Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 Variance 02-001· eport to the Planning Commission ITEM#3 DATE: MARCH 25, 2002 SUBJECT: VARIANCE 02-001 APPLICANT: STANDARD PACIFIC HOMES ATTN: MAl-r WHEELWRIGHT 15326 ALTON PARKWAY IRVlNE, CA 92618 PROPERTY OWNER: STANDARD PACIFIC HOMES 15326 ALTON PARKWAY IRVINE, CA 92618 LOCATION: 0905 SILVERADO TERRACE ZONING: ESTATE DENSITY- SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED (E-SFD); EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 5) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15305 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. REQUEST: TO CONSTRUCT A SIX (6) FOOT HIGH BLOCK WALL AND THREE (3) - SIX (6) FOOT, SlX (6) INCH PILASTERS WITHIN A PORTION OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED HEIGHT OF THREE (3) FEET. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3826 approving Vadance 02-001. BACKGROUND The applicant, Standard Pacific Homes, is requesting approval of a Vadance application for the installation of a six (6) foot high block wall and three (3) - six (6) foot, six (6) inch pilasters within the front yard setback along Silverado Terrace. The wall would exceed the Planning Commission Report Variance 02-001 Mamh 25, 2002 Page 2 maximum permitted fence height allowed by Tustin City Code Section 9271(i)(b), which requires that no fence, hedge, or wall over three (3) feet in height be erected in the required front yard setback. Variances may be considered by the Planning Commission pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9292. The property, located on Silverado Terrace within the Tustin Ranch Estates (Attachment A - Location Map), is located in the Planned Community-Residential (PC-RES) Distdct of the East Tustin Specific Plan, and more specifically designated Estates Density, Single-Family Detached (E-SFD). The property is currently being developed with a single-family residence along the eastern portion of the parcel (Attachment B - Final Tract Map). There are other single-family residences under construction within the Tustin Ranch Estates tract. The site was created as part of Tract 15993 and is commonly known as "Cameo Woods." DISCUSSION As a result of lot placement and the existing topography of the development, the lot has an unusual configuration. As noted on the Final Tract Map (Attachment B), the property is located on a cul-de-sac with a significant amount of street frontage subsequently creating a lot width that is greater than the lot depth. In addition, the residential structure is currently being .constructed on the eastern portion of the lot, with the south, or '1'ront," property line located along Silverado Terrace. Since the lot has a shallow depth on the west side dueto the configuration of the cul-de-sac road and the house is located on the east side, the lot does not havea squared shape resulting in a typical front and rear yard area. The only useable yard area is located to the west of the house and adjacent to the street. Given these specifics, the main yard is located within the twenty (20) foot front yard setback required by the East Tustin Specific Plan. The applicant is desirous of enclosing the front portion of the lot with fencing six (6) foot in height to minimize access onto the property and create a safe area for family use (Attachment C - Site Plan/Details). Since a portion of the fencing is located within the front yard setback, approval of a vadance is required. The proposed block wall will be six (6) feet tall, with a maximum of three (3) - six (6) foot, six (6) inch high pilasters, and a total length of 126 linear feet. The proposed wall will be built of eight (8) inch by six (6) inch by sixteen (16) inch concrete slump block, and painted an off-white color (Dunn Edwards #51 "Birchwood"). The main section of the proposed wall will be set back eight (8) feet and parallel to the street. The proposed wall will tie into the proposed wall sections to be located outside of the front yard setback along the west property line, and adjacent to the house. Planning Commission Report Vadance 02-001 March 25, 2002 Page 3 One of the reasons that fences and walls are limited to a maximum height of three (3) feet within the front yard setback area is to maintain site visibility requirements for driveways, alleys, and streets. The site visibility requirements is calculated by visual clearance triangle by measuring ten (10) feet from the on-site and neighboring property's driveways to the closest wall section. Generally, walls and landscaping within the site distance triangle need to be maintained a maximum height of three (3) feet. However, the proposed wall section is outside of this triangle and, therefore, is consistent with the City of Tustin site visibility requirements and does not pose a potential conflict with other development along the street. The second reason for the height restriction within the front yard setback is to promote landscaping and open streets, and to discourage the feeling of a "walled" city. The applicant is proposing to setback the fence eight (8) feet from the street and maintain an ample landsciape buffer. FINDINGS To approve a Variance, the Planning Commission must make the following findings: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to depdve subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. As a result of lot placement and the existing topography of the development, the lot has an unusual configuration. The property is located on a cul-de-sac with a significant amount of street frontage subsequently creating a lot width that is greater than the lot depth. In addition, the residential structure is currently being constructed on the eastern portion of the lot, with the south, or "front," property line located along Silverado Terrace. Since the lot has a shallow depth on the west side due to the configuration of the cul.-de-sac road and the house is located on the east side, the lot does not have a squared shape resulting in a typical front and rear yard area. The only useable yard area is located to the west of the house and adjacent to the street. Typically, other lots With the Estate Density residential district may enclose side and rear yard areas with fencing that is a maximum of six (6) feet eight (8) inches in height. The strict application of the applicable zoning would depdve the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties within the same zoning district. That any Vadanca granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the [imitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is situated. Planning Commission Report Vadance 02-001 March 25, 2002 Page 4 The granting of this vadance would not constitute a special privilege that is inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the Estate Density residential district in that the main yard area would be enclosed with a fence that is less than the maximum six feet eight inches (6'8") in height that would be allowed within the side and rear yards of other properties within the same zoning district. Assistant Planner Karen Peterson Senior Planner Attachments: Attachment A - Location Map Attachment B - Final Tract Map Attachment C - Site Plan/Details Attachment D - Resolution No. 3826 ATTACHMENT A Location Map LOCATION MAP PROJECT NO. ADDRESS VAR 02-001 10905 Silverado Terrace Tract 15993, Lot 16 Front Yard Fence Height COVEY LN. ORCHARD DR. ATTACFIMENT B FINAL TRACT MAP 15993 TRACT NO. 159.93 DATT.~ SI'AI~IENT: 10905 Silverado Terrace ATTACHMENT C Site Plan/Details / t t t f. 0 J \ ATTACHMENT D Resolution No. 3826 2 7 8 9 I0 12 t3 I4 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 RESOLUTION NO. 3826 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING VARIANCE 02-001 TO CONSTRUCT A SIX (6) FOOT HIGH BLOCK WALL AND THREE (3) - SIX (6) FOOT, SIX (6) INCH PILASTERS WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED HEIGHT OF THREE (3) FEET. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: That a proper application for Variance 02-001 was filed by Matt Wheelwright on behalf of Standard Pacific Homes to construct a six (6) foot high block wall and three (3) - six (6) foot, six (6) inch pilasters within the front yard setback exceeding the maximum allowed height of three (3) feet. That the Planning Commission duly called, noticed, and held a public hearing on the project on March 25, 2002. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the stdct application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. As a result of lot placement and the existing topography of the development, the lot has an unusual configuration. The property is located on a cul-de-sac with a significant amount of street frontage subsequently creating a lot width that is greater than the lot depth. In addition, the residential structure is currently being constructed on the eastern portion of the lot, with the south, or "front", property line located along Silverado Terrace. Since the lot has a shallow depth on the west side due to the configuration of the cul-de-sac road and the house is located on the east side, the lot does not have a squared shape resulting in a typical front and rear yard area. The only useable yard area is located to the west of the house and adjacent to the street. Typically, other lots with the Estate Density residential district may enclose side and rear yard areas with fencing that is a maximum of six (6) feet eight (8) inches in height. The strict application of the applicable zoning would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties within the same zoning district. 5 6 7 8 9 iO 11 16 17 18 19 2O 2l 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Resolution 3826 Vadance 02-001 Page 2 That any Vadance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is situated. The granting of this variance would not constitute a special privilege that is incorlsistent with the limitations on other properties in the Estate Density residential distdct in that the main yard area would be enclosed with a fence that is less than the maximum six feet eight inches (6'8") in height that would be allowed within the side and rear yards of other properties within the same zoning district. This Project is Categorically Exempt (Class 5) Pursuant to Section 15305 of The California Environmental Quality Act. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Vadance 02-001 to construct a six (6) foot high block wall, and three (3) - six (6) foot, six (6) inch pilasters, within the front yard setback exceeding the maximum allowed height of three (3) feet, subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 25~ day of Mamh, 2002. Douglass S. Davert Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, Califomia; that Resolution No. 3826 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commissiorh held on the 25th day of March, 2002. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A VARIANCE 02-001 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENEP. AL (1) 1.1 The proposed wall and pilasters shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped March 25, 2002, on file with the Community Development Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are to be consistent with the previsions of the Tustin City Code and other applicable codes. 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with as specified or pdor to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (4) 1.3 The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits are issued within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit and substantial construction is underway. Time extensions may be granted if a written request is. received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days pdor to expiration. ¢) 1.4 Approval of Variance 02-001 is contingent upon the applicant returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. (1) 1.5 As a condition of approval of Variance 02-O01, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. SOURCE CODES (4) (2) (3) (4) STANDARD CONDITION CEQA MITIGATION UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S DESIGN REVIEW (6) (7) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES PC/CC POLICY EXCEPTION Exhibit A Resolution 3826 Variance 02-001 Page 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (1) 2.1 The wall shall be painted an off-white (Dunn Edwards #51 "Birchwood") to match the other property walls and maintained in good repair at all times. (1) 2.2 Within the front yard setbaCk, the three (3) pilasters shall be a maximum of six (6) feet, six (6) inches in height measured from the finish grade, and the wall shall be a maximum height of six (6) feet in height. PLAN SUBMITTAL (1) 3.1 Prior to installation, the applicant shall obtain a building permit for the wall. (3) 3.2 At the time of building permit application; the plans shall comply with the 1998 California Building Code (CBC), City Ordinances, and State and Federal laws and regulations. Building plan check submittal shall include the following: · Four (4) sets of construction Plans; · Elevations that include all proposed dimensions, materials, colors, and finishes; and, · Note on plans that no field changes shall be made without prior approval from the Building Official and architect or engineer of record. FEES (1) 4.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all applicable building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based upon the most current schedule. A. Building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based on the most current schedule. Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $43.00 (forty-three dollars) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project, if within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened.