of 14511 and
14512 Carfax, and as a management office for these
properties. Residents of 14511 and 14512 Carfax
Drive are required to receive their mail at 14151
Newport Avenue to avoid the risk of receiving drugs
through the mail. Counseling and drug testing are
Resolution No. 02-14
Page 5
terms of residency for individuals residing at 14511
and 14512 Carfax Drive. Off-site mandatory mail
service as well as social and medical services are not
typically associated with apartment houses in which
individuals arrange their own mail service and
establish and maintain their own social and medical
services.
J.
Section 9298 of the Tustin City Code requires the approval
body to consider the effect upon the public health, safety,and
general welfare of the neighborhood involved and the City at
large; the effect upon traffic conditions; and the effect upon
the orderly development of the area in question and the City
at large, in regard to the general planning of the whole
community. A total of 32 persons living independently within
a building designed to accommodate multiple families has the
potential to impact the welfare of the neighborhood on Carfax
Drive with increased activity, noise, and traffic. A
concentration of these uses at two separate properties has
the potential to erode the character of the multiple family
residential neighborhood existing on Carfax Drive and nearby
streets. Since boarding houses are necessary components of
a City's housing stock yet have the potential to adversely
affect the public health, safety, and welfare, the City Council,
through Ordinance No. 1225, has deemed that boarding
houses should be conditionally permitted. Conditional use
permits provide for reasonable conditions of approval that
mitigate the negative impacts of uses.
K.
That the project is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15270 of Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of
Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental
Quality Act) which states that projects that are rejected or
disapproved by a public agency are not subject to CEQA.
The City Council hereby resolves as follows:
I.
The applications for Use Determination Nos. 00-001 and 00-
002, requesting that the uses at 14511 and 14512 Carfax
Drive be determined to be apartment houses, are hereby
denied.
2.
The Council's action denying applicant's applications for use
determinations should not be viewed as a denial of any
applicable entitlement to accommodate the applicant's
proposed used of the property. In denying the use
Resolution No. 02-14
Page 6
determinations and concurring with the Planning
Commission to deny the application, Council has also
recognized that the applicant has the right to file applications
for conditional use permits to use the subject properties as
boarding houses to accommodate his proposed use of the
properties.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council,
held on the 4th day of March, 2002.
Pamela Stoker
City Clerk
Je~fe~V M/Thomas
Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
SS
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 02-14
PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City
of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members
of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing
Resolution No. 02-14 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Tustin City Council, held on the 4t~ day of March, 2002 by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Thomas, Worley, Bone,
None
None
None
Doyle, Kawashima
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk