Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC RES 4247RESOLUTION NO. 4247 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, DENYING MINOR ADJUSTMENT 2013 -006, A REQUEST FOR A MINOR ADJUSTMENT TO INCREASE THE EXISTING ENDERLE GARDENS ENTRY WALLS THAT ARE THIRTY -SIX (36) INCH HIGH WALLS TO FORTY -THREE (3) INCH HIGH WITHIN THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK WHERE ONLY WALLS THREE (3) FEET IN HEIGHT OR LESS ARE ALLOWED. The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Minor Adjustment 2013 -006 was filed by Vincent Feehan of Enderle Gardens Property Owners Association, a request for a minor adjustment to increase an existing thirty -six (36) inches high walls to forty-three (43) inches high, located at 17331 and 17332 Jacaranda Avenue, within the required front yard setback where only walls three (3) feet in height or less are allowed. B. That the subject property is designated as Single Family Residential (R1) on the City of Tustin Zoning Map. C. That Table 1 of TCC Section 9220 states that the front yard setback for properties designated as R1 is twenty (20) feet. D. That Tustin City Code (TCC) Section 9271(i)(1)(b) states that no fence or wall shall exceed three feet within the front yard setback area. E. That pursuant to TCC Section 9299b(1)(c) minor adjustment for an increase of not more than twenty (20) percent in the maximum height of a wall is allowed if findings can be made to support the request. That the fundamental purposes of the provision to not allow fences within the front yard setback area include, but not limited to: providing adequate line of sight to allow vehicles and pedestrians to access to and from properties; allowing police and fire emergency access without additional barrier; maintaining consistent building lines within residential neighborhoods; maintaining the aesthetics of single family neighborhoods; and maintain orderly development of single family homes, etc. G. That the applicant indicated the subject properties' close proximity to Yorba Avenue and exposure to noise and traffic is a special circumstance applicable to the property and that other properties within the general vicinity have constructed the same type of block wall. Resolution No. 4247 January 28, 2014 Page 2 H. That the proposed minor adjustment is not found to be in conformance with the General Plan in that the following policies and goals are not adhered to: • Policy 2.2: Maintain consistency between the Land Use Element, Zoning Ordinances, and other City Ordinances, regulations and standards. • Goal 4: Assure a safe, healthy and aesthetically pleasing community for residents and businesses. • Policy 4.6: Maintain and enhance the quality of healthy residential neighborhoods, and safeguard neighborhoods from intrusion by nonconforming and disruptive uses. • Goal 6: Improve urban design in Tustin to ensure development that is both architecturally and functionally compatible, and to create uniquely identifiable neighborhoods, commercial and business park districts. • Policy 6.4: Preserve and enhance the City's special residential character and "small town" quality by encouraging and maintaining Tustin's low density residential neighborhoods through enforcement of existing land use and property development standards and the harmonious blending of buildings and landscape. Allowing the proposed minor adjustment would not be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Policy 2.2 in that pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, no walls higher than three (3) feet may be located within the front yard setback of R1 district. Allowing deviation from the Zoning Ordinance without proper findings would conflict between the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance in that land use standards are not enforced uniformly. Single- family residential (R1) Districts have continuity of front yard open spaces. The neighborhood has been designed to look and feel like a low density community, with open front yards and homes setback from the street. Allowing walls taller than three (3) feet within the front yard setback would disrupt the visual character of R1 neighborhoods and would divide communities in otherwise orderly single family neighborhoods, inconsistent with General Plan Goals 4 and 6 and Policies 4.6 and 6.4 to encourage preserving and enhance Tustin's special residential character through enforcement of existing land use and development standards. That the granting of Minor Adjustment 2013 -006 would constitute the granting of a special privilege not afforded to other properties in the vicinity and identical zoning district of the subject property and no special Resolution No. 4247 January 28, 2014 Page 3 circumstances existing on the subject property that deprive it of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. A decision to deny this request is supported by the following findings: 1) The subject property does not have special circumstances due to increased traffic and noise on Yorba Street, one -way drive configurations, and desire for an updated look. Allowance of a wall taller than three (3) feet within the front yard setback would be granting a special privilege not afforded to other properties with identical zoning districts in that there is no evidence of the need for a sound wall to mitigate noise and that the increase of seven (7) inches wall does not appear to alleviate much of the traffic noise. 2) The proposed minor adjustment would be privileges that are not legally permitted or attainable by other property owners within the R1 District. Therefore, the granting of the requested variance would constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and identical zoning district. 3) That approval of the requested minor adjustment would set precedence for the R1 zoning district because the circumstances of the properties are common throughout the R1 zone. Therefore, the issue becomes no longer a question about a minor adjustment, but rethinking the fence height restriction on a citywide basis. Should this be a desired outcome, an impact analysis city -wide would be appropriate rather than one property determining a standard that may not be acceptable from an aesthetic or safety perspective. 4) That taller walls within the front yard setback would defeat the fundamental purposes of the code provision including but not limited to life and safety responses; line of sights, aesthetics, consistency of building lines, and orderly development, as follows: a. Walls taller than three (3) feet could block the line of sight for drivers leaving their driveway and create a safety hazard. Drivers may not be able to see pedestrians approaching, which could lead to an accident. Line of sight or visual clearance area in ensuring there are not impediments or obstacles are standard throughout the country. For passenger vehicles, it is assumed that the driver's eyesight is at 3.5 feet. Obstructions within the line of sight would impair the decision point for the driver if there is an oncoming pedestrian. b. Walls taller than three (3) feet within the front yard setback would change the character of the street and neighborhood in that instead of seeing homes along the street, drivers and Resolution No. 4247 January 28, 2014 Page 4 pedestrians would see walls and fences along Yorba Street, impacting street view /aesthetics and dividing communities. C. The proposed wall with pilaster on 17331 Jacaranda Avenue would be constructed adjacent to an existing fire hydrant and would impact the visibility of the fire hydrant; thereby could impact fire response to the area. J. That this project is exempt pursuant to Section 15270 (Projects which are disapproved) of the California Environmental Quality Act. II. The Planning Commission hereby denies Minor Adjustment 2013 -006, a request for a minor adjustment to increase the existing thirty -six (36) inch high walls to forty - three (43) inches high within the required front yard setback where only walls three (3) feet in height or less are allowed. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 28th day of January, 2014. "9„0 -8TEVE90ZAK 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 Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4247 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of January, 2014. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary