Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 PC REPORTti�Y O w AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: ice FROM: AUGUST 12, 2014 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 90TNU SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE 2014 -001, SUBDIVISION 2013 -01 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17665, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2013 -01, AND DESIGN REVIEW 2013 -002 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SIX (6) SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1381 -1391 SAN JUAN STREET APPLICANT: ALFONSO MACIEL A&A DRAFTING 2017 W. ALCO AVENUE SANTA ANA, CA 92703 PROPERTY OWNER: SHAYGAN FAMILY TRUST 19 SPIKE MOSS IRVINE, CA 92603 LOCATION: 1381 -1391 SAN JUAN STREET GENERAL PLAN: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR 15 -25 DU /ACRE) ZONING: EXISTING: MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R3) 2700 PROPOSED: MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R3) 2650 EXISTING LAND USE: VACANT AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ':i ■r n A'.ai m -�! ii ii it FAM ii it ii I � I Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL: THIS PROJECT IS STATUTORILY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15270(A) OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS (GUIDELINES FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT). CEQA DOES NOT APPLY TO PROJECTS WHICH A PUBLIC AGENCY REJECTS OR DISAPPROVES. IF ZONE CHANGE 2014- 001, SUBDIVISION 2013 -01, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2013 -01 AND DESIGN REVIEW 2013 -002 ARE NOT REJECTED OR DISAPPROVED, A NEW ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED ACCORDINGLY. REQUESTS: 1. ZONE CHANGE (ZC) 2014 -001 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM R3 -2700 TO R3 2650 TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM LOT AREA PER FAMILY UNIT FROM 2,700 SQUARE FEET TO 2,650 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF SIX (6) RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS. 2. SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2013 -01 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) 17665 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 1/3 ACRE SITE CONSISTING OF ONE (1) NUMBERED LOT AND ONE (1) LETTERED LOT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SIX (6) SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2013 -01 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN THE R3 ZONING DISTRICT, PURSUANT TO THE CRITERA OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) DISTRICT. 4. DESIGN REVIEW (DR) 2013 -002 FOR THE DESIGN AND SITE LAYOUT OF SIX (6) SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4263, recommending that the City Council deny: a. ZC 2014 -001, a request to change the zoning from R3 2700 to R3 2650 to reduce the minimum lot area per family unit from 2,700 square feet to 2,650 square feet to allow the development of six (6) residential condominium units. b. SUB 2013 -01 for TTM 17665 for the subdivision of an approximately 1/3 acre site consisting of one (1) numbered lot and one (1) lettered lot for the development of six (6) single family detached condominium units. c. CUP 2013 -01 for the development of condominium units in the R3 Zoning District, pursuant to the criteria of the Planned Development (PD) District. d. DR 2013 -002 for the design and site layout of six (6) single family detached condominium units and related improvements. Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 3 APPROVAL AUTHORITY: Zone Change (ZC): Tustin City Code (TCC) Section 9295f authorizes the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council on ZC applications. Subdivision (SUB)/Tentative Tract Map (TTM): TCC Section 9321b authorizes the Planning Commission to review and take action on Tentative Maps; however, since the proposal includes an entitlement application that requires City Council approval, TTM 17665 is to be forwarded to the City Council for concurrent consideration. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): TCC Section 9291 authorizes the Planning Commission to review and take action on CUPs; however, since the proposal includes an entitlement action that requires City Council approval, CUP 2103 -01 is to be forwarded to the City Council for concurrent consideration. Design Review (DR): TCC Section 9272 authorizes the Community Development Director to consider DR applications; however, since the proposal includes an entitlement application that requires City Council approval, DR 2013 -002 is to be forwarded to the City Council for concurrent consideration. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Recent Site History In 2005, the City approved a request by the previous property owner to demolish the single family residence, apartment unit, and garage that existed at that time at 1381 San Juan Street and construct a two -story apartment building with three (3) units. The previous property owner later requested approval to construct one (1) single family residence in lieu of the apartments, but never commenced construction. In 2009, the current property owner purchased the property at 1381 San Juan Street with the intention of developing new residences on the site. An application for a tentative parcel map, conditional use permit, and design review was submitted in 2013 to subdivide the lot at 1381 San Juan Street and develop three (3) two -story detached residential condominiums on the property. No change in zoning was necessary for this original application. While the application was being processed and not yet determined complete, the property owner purchased the adjacent property at 1391 San Juan Street with the understanding that the existing zoning of both properties would allow a total of five (5) units to be developed on the site, subject to the approval of the requested discretionary actions. Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 4 Site Location The project site consists of two (2) lots, totaling approximately one -third of an acre in size, and is located at 1381 -1391 San Juan Street. (Attachment A). The project site is bounded by Utt Drive to the northwest, San Juan Street to the southwest and residential uses to the southeast and northeast (Figure 1). Surrounding uses include multiple family residential across Utt Drive to the northwest, multiple family residential across San Juan Street to the southwest, a single family residence to the southeast, and multiple family residential to the northeast (Figure 1). Figure 1 Project Description ZC 2014 -001, SUB 2013 -01, CUP 2013 -01, and DR 2013 -002, are development applications for the purpose of developing six (6) detached residential condominium units and related improvements at 1381 -1391 San Juan Street (Figure 2). The project includes the demolition of the existing single story single family residence and accessory structures at 1391 San Juan Street. Planning Commission Report August 12.2O14 13V1'1881 San Juan Street Page Figure 2 Pursuant b]TCC Section 9226b. cUAd08AiniUnAS, as defined in the California Civil Code, are C0OditiUDGUy p9[0iMBd when developed pursuant to the criteria of the Planned Development (PD) District. Thus, the Tustin City Code requires that the PD standards ba used for the proposed condominium project, N/ithth8@ppnDV@lOfaC0Dditi0D@|uS8p8[nliLTh8projeCfVVouW comply with the development standards for the P[] District 8Sfollows: it UNIVE 24T.1 KH Figure 2 Pursuant b]TCC Section 9226b. cUAd08AiniUnAS, as defined in the California Civil Code, are C0OditiUDGUy p9[0iMBd when developed pursuant to the criteria of the Planned Development (PD) District. Thus, the Tustin City Code requires that the PD standards ba used for the proposed condominium project, N/ithth8@ppnDV@lOfaC0Dditi0D@|uS8p8[nliLTh8projeCfVVouW comply with the development standards for the P[] District 8Sfollows: Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1361 -1391 San Juan Street Page 6 Standard Required Proposed Building Height No maximum 35 feet Front Yard Setback Not specified 12 feet, 8 inches Rear Yard Setback 10 feet 10 feet Side Yard Setback 5 feet 5 feet Corner Side Yard Setback 10 feet 10 feet Architecture The proposed project includes six (6) detached, three -story residential condominium units with identical floor plans (Figure 3) in three different architectural styles: Craftsman, Spanish, and Mediterranean. Two (2) of the residences are proposed to face San Juan Street, and the remaining four (4) residences are proposed at the rear of the property, facing a central driveway that is accessed from Utt Drive. Each home is 2,275 square feet is size and consists of three (3) bedrooms and three and one -half (3.5) bathrooms. All of the bedrooms and two (2) of the three (3) bathrooms are located on the third floor. The main living /dining area, kitchen, laundry room, and powder room (1/2 bathroom), are located on the second floor. On the first floor there are a den, one (1) bathroom, and a two -car garage. Swann FLOOR FIRIT FLOOR T'� FLOOR MAN TINS FLOOR ae. Figure 3 Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1361 -1391 San Juan Street Page 7 The six (6) proposed residences are designed in three different architectural styles: Craftsman, Spanish, and Mediterranean. Each of the six (6) residences is three (3) stories in height and features a two -story covered front porch, a deck on the second floor (facing the rear), and a decorative balcony on the third floor. -1{ 11111 VI11�1 / =' 110 Figure 4 The exterior elevations (Figure 4) are enhanced with architectural details such as gable roofs, window and door trim, various size windows, decorative window shutters, balconies with Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 8 decorative railing, wood entry doors, and various stucco colors to create visual interest. The roof material is proposed to be full - dimensional concrete shingles, with each residence having a different color and material to complement the proposed architectural style and color scheme. It should be noted that two (2) of the six (6) elevations depicted in this report are actually being proposed in a reverse arrangement. The applicant has proposed the use of several neutral and earth tone colors. Each unit features one (1) or two (2) primary stucco colors, plus accent colors, to create visual interest. Each front door and garage door is painted in a color that complements the stucco color. All shutters and trim will be painted in accent colors. Material and color sample boards for the project will be available at the Planning Commission meeting. Landscape / Handscape Landscaping is proposed along the perimeter and within the interior of the site. The proposed trees include: Sunburst Honey Locus Tree and Golden Eclipse Lilac Tree. A variety of ground covers and shrubs would be utilized throughout the site. Decorative paving is proposed at the two (2) driveways on San Juan Street and along the middle of the large driveway off of Utt Drive. Perimeter six (6) foot high "split- face" block walls are proposed along the boundaries of the site facing San Juan Street and Utt Drive. Six (6) foot high block walls are also proposed to enclose each of the six (6) private yard areas. Some of the existing six (6) foot high block wall is proposed to remain along rear property line, while new walls will be constructed along the remaining portions of the rear and side property lines. Open Space Recreation Area A private ground level yard area of between 400 and 533 square feet is provided for each of the six (6) residences. Tustin City Code Section 9224g6 allows private ground level open space in condominium developments to be credited toward the minimum open space requirement, which is 400 square feet per dwelling unit of open space recreation area within a common designated recreation area. However, the proposed development provides all of the required open space for the condominium development within private yard areas, and does not provide any common recreation area. Parking TCC Section 9263 requires two (2) covered parking spaces for each dwelling unit, plus one (1) unassigned guest space for every four (4) units. This requirement has been satisfied by providing each of the six (6) residential units with an attached two -car garage and by providing three (3) on -site guest parking spaces. Standard Required Provided Resident Parking 12 covered 12 garage Guest Parking 2 3 Parking Ratio Resident Parkin 21unit 21unit Parking Ratio Guest Parkin 0.251unit 0.51unit Total Parking Provided 14 15 Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 9 Parking is also currently allowed on San Juan Street and Utt Drive along portions of the perimeter of the site; however on- street parking is for public use and it will be necessary for safety and visibility reasons to prohibit some or all of the on- street parking along the site perimeter in conjunction with the development of the site, due to the curb cuts for the proposed driveway approaches. Traditional driveways are proposed for the two (2) residences facing San Juan Street. Vehicle parking would be allowed in these two (2) driveways. However, traditional driveways are not proposed for the four (4) residences at the rear of the property. ANALYSIS: Zone Change TCC Section 9295 specifies any amendment to the zoning of a property may be initiated and adopted as other ordinances are amended or adopted. The project site is located within the Multiple Family Residential (R3) 2700 Zoning District, which requires a minimum of 2,700 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. A ZC is being requested to change the zoning to R3 2650 to increase the allowable density of the site to allow the development of six (6) residential condominium units. Without the approval of the requested ZC, a maximum of five (5) residential units would be allowed on the 16,060 square foot site. Based on the zoning designation, the site would need to be at least 16,200 square feet in size to allow the development of six (6) residential units. The site has a General Plan designation of High Density Residential (HDR) which allows the development of 15 -25 du /acre. Both the R3 2700 and R3 2650 zoning designations are consistent with the HDR General Plan land use designation. Therefore, a general plan amendment is not required for this project. As shown in Figure 5, the properties directly adjacent to the project site, as well as properties in the immediate vicinity on Red Hill Avenue, Green Valley Drive, and Utt Drive are also zoned R3 2700. The properties across Utt Drive and San Juan Street are zoned R3, which requires a minimum of 1,750 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. The proposed ZC from R3 2700 to R3 2650 would be classified as spot zoning since it only includes two (2) relatively small lots within a block of properties zoned R3 2700 (Figure 5). As articulated in court decisions, spot zoning is a term used to describe the discriminatory zoning of a small parcel that is surrounded by land within a different zone and is contrary to orderly development and sound land use planning principles. In a recent case, Foothill Communities Coalition v. County of Orange, the court of appeal determined that spot zoning can be justified where a "substantial public need exists" or if it is in the public interest. However, the proposed ZC does not appear to promote the public good or support a substantial public need or interest in that the housing units to be built would be offered for sale at market rate and would not accommodate low and very-low income individuals or special needs groups. The proposed ZC would primarily benefit the property owner by granting the property owner privileges which are not granted or extended to other landowners in the vicinity and in the same zoning district. In addition, the proposed ZC is a piecemeal approach lacking of overall zoning or plan for the area. Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 10 Figure 5 If the project site were considerably larger (i.e. the properties fronting San Juan Street between Utt Drive and Green Valley Drive and /or the entire block of properties were included and fully evaluated and analyzed) in the requested ZC, the issue of spot zoning would not be a factor in the decision - making process for the project. Such an analysis has not been provided with the submitted application. Conditional Use Permit and Design Review TCC Section 9226b5 requires the approval of a conditional use permit for the development of condominium units in the R3 Zoning District, when developed pursuant to the criteria of the Planned Development (PD) District. Further, TCC Section 9272 requires applicants to obtain Design Review approval prior to the issuance of building permits for all new structures. DR 2013 -002 provides for the design and site layout of the proposed residential project. Design Compatibility In part, the purpose of Design Review is to: 1) protect the value, standards, and importance of land; 2) retain and strengthen the unity and order of the visual community; and, 3) ensure that new uses and structures enhance their sites and are harmonious with the highest standards of the surrounding area and the community. Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 11 Staff is concerned about the compatibility of the six (6) proposed three -story residences with the adjacent single story residences to the northeast and southeast of the project site (Figures 6 and 7). The only existing three -story residential development in the vicinity of the proposed project is located on the southwesterly side of San Juan Street, but it is surrounded on two (2) sides by open space and on the third side by a two -story multi - family residence (Figures 8 and 9). Although the 35 -foot height of the proposed residences complies with the R3 development standards, the project has not been designed to be sensitive to adjacent single -story residential uses and may create intrusive visual impacts on the adjacent homes in the neighborhood. Multi -story residential developments can be designed to be more compatible with adjacent single story residences by considering the pattern and rhythm of the streetscape and by providing adequate setbacks, significant architectural articulation and step- downs, sloping roof planes, and other features that soften the transition between the adjacent properties. Figure 10 depicts how features, such as dormers and basements, can be used to reduce the bulk of taller buildings and achieve compatibility with smaller buildings. However, these features are not proposed, and approval of the proposed project could set an undesirable precedent for additional incompatible in -fill development. Figures 6 and 7 Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 12 -e. i� Figures 8 and 9 Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 13 COMPATIBILITY OF SCALE (HEIGHT): Hide the building'& height within the roof. Dormer& increase usable space. Excavate help hide significant differences In height. 7 n nF: c I story 1.112 stories 2 stories 1 +basement 2 -1/2 stories ZONING ALLOWS, \ MOST FREQUENT \ SOMETIMES \ 13UT REOUIRES EXTRA CARE Figure 10 Parking Issues Single family detached residences within the City are typically developed with individual driveways (minimum 20') in accordance with the required front yard setback of the Single Family Residential (R1) zoning district. The proposed development circumvents this requirement by subdividing the property in a manner which does not create individual lots. One purpose of the driveway for single family detached dwellings is to allow for additional parking of vehicles. Although a total of three (3) on -site guest parking spaces are proposed, which exceeds by one (1) space the required number of guest parking spaces for the project, individual driveways are proposed in only two (2) of the dwelling units within the development Therefore, staff anticipates a lack of adequate parking for the project. Further, the proposed single family detached dwellings are relatively large in size and generally can accommodate more persons (resulting in more vehicles) than attached residential products provided in most multi - family developments. Open Space and Recreation Issues TCC Section 9224gh requires a minimum of four hundred (400) square feet of open space recreation area per dwelling unit within a common designated recreation area. Although private ground level yard areas of between 400 and 533 square feet are proposed for each of the six (6) residences, these private spaces may only be credited toward the project's open space requirement and should not constitute the entire open space area or completely substitute for a common recreation area. Providing a recreation area with amenities often mitigates the impacts of higher density development and improves livability. Tentative Tract Map TCC Section 9323b2 requires a tentative tract map be prepared for subdivisions creating five (5) or more condominiums as defined in Section 4125 of the California Civil Code. Tentative Tract Map 17665 is a subdivision of an approximately 1/3 acre site into one (1) numbered lot and one (1) lettered lot for the development of six (6) single family detached condominium units and Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 14 related improvements. Lot A is to be dedicated in fee title for sidewalk purposes to the City of Tustin at no cost to the City. (Attachment C). Pursuant to TCC Section 9331d2, 0.0067 acres of parkland per dwelling unit (in a higher density development with 15 -25 dwelling units per acre) are required to be dedicated for park purposes. When the subdivision consists of fewer than fifty (50) parcels, TCC Section 9331 d3 allows the subdivider to pay a park in -lieu fee. Since the private open space provided for each of the six (6) residences does not qualify for park credit, park in -lieu fees will be required for this project, if the project were approved. To ensure operational standards that are consistent with the intent of the community, a Homeowners Association (HOA), Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &Rs) and homebuyer notifications would be required if the project were approved. In larger condominium communities, these regulatory mechanisms are generally successful in providing for the maintenance of the common areas of the community. However, in smaller communities such as the proposed project, it is often challenging for the small HOA to provide for the long term maintenance of the common areas and to fund significant capital expenses, such as driveway and roof repair and replacements, often resulting in the need for code enforcement involvement and supplemental assessments in HOA dues. Staff is also concerned about the ability of six (6) owners to carry out the responsibilities of the HOA, including parking enforcement, maintenance, and architectural review. Other Agencies Input In compliance with State Subdivision Map Act, the City sent out letters along with a copy of the Tentative Tract Map to affected agencies. In response, three (3) agencies provided comments (Attachment D). The Department of Transportation, District 12, indicated that they have no comments at this time. Southern California Edison advised that the proposed map will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of any easements and /or facilities held by Southern California Edison Company within the boundaries of said map. The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) provided preliminary comments regarding the sewer connection, abandonment/capping of the existing sewer lateral, OCSD fees, and a contract for the shared sewer lateral. No further comments were received. Environmental Review This project is Statutorily Exempt pursuant to Section 15270(A) of the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act). CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves. If ZC 2014001, SUB 2013 -01, CUP 2013- 01 and DR 2013 -002 are not rejected or disapproved, a new environmental review will be conducted accordingly. FINDINGS: In determining whether to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed project, the Planning Commission must determine whether or not the proposed use will be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood, or be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin; and whether the location, size, architectural features, and general appearance of the proposal will impair the orderly and Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 15 harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, the occupancy thereof, or the community as a whole. A decision to recommend that the City Council deny this request may be supported by the following findings: 1) That the proposed change in zoning from R3 2700 to R3 2650 would be classified as spot zoning. As articulated in court decisions, spot zoning is a term used to describe the discriminatory zoning of a small parcel that is surrounded by land within a different zone, and is contrary to orderly development and sound land use planning principles. 2) That in a recent decision, the court of appeals determined that spot zoning can be justified where a "substantial public need exists" or if it is in the public interest, and the proposed ZC is not justified because it does not appear to support a substantial public need or interest in that the housing units to be built would be offered for sale at market rate and would not accommodate low and very-low income individuals or special needs groups. The proposed ZC would primarily benefit the property owner by granting the property owner privileges which are not granted or extended to other landowners in the vicinity and in the same zoning district. 3) That if the project site were considerably larger (i.e. the properties fronting San Juan Street between Utt Drive and Green Valley Drive and /or the entire block of properties were included and fully evaluated and analyzed) in the requested ZC, the issue of spot zoning would not be a factor in the decision - making process for the project. Such an analysis has not been provided with the submitted application. 4) That the proposed development does not provide all of the units with driveways to accommodate additional parking that are typically associated with single family dwellings, by subdividing the property in a manner which does not create individual lots. As individual driveways are proposed in only two (2) of the dwelling units within the development, a lack of adequate guest parking is anticipated for the project (only three guest spaces are proposed). This issue will become exacerbated if the HOA does not adequately enforce garage parking. 5) That the lack of adequate on -site parking may impact the streets in the vicinity of the project site and result in residents and guests parking their vehicles on the rear driveway where parking is not allowed and blocking access for emergency vehicles. 6) TCC Section 9224g6 allows private ground level open space in condominium developments to be credited toward the minimum open space requirement, which is 400 square feet per dwelling unit of open space recreation area within a common designated recreation area. However, the proposed development provides all of the required open space for the condominium development within private yard areas, and does not provide any common recreation area. Providing a recreation area with amenities often mitigates the impacts of higher density development and improves livability. 7) That the six (6) proposed residences are three stories and thirty-five (35) feet in height, which is significantly taller than, not in scale with, insensitive to, incompatible with, and greater in bulk than the existing residences directly adjacent to, and within the immediate vicinity of, the project site, which also creates intrusive visual impacts on adjacent homes in the neighborhood. Planning Commission Report August 12, 2014 1381 -1391 San Juan Street Page 16 S) That multi -story residential developments can be designed to be more compatible with adjacent single story residences by considering the pattern and rhythm of the streetscape and by providing adequate setbacks, significant architectural articulation and step- downs, dormers, basements, sloping roof planes, and other features that reduce the bulk of taller buildings, soften the transition between the adjacent properties, and achieve compatibility with smaller buildings. However, these features are not proposed, and approving a project of a height and design that is not compatible with adjacent development could set an undesirable precedent and result in a proliferation of incompatible in -fill development. 9) That it is often challenging for small homeowners associations to provide for the long term maintenance of the common areas and to fund significant capital expenses, such as driveways, perimeter fencing /wall, utilities (water, sewer, etc.), often resulting in the need for code enforcement involvement and supplemental assessments in HOA dues. In addition, the six (6) owners may be unable to carry out the responsibilities of the HOA, including parking enforcement, maintenance, and architectural review. 10) As proposed, Tentative Tract Map 17665 is not consistent with the existing R3 2700 zoning of the property, and may not be approved unless the City Council approves ZC 2014 -001. CONCLUSION: The proposed ZC 2014 -001, SUB 2013 -01 for TTM 17665, CUP 2013 -01 and DR 2013 -002 would have parking and visual impacts to the neighborhood surrounding the site, is incompatible with the adjacent residential development, and does not comply with the intent of the City's open space requirement for the proposed type of development. More importantly, the proposed ZC is a type of spot zoning that is not extended to other landowners in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; does not appear to promote the public good or support a substantial public need or interest in that the housing units to be built would be offered for sale at market rate and would not accommodate low and very -low income individuals or special needs groups; is a piecemeal approach lacking of overall zoning or plan for the area; and, that is not justified and should not be approved. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny ZC 2014 -001, SUB 2013 -01 for TTM 17665, CUP 2013- 01 and DR 2013 -002. Scott Reekstin Principal Planner Attachments: A. Location Map B. Land Use Fact Sheet C. Submitted Plans D. Other Agencies Comments E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4263 Director of Community Development r_rir_TS] :iky r:101: r_1 LOCATION MAP LOCATION MAP ZC 2014 -001, SUB 2013 -01, CUP 2013 -01, DR 2013 -002 1381 -1391 SAN JUAN STREET .. .�...r.. "C�.,. UTT OR PWe CHMLCU U DR. o- PROJECT SITE AT s 6w� ell, J� 300' PJ 500' THE - COTTRE:f �s r 00119f1 OTI QW-1 I W_104 1IXIMI 9_[09•9:1 =101 LAND USE APPLICATION FACT SHEET 1. LAND USE APPLICATION NUMBER(S): ZC 2014 -001, SUB 2013 -01, CUP 2013 -01, DR 2013 -002 2. LOCATION: NEC SAN JUAN AND UTT DRIVE 3. ADDRESS: 1381 -1391 SAN JUAN STREET 4. APN(S):500- 081- (01 -02) 5. PREVIOUS APPLICATION RELATING TO THIS PROPERTY: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2012 -145 6. SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL EAST: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WEST: MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 7. SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATION: NORTHEAST: R3 -2700 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SOUTHWEST: R3 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SOUTHEAST: R3-2700 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NORTHWEST: R3- MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 8. SURROUNDING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: NORTHEAST: HDR (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) SOUTHWEST: HDR SOUTHEAST: HDR NORTHWEST: HDR 9. SITE LAND USE: A. EXISTING: VACANT /SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL B. PROPOSED: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED CONDOMINIUMS C. GENERAL PLAN: HDR D. ZONING: R3 - 2700 PROPOSED GP: HDR PROPOSED ZONING: R3 - 2650 DEVELOPMENT FACTS: 10. LOT AREA: 16.060 SQUARE FEET. 11. PARKING: 14 REQUIRED SPACES 15 PROVIDED SPACES 12. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: NONE SPECIFIED: 35 FEET PROPOSED 13, BUILDING SETBACKS: REQUIRED PROVIDED FRONT: NONE SPECIFIED 12 FEET, 8 INCHES SIDE: 10 FEET 5 FEET CORNER SIDE: 10 FEET 10 FEET REAR: 10 FEET 10 FEET ATTACHMENT C SUBMITTED PLANS • ~�� agee q` s ' _ruesM�P OU '@ S2aN2Om3 % 54 �lwnj 2neN § 11.4 �"| . :¥ |§§ §AI § , . . , 2q .� a w=. a ! \51§1 �| ,• R co fit§ | ' 4 089N VO ugsnj ;S uenr ueS 66£6 PUB 48£4 I I N 1 I u ! • __ A►IWV� 3aJN1 9 is 5 �* d m, cc 0 .J cc LL I� O V F. F N u d' y 1i C F I , e aF, 0 1 D a I ; . 1 ... phi S J t LL 3 WO 7 7 � W 9 Eh8dl 6 _ I 6 - I I I 1 099Z6 V3 `w ;sny • ;s uenr ues M6 pue L9£6 I M P- S33N3aIS3 k- IIWVxl 3'IJNI� g 8 !� a VIII g 4 Pig F 7 W 0 W a II II f � � W __- Ea El LL I 3 � I a6 a! Illmll ei •SC l�Ll 0� I�0 I1 089Z6 tl3'ugsn1 6S uenr ueS 6686 PUe 68£6 1 � 1100 1 A"11W` =j 3'IJNI 9 z :..;; !, S3�N3QIS3)J s zg S I�lili� Ii al ga m 9 kal o ' e � a J 'z II II LU I II HIM M� I Ir 99 cB Icy C �i ❑ 0 SC ai II �'IIIU�ffE'pQ'' _ F w ILILJ K / II II I II I I I II II i z " 089Z6 VO'upsnl •;S uenr ueS 66£6 Pue 68£6 �Q s All ;l °I. I�1111� I! al C i W JW cc c H�I7I W �W X W 13 -® _ ® J ¢A LL ap ss I I CA ® SA F0 II III n< it II 1 II I. HH I, FM a009Z6 V3 lui ;snl • ;S uenp ueS 66£6 PUB 68£6 €� Al Wv� 3JN1 9 a aQ �z a 88 O89Z6 VO `ui;sny o ;S uenr ueS M6 Pue M8 u 'I ' klddd A'1 W` =l MON1 le Y � e X c. J 11 / H O 1 1 a p j6 4 5 6 W 6 Q V N O Z 5 e p h i9 o, Z" NxI ^ e p h i9 LO CD T O U Z LLJ f 3� O O 0 W O 5 d a , U � 2H2i FJ y NO d i£ U FLL0 si 2 w � e@ jilt, i II III � qq Ille i f I I III 6;1 II me I1III I I I 9y I II III °' Ilpe�� IIII i I i- i� I I 1 i ?9 NIP�I@ 5� a��EE rnnr Nds meatIS i '""" '•• - -- I� ilill II ill L,III,I� pp� 8� fill J� 1� 'r — !E I� I m m n! 8 g@gi B� e @ I.s ii�iB iEEg H11 Ili E� @i� II III � qq Ille i f I I III 6;1 II me I1III I I I 9y I II III °' Ilpe�� IIII i I i- i� I I 1 i ?9 NIP�I@ 5� a��EE rnnr Nds meatIS i '""" '•• - -- I� ilill II ill L,III,I� pp� 8� fill J� 1� 'r — !E I� I m m n! 8 g@gi B� e 4 m 0 z Wm W � � o c. M ,p` i 'i m LU ' Z � ❑!T J W !r � k __1 k; p iv f w.- ATTACHMENT D OTHER AGENCIES COMMENTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 12 3347 MICHELSON DRIVE, SUITE 100 IRVINE, CA 92612 -8894 PHONE (949) 724 -2086 FAX (949) 724 -2592 TTY 711 www.doLca.gov June 24, 2014 Mr. Scott Reekstin Principal Planner City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA. 92780 Dear Mr. Reekstin: RECEIVED JUN 27 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT �T7 Serious drought. Help save water! File: IGR/CEQA SCH #: None Log #: 3904 I -5, SR -22 Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on Tentative Tract Map 17665. The proposed condominium subdivision consisting of (1) numbered lot and (1) lettered lot for the development of six single family detached condominium units on a 16,060 square foot site. The Department of Transportation (Department) is a commenting agency on this project and has no comment at this time. However, in the event of any activity in the Department's right of way, an encroachment permit will be required. Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments that could potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Aileen Kennedy at (949) 724 -2239. Sincerely, MAUREEN EL HARAKE Branch Chief, Regional - Community- Transit Planning District 12 c: Saied Hashemi, Traffic Operations North "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance CaVorma's economy and livability " SOI,t I II'RN CALH ORNIA EDISON ��� tutsov t� nt; nary tt. c ... nru„ ,. City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Attention: Planning Division Subject: Tract Map No. 17665 RECEIVED JUN 3 0 2014 COMMUNITY OEVELOPMSNT DEPT June 25, 2014 Please be advised that the division of the property shown on Tract Map No. 17665 will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of any easements and /or facilities held by Southern California Edison Company within the boundaries of said map. This letter should not be construed as a subordination of the Company's rights, title and interest in and to said easement(s), nor should this letter be construed as a waiver of any of the provisions contained in said easement(s) or a waiver of costs for relocation of any affected facilities. In the event that the development requires relocation of facilities, on the subject property, which facilities exist by right of easement or otherwise, the owner /developer will be requested to bear the cost of such relocation and provide Edison with suitable replacement rights. Such costs and replacement rights are required prior to the performance of the relocation. If you have any questions, or need additional information in connection with the subject subdivision, please contact me at (626) 302 -4473. Steven D. Lowry ' l Title and Real Estate Services Corporate Real Estate Department 2151 Walnut Grove Ave. 2nd Flour Tide and Real Estate Services Rosemead, CA 91 770 Reekstin, Scott From: Smith, Wendy <WSmith @OCSD.COM> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:09 PM To: Hutter, Edmelynne; Reekstin, Scott Cc: Smith, Wendy; PermitCounter Subject: 1381 - 1391 San Juan Street; Tentative Tract Map No. 17665 Review Hi Edmelynne, Per our conversation earlier today, I've completed a preliminary review of the subject tract map. I anticipate having comments regarding the following topics: • Physical connection to the OCSD sewer on San Juan • Abandonment and /or capping of existing sewer lateral • OCSD fees required for the project • Possible requirement to have the property owner draw up a contract /agreement (not sure of the correct terminology to use yet) for the shared sewer lateral. I need to perform more research on this point I will be on vacation starting tomorrow and returning on Monday July 7`h. ]will complete my review at that time. Thank you for understanding. Wendy Smith, P.E. Orange County Sanitation District I Planning Division Engineer 714.593.7880 ph wsmith(mocsd.com for you. 4 You 7 ■ s d:hil:4ki 11i:4 RESOLUTION NO. 4263 RESOLUTION NO. 4263 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DENY ZONE CHANGE 2014 -001, SUBDIVISION 2013 -01 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17665, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2013 -01, AND DESIGN REVIEW 2013 -002, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R3) 2700 TO R3 2650 AND TO DEVELOP SIX (6) DETACHED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1381 -1391 SAN JUAN STREET. The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application has been submitted by Alfonso Maciel, for the development of six (6) detached residential condominium units on an approximately 1/3 acre site at 1381 -1391 San Juan Street. B. That the development application includes the following requests: 1. Zone Change 2014 -001 to change the zoning from R3 2700 to R3 2650 to reduce the minimum lot area per family unit from 2,700 square feet to 2,650 square feet to allow the development of six (6) residential condominium units. 2. Subdivision 2013 -01 for Tentative Tract Map 17665 to subdivide an approximately 1/3 acre site consisting of one (1) numbered lot and one (1) lettered lot for the development of six (6) single family detached condominium units. 3. Conditional Use Permit 2013 -01 for the development of condominium units in the R3 Zoning District, pursuant to the criteria of the Planned Development (PD) District. 4. Design Review 2013 -002 for the design and site layout of six (6) single family detached condominium units and related improvements. C. That the site is zoned Multiple Family Residential (R3) 2700 and has a High Density Residential General Plan land use designation. In addition, the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub - element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub - element. D. That Tustin City Code Section 9295 specifies any amendment to the zoning of a property may be initiated and adopted as other ordinances are amended or adopted. Exhibit A Resolution No. 4263 Page 2 E. That Tustin City Code Section 9323b2 requires a tentative tract map be prepared for subdivisions creating five (5) or more condominiums as defined in Section 4125 of the California Civil Code. F. That Tustin City Code Section 9226b5 requires the approval of a conditional use permit for the development of condominium units in the R3 Zoning District, when developed pursuant to the criteria of the Planned Development (PD) District. G. That Tustin City Code Section 9272 requires applicants to obtain Design Review approval prior to the issuance of building permits for all new structures. H. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for Zone Change 2014 -001, Subdivision 2013 -01 for Tentative Tract Map 17665, Conditional Use Permit 2013 -01, and Design Review 2013 -02 on August 12, 2014, by the Planning Commission. That the proposed change in zoning from R3 2700 to R3 2650 would be classified as spot zoning. As articulated in court decisions, spot zoning is a term used to describe the discriminatory zoning of a small parcel that is surrounded by land within a different zone and is contrary to orderly development and sound land use planning principles. J. That the court of appeal determined in Foothill Communities Coalition v. County of Orange that spot zoning can be justified where a "substantial public need exists" or if it is in the public interest. The proposed zone change is not justified because it does not appear to support a substantial public need or interest in that the housing units to be built would be offered for sale at market rate and would not accommodate low and very - low income individuals or special needs groups. The proposed zone change would primarily benefit the property owner by granting the property owner privileges which are not granted or extended to other landowners in the vicinity and in the same zoning district. In addition, the proposed Zone Change is a piecemeal approach lacking of overall zoning or a plan for the area. K. That if the project site were considerably larger (i.e. the properties fronting San Juan Street between Utt Drive and Green Valley Drive and /or the entire block of properties were included and fully evaluated and analyzed) in the requested ZC, the issue of spot zoning would not be a factor in the decision - making process for the project. Such an analysis has not been provided with the submitted application. L. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the proposed use will, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working Exhibit A Resolution No. 4263 Page 3 in the neighborhood of such proposed use, and be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin in that: 1. That the proposed development does not provide all of the units with driveways to accommodate additional parking that are typically associated with single family dwellings, by subdividing the property in a manner which does not create individual lots. As individual driveways are proposed in only two (2) of the dwelling units within the development, a lack of adequate guest parking is anticipated for the project (only three guest spaces are proposed). This issue will become exacerbated if the HOA does not adequately enforce garage parking. 2. The lack of adequate on -site parking may impact the streets in the vicinity of the project site and result in residents and guests parking their vehicles on the rear driveway where parking is not allowed and blocking access for emergency vehicles. 3. Tustin City Code Section 9224g6 allows private ground level open space in condominium developments to be credited toward the minimum open space requirement, which is 400 square feet of open space recreation area within a common designated recreation area. However, the proposed development provides all of the required open space for the condominium development within private yard areas, and does not provide any common recreation area. Providing a recreation area with amenities often mitigates the impacts of higher density development and improves livability. M. That pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9272, the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of the proposed development will impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, the occupancy thereof, or the community as a whole, in that the six (6) proposed residences are three stories and thirty -five (35) feet in height, which is significantly taller than, not in scale with, insensitive to, incompatible with, and greater in bulk than the existing residences directly adjacent to, and within the immediate vicinity of, the project site, which also creates intrusive visual impacts on adjacent homes in the neighborhood. N. That multi -story residential developments can be designed to be more compatible with adjacent single story residences by considering the pattern and rhythm of the streetscape and by providing adequate setbacks, significant architectural articulation and step- downs, dormers, basements, sloping roof planes, and other features that reduce the bulk of taller buildings, soften the transition between the adjacent properties, and achieve compatibility with smaller buildings. However, these features are not proposed, and approving a project of a height and design that is not Exhibit A Resolution No. 4263 Page 4 compatible with adjacent development could set an undesirable precedent and result in a proliferation of incompatible in -fill development. O. That it is often challenging for small homeowners associations to provide for the long term maintenance of the common areas and to fund significant capital expenses, such as driveways, perimeter fencing /wall, utilities (water, sewer, etc.), often resulting in the need for code enforcement involvement and supplemental assessments in HOA dues. In addition, the six (6) owners may be unable to carry out the responsibilities of the HOA, including parking enforcement, maintenance, and architectural review. P. As proposed, Tentative Tract Map 17665 is not consistent with the existing R3 2700 zoning of the property, and may not be approved unless the City Council approves Zone Change 2014 -001. Q. That this project is exempt pursuant to Section 15270 (Projects which are disapproved) of the California Environmental Quality Act. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council deny Zone Change 2014 -001, Subdivision 2013 -01 for Tentative Tract Map 17665, Conditional Use Permit 2013 -01 and Design Review 2013 -002, a request to change the zoning and develop six (6) detached residential condominium units on an approximately 1/3 acre site at 1381 -1391 San Juan Street. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 12th day of August, 2014. JEFF R. THOMPSON Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Exhibit A Resolution No. 4263 Page 5 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 City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4263 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 12th day of August, 2014, by the following vote: PLANNING COMMISSIONER AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONER NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONER ABSTAINED: PLANNING COMMISSIONER ABSENT: ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary