The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZA Report MA 2013-001GENDA MEETING DATE.: 20, 21,00 7-0 RJH1H Q ,, �DRl1R10 i RA7 0R FR0Rjl CD1!ilRlRRI u Y o CE19C1, C:)FD'3i [,-7- [f\ 9 a R -R 1R 1 R7C 19i1 L9RJRCT. ui71 IR�R 10 -- IU5UR�IE -1 2'c 10 -B3c I ARFLL Qk.R i �� 9R1 ��ilR � UINTERO 5 C -100L 2 FIRST FEDERAL CRRR1f J.R1ON `l 342 RFE�WPORT AVENUE 7'U9R ii 1R, C \ 22780 PROFRR7V R 00 LSFI l \07 FEDERAL CRR10 -T J1�91 R OWNER; I41!�02 NEWPORT AVENUE 7UL 3 FI, CA 92780 LOCATION: 1200 LDINGER AVENUE GENERAL PLAN: PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERR1,1�0� Rs19 5 ZONING: PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) /PACIFIRC C7ENTER EAST SPECIFIC RLzA-L (SR 11 Ru`RI1Rr�o-)1`RjqRR7AL I- 7NiS PRC)47tiRT IS CATEGORICALLY Z-RER T (CLASS 1) 3 ;� ,�L\ a J o PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 0, F —flRE CALIFORNIA [ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, RCS �� RZTo 7O INCREAS R THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF A BLOCK WALL ON THE SOU 7h] 1-1 RAST SIDE L Y TWENTY (20) PERCE-R 7 AND TO REDUCE THE- ,JRONT /STR1',EZ'- a 510E SETBAC[vC 137 i1 `N (10) PERCENT, Zoning Aclrninis'rasor January 28, 2013 'j\j]A 201 3 -001 Page 2 I21 [Edinger Ave. (Regional Center) GZDCDj� ilhil IMIQA,i 1r- JN That he Zoning Administrator adopt Zone g Admin.ialm or Actbn 2013 -003 appro1>ing N ,II ror Adjus'Iment 2013-001 to incroase he madm m hsighl of a proposed block vials by 20 ,peTcen'3 and Teduca °she fron'Ustrast side setback by 10 paresrt for -a proper�'y located at 1 200 Edl ng -_r AYen us, "A MRR177 Section 5A of �Iha Pacifc Center Easy SpecFic plan ailo�yus rninoT modifima�kns or adjus'Iments -for an increase of no'I more than 20 parcon'� in ohs maAmum parmMied hnsigh( of a farce or lj�jali, sljbjad� to cKY- approved s- Iructurra i rlssig ). The same section allows rninor modjIicalions of a decrease in not mor '�ha 10 peresn� in ohs rsqu rsd bu Ung or landscaping setbacks. PUTS cant to Section 2299b(l) of the T assn Ci"�y Cods, Iha Zone g '\dmr n s"«ra�lor has °shy authority to approve m nor adjusimsn'L_9 of an increass of not more than 20 percan"k' in �hs ma,,d gum permitted height of a 'fSnC-- ',Or �J\Ja l and a decrease of no« morn than 10 percen o,' a Mq wired building �� o��po�� Om 0.e 'WO O®.t0 O 9e'IM 0�7 J4y o-9c�n 540�41'b!n�, BACKGROUND Locaion The projecI si�Ia is an aAs`dng it uIrlal properly located or °she southeast cornier of Edl nger Avarua and Del Amo �'� ienue, �xiNn °l'he Plane ne l Commune Iqj (PC) zoning Flo ITiek and the RaciAIc Career Ease Specific PPlan, The pmparky is located Ajk4i in the Regional Zoning Admr nistmlor January 28, 2013 NIA 201 3 -001 Page 3 Center land use o;' the Pacifk,, Center Easy peciflc Flan, RYA &oh alloljAjs -for a variety of o flce and cornrnercial uses. In addRkn, t e properly is designeated as Planned Community Comrnercia uss ness �AjNlNn the General Plan Land Uss Nlapp The swroundl ng prope7"kas ire also zoned PC and locatad vjitNn I'hs Paci� c Censer East Speciflc Man. To tlhe soLr'lh sans, true subject proper abLVIS th- )urlinglon iNorthern Santa Fe (BNSF ) Railroad I °one "Ih -at runs along the ear ern pmpwe ly line. Aerial Photo 015 - U,ZZI ON The SchoolsF T -9t FesdS EI Credit Unioru iS proPoSing --;;I continuous Concrete Mayo nrrj Unit �Cu��lU j block- �jv -@H along the eastern property line �o screen the property from the e feting railroad line. The proposed wa l A3AJould be an extension of an existing eigh°l (8) fool CMU block �jiva l running &long the eastern property line of the three propersies directly adjacent to the south. The existing Nock Avva l �jivas pra%dously approved through Zoning AdrninislraTor Action 08 -005, prior to the Purchase of the Zoning Administrator Januan 280, 2013 AJIA 201 3 -001 'Oage '4 subject propsariy by 'lne Schools First �' sd8Tal Crad�l Union. The SXIS BiOn AAJOLfld replace an e i din chain 'link -fence and con'JnUS ElOng The int8T Or PrOpSr�y line, Existina Dock VA]ali PrOOOSLCi 810C% )A/211 Currently the nacific Cssm7sr mast Speoft Plan allOANS �TOr a rna �jnlUrn hsight of six (6) nest, eight (8) inches or f-ances, edges, and viaHs. j he proposed livo ld be sight (8) feet in height, making K twenty (29) percent' faller ��Ihan she maMirr um permitted heigh'L It is not uncommon for many larger developrnen s �o ss'�abHsh high-ar perimeter 'vjalls as sound barriers or security measures to address sra`uc noise, dust, and luu a i u`i n, :iJOS ✓all �3�Jouk' Beare as a safety barrier batmieen ps— d83tTiEnS and the railrroad lone. The applicant also plans '�o con 1ruct a drive aisle anal paring lo�� connact7 �n'the subjec"� PrOPeriy wilh she BchooisRr t Fed-sral Credli Union properly adjacsn'� to slue South. The parNng let e �pansien will include associa'lad landscaping anal elx�erier li H« ng `�o ma'�ch e;,i5'bng (See ; srial Map). Zoning AdrnWs'Uator January 23, 2313 NIA 201 3 -001 Gage a - 13�tkrdyt9anc{u4:� ty SchooliFirst The cuTrent street side setback requirement along Edinger vesnue is thirty - f`i're (35) west. The appflcant is proposing to hays the wall encroach into this ssllback by, 10 Percent, Aj-,jhich �jvoi-fld result in a nevi setback from the right -o'74/ \gay of thirty -one (01 feet, si (6) inches, The proposed encroachment would not have an ef`f'ect on public right- of-viay Njisual ciearance since the proposed fence is Over 01 feet from the intersection oTthe street and the railroad right- of-ijvay. Section 9229c(3)(a ) of the T CC, the California Government Code Section 65906 requires the City to make two positive findings to approve a minor adjustment. In determining whether to approve the Minor Adjustment for the proposed increase in the maximum permitted height of a block wall by 20 percent and reduce setback by 10 percent, the Zoning Administrator must determine that the proposed request constitutes a special circumstance unique to the lane] based on hardship vihere the strict literal interpretation of the zoning code deprives "the ;property Of priNi leges enjoyed by other properties in the PARIaNGS'UaR44RY- ,. ,. ,. BVAM%9101 ALIEN ° .. r �f 6'fli•. GY' i l � I .J��h IJ IJ C�J II II The cuTrent street side setback requirement along Edinger vesnue is thirty - f`i're (35) west. The appflcant is proposing to hays the wall encroach into this ssllback by, 10 Percent, Aj-,jhich �jvoi-fld result in a nevi setback from the right -o'74/ \gay of thirty -one (01 feet, si (6) inches, The proposed encroachment would not have an ef`f'ect on public right- of-viay Njisual ciearance since the proposed fence is Over 01 feet from the intersection oTthe street and the railroad right- of-ijvay. Section 9229c(3)(a ) of the T CC, the California Government Code Section 65906 requires the City to make two positive findings to approve a minor adjustment. In determining whether to approve the Minor Adjustment for the proposed increase in the maximum permitted height of a block wall by 20 percent and reduce setback by 10 percent, the Zoning Administrator must determine that the proposed request constitutes a special circumstance unique to the lane] based on hardship vihere the strict literal interpretation of the zoning code deprives "the ;property Of priNi leges enjoyed by other properties in the Zoning Adrninostrat ®r January 23, 2013 A0A 2013 -001 Page 6 area, In addKJon the Zoning Administrator must determine that «'fie proposed N/linor /1 \djustrnen' Aivould not be a granting of special prhrilega incor sist&ent viKh limy tations placed on other properties in the ?Jcinity. A decision to approve ti s request may be supported by the folloNjAJng findings, The property is unique in that it abuts an existing railroad line 'Chat creates ammesskie noise and air pollution, The proposed �jvall viould serves as a sound barrier and SGCLITity devics. 2, `\ppToNjal of the proposed Minor Adjustment viould not be a granting of special prkjilege in that other propersies vJthin the City experiencing hazards dus to traf-flc have also erected vialls and sound barriers in excess of :the requirements oLtlirad in the City of TuaJn zoning code, 3, That the properJas to the south of the project site have an existing, eight (5) fool tail block and that the proposed project �, /NoLf1d be an extension of the existing block wall. Al, The project cons'dlutes 531 linear ieet along the railroad line at the southeast prcpe -T,ly line, The proposed bloc? Nj?7all livould create a cohesiva and asstheti ally uniform solution to mitigate the effects of railroad operation, 5e The proposed block �jAiall ti,jvould be located at the side of the property and not highly Asible from the public right- ofejl�iay. In addition, the encroachment into the required street side setback by ten (10 ) percent viould not interfere �Mlh and Azual clearance, S. The proposed block �j?�all setback redUCtion tisrould provide the property increased protection from trespassers, noise, and debris or trash. Stal a recommends ghat the Toning A- drnWsttrator adopt Toning Administrator Action No. 2013 -073 approving Minor ��lj�strr�ent 2013 -001, allo�jvjng for an increase in the maArnUM perrnit(ted hae qht of a block vialC by 20 percent and a decrease in the required street side setback for tine same block gall by 10 percent located at 1200, Edinger / '\venue within the IFacifiic Center East Specific Flan and the Planned Community zoning district, EdhWne V. Huffer Associate Planner Atlachme —nts; A. SubmiRed Glans B. Toning Adm nistratcrr Action No. 2013 -003 z f A,t F,uM su\1f z SUBMITTED PLANS =, z n 0 r r d JJ, FED 'F T �1 CcPTL-� F�, s oil, i,g�� p _� ��'s l a9Hil .R 1 It a q yL 5 9 ffi� .9 33& Fk l CCCS �3a3 SS� a *pyB c 00 Cr d 8: 8a d b p WW2 x d z�1 d d 0 LLUV w 4G� x t5 1 3 E a � 1 t C $�1X 82! L)Lu � 3 rod =, z n 0 r r d JJ, FED 'F T �1 CcPTL-� F�, s oil, i,g�� p _� ��'s l a9Hil .R 1 It a q yL 5 9 ffi� .9 33& Fk l CCCS �3a3 SS� a *pyB c Cr d 8: 8a d b p $$a d z�1 d d 0 E a � � 3 333 $$y gg �9l9 s� t�$d Ay'Ue X j 5 LU k y �:5 #I gg g ESt €aE § §isisi3 0 S MI }c.�yaa SS � S �yy Y p 8 @ �n�8�c5" � p 1 11� :9bn�i6��tiie1� 979 ~ 1143 19 ab91599I kaa dA M m y mQ ------------ =ni�3 -H35NICI:R U I I II II -A I Oil U) z i 161 ii wo z Qz lid � W I. ,I III�� f, 11 1 F- r, W W Z LLOL) j! - I p li LLI � � � i $ W 0 Mix @2f P > i lip i a 91 LU E ego o@qjjj):)ss a I U)LL9 V3 ------------ =ni�3 -H35NICI:R U I I II II -A I Oil U) z i 161 ii wo lid � I. ,I III�� f, 11 1 j! - I p li � � � i $ W 0 If i P > i lip i a 91 LU E ego o@qjjj):)ss ------------ =ni�3 -H35NICI:R U I I II II -A I Oil U) z V) (D 1 1 1 11 Z (L LL, LU (D z W 6— . wo � ' f, 11 1 j! - I p 1 � � � i $ W 0 P > i lip i a 91 LU E ego o@qjjj):)ss V) (D 1 1 1 11 Z (L LL, LU (D z W 6— °~ Ps oz ZO of T t:U Lu w r 0 V V u�l Q Oy I t:j 36 o _ of Ow gyYj � a j 9x�'C�C E°r�r �� M �i N3 � p`■p $jj$ �M d� �t • ' � yy� N gg za g5 Ead � 4�6 d tl °� i 2 ii g o Q � � � � .�� a �� ` b � @j ` 6 j q u� LU 71 he LU J p, u'7C is .- —77 N 1 r IMAI 11jiz U' 9gi. St,P r Eta,9 ,1f; 'r1" a IrJr uj 2 F- s b r 1sfi i,ia� ! LL f 7,...r l _._ J F � EiS L �]a�,iP Xr Pi CSrt� C #idfi�5l g;Igye Srj��f LLL Jn d3 a 2 !? i z L ...1 L2' iL�F?� 2 F }ar�:i7pYT Zia i _ as . K �'ierQ�sb R �p[gtr i 7 lelYa §�h�SaHlie exy ' •'t 1r,„ t � y x 3Cdi ^.a �ri3tir:1 ��i22e Pstii 71 iP ? g tt p LL L2 � �4iitli! I�$tt , jtt; i s O i'll j Isj�� ' 1 lIM, �g e4, dg�ia? ,31�,ltih 3P13�ngi1�P,li,i it�}' ,!.l,. Pat gi mm do ---------------------- 1.7 jc-27 ZZ' L-- 7-1 --M uh k I MW if ----------------- JAI Iola 0., OR Igo 8 8 SMS z W lfl COD w L) C) GO =j3 O rn LL w IT Dr .... .. ....... . 14, JA 2 7F=O P. A -MT i., -- ---- -- fiTa-iff T I ul:ill I Y1 II I 9r$M o gigg CD z IT Dr .... .. ....... . 14, JA 2 7F=O P. A -MT i., -- ---- -- fiTa-iff T I ul:ill I Y1 II I i, f i zt" z LLJ 06 W I i, f i zt" z LLJ SIM IN 'O A N I "q1F VW Hit ■■�Ul uul a 00- F, -s- s I 4—A pp 7L F1 U 10011 a. Eu LW v F- z �LUZ fro OLI q zu 8LL Mz OLU WLL. 4—A pp 7L F1 U 10011 a. GF ti c7 q R3 co z RR R 7R M 111, Eiji HIP yell GF ti c7 3, jt4 z �! W Z 3E�� LuO INa �` 3 g U p0 �N Z o z r � a OHM �pa55 e,1 > Y O© O e Vii; C O g� g£ @pao }@ � oil P fig„ p HIP 8m�ag3�sp�Saj�€s Mimi �$ �.: • w ♦w w .. w Y V OE o eg_ 4 a � ilk 3 dR€ �' rc ak�dFSy 2'g 1�mf 3 Ck ¢ rr P HU 1 h �a@ 111, I.aggg� IKE 9 j 5a UEP 3 4 �� 22 I • 1 S z r � a OHM �pa55 e,1 > Y O© O e Vii; C O g� g£ @pao }@ � oil P fig„ p HIP 8m�ag3�sp�Saj�€s Mimi �$ �.: • w ♦w w .. w Y V OE o eg_ 4 a � ilk 3 dR€ �' rc ak�dFSy 2'g 1�mf 3 Ck ¢ rr P HU 1 h �a@ 111, I.aggg� IKE 9 j 5a UEP 3 4 �� 22 I • ��DD9�D�1I HE)' Z©INYM D AID MUDIS ll DA7©D ACTMIN N- 201S-00 CO3 NUNIOR JLJ STj'V1FEzj9T 2013-001 1200 LDiil \1.c3, ,L\V1Ej U The Zoning Administrator of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Zoning Administrator finds and determines: A. A proper application .for Minor Adjustment 2013 -001 by SchoolsFirst (Federal Credit 'Union to allow for an increase in the maximum permitted height of a block wall by -twenty percent (20 %) and a decrease in the required street side setback for the block wall by ten percent (10 %), which equates to an eight (3) foot high block wall setback ay thirty -one (31) feet, six (0) inches from the street. The proposed block wall, at 1200 Edinger Ave, would be an extension of an existing eight (3) foot block well running along the eastern property line of the three (3) properties directly adjacent to the south, S. That the site is designated as Planned Community Commercial/Business by the City General Plan and is within the Pacific Center East Specific Plan Zoning District. C. That Pursuant to Section 5.4 of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan, minor modifications or adjustments for an increase of not more than twenty (20) percent in the maximum permitted height of a fence or wall are allowed. The same section allows minor modifications of a decrease in not more than ten (10) percent in the required fence setbacks, D. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for, under the circumstances of this case, constitutes a special circumstance unique to the land based on hardship where the strict literal interpretation of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the area as evidenced by the following findings: 1. The property is unique in that it abuts an existing railroad fine that creates excessive noise and air pollution. The proposed wall would serve as a sound barrier and security device. 2. Approval of the proposed Minor Adjustment would not be a granting of special ;privilege in that other properties within the City experiencing hazards due to traffic have also erected walls and sound barriers in excess of the requirements outlined in the City of Tustin zoning code. 3. That the properties to 11he south of the project site have an existing eight (8) foot tali block wall and that the proposed project would be an extension of the existing block wall. Zoning Administrator Action 13-003 MA 2013 -001 Page 2 4. The project constitutes 531 linear feet along the railroad Bone at the southeast property line. The proposed block wall would create a cohesive and aesthetically uniform solution to mitigate the effects of railroad operation. 5. The proposes] block wail wouid be located at the side of the property and not highly visible -from the public right -of -way. In addition, the encroachment into the required street side setback by ten (1 0) percent would not interfere with any visual clearance. 6. The proposed block wall setback reduction would provide the property increased protection from trespassers, noise, and debris or trash. E. This project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 1) of the California Code of Regulations (CuideMes for the California EnVronmental Quality Act). Il. The Zoning Administrator hereby approves Minor Adjustment 2013001 allowing for an increase in the maxirnum permitted height of a block wall by twenty percent (20 %) and a decrease in the required street side setback for the block wall by ten percent (10 %), which equates to an eight (8) foot high block wall setback at thirty - one (31) feet, six (6) inches from the street, subject to the conditions contained within Exhibit A, attached' Hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Zoning Administrator of the City of (Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 28th day of January 2013. ELIZABETH A. BWSACK ZONING AD MMSTFRA -FOR ADRlANNE IDILEVA RECORD NC SECRETARY Zoning Administrator Action 13 -003 MA 2013 -001 Page 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF TUSTlN i, Adrianne DiLeva, the undersigned, hereby certify that i am the Zoning Administrator Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; -that Zoning Administrator Action 201 3 -003 was duiy passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Zoning Administrator, held on the 28th day of January, 2013, ADRiA NE DILEVA RECOjF1, ING SECRETARY 19 3 T , ZONIN c zL-\DIN]I Ni ST ATOR ACTION 13 =0 0 3 V�r�lhlD -A© 9US7- _O?ENT 2013 -001 c OiNMTHD -N O QF APPROVAL `l o The proposed project shell substantially conform with the submittcd plans for the project date stamped January 23, 2013, on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or as modified by the Zoning Administrator in accordance with this Exhibit. The Community Development Director may also approve subsequent miner modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are consistent with provisions of -the Tustin City Code or other applicable regulations. 2. Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. 3. Approval of Minor Adjustment 2013 -001 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Deveiopment 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. e This approval shall become null and void unless the use is established within tweive (1 2) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be granted if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration 5. The property owner shall be required to coat and protect the proposed block wall with a graffiti resistant finish and /or material. In addition, the property owner shall install and maintain mature vines on both sides of the wall as a measure to cover the wall and deter graffiti. 8a Any cieanup or costs associated with the removal of graffiti on the proposed block wall shall be the sole responsibility of the property owner. Should the property owner fail -to remove graffiti in a timely manner, the City of Tustin may remove the grafifiti at the cost of the property owner. 7. Within forty4ght (43) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY GLEFR C in the amount of fifty dollars ($50.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. if within such forty - eight (43) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above -noted check, the statue of limitations for any interested parity to challenge the environ mental determination under the provisions of the California :Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened.