Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 RE-OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR CODE AMENDMENT 2015-001 (ORD. NO. 1454)1TY O AGENDA C'=a REPORT P� VST1 MEETING DATE TO: FROM: SUBJECT: SUMMARY: MAY 5, 2015 JEFFREY C. PARKER, CITY MANAGER Agenda Item Reviewed. City Manager Finance Director ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CONTINUED CODE AMENDMENT 2015-001, SECOND RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE CULTURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT The project is a proposed amendment to the Tustin City Code (TCC) that would provide new standards for second residential units in the Cultural Resources (CR) District and prohibit new accessory buildings used as guest quarters in the CR District. On April 21, 2015, the City Council held a public hearing on Code Amendment (CA) 2015-001, continued the item to May 5, 2015, and directed staff to develop a recommended approach to address the issue of parking in the CR District. (Applicant: City of Tustin) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1) Introduce and have first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1454, approving CA 2015-001 by amending Article 9 Chapter 2 of the TCC to provide new standards for second residential units in the CR District and prohibit new accessory buildings used as guest quarters in the CR District, and set a second reading for the next City Council meeting; and 2) Direct staff to take the following actions regarding on -street parking, residential privacy, and illegally converted structures in the CR District: a. Conduct an analysis and workshop to explore solutions to address parking impacts within the CR District; b. During the plan check process, examine ways to respect residential privacy for properties adjacent to any proposed second floor residential project; and, c. Continue to enforce illegally constructed or converted structures. d. Continue to enforce the California Vehicle Code for illegally parked cars obstructing sidewalks, driveways and/or accessible ramps. City Council Report May 5, 2015 CA 2015-001 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT: CA 2015-001 is a City -initiated project. There is no direct fiscal impact to the General Fund. CORRELATION TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN: The proposed project furthers the objectives of the following Strategic Plan goals: Goal A: Economic and Neighborhood Development — The proposed project would enhance the vibrancy and quality of life in the community. Goal B: Public Safety and Protection of Assets — The proposed project would ensure Tustin is an attractive, safe and well maintained community in which people feel pride. APPROVAL AUTHORITY: The TCC Section 9295g authorizes the City Council to adopt Zoning Code amendments following a recommendation by the Planning Commission and a public hearing. BACKGROUND: Proposed Code Amendment The proposed CA 2015-001 would provide new standards for second residential units in the CR District, allow new second residential units on any residentially zoned lot in the CR District regardless of lot size, and prohibit new accessory buildings used as guest quarters in the CR District. The standards for second residential units in all other areas of the City are not proposed to be amended, and all second residential units in the City would continue to be allowed ministerially without discretionary review or a public hearing. The existing and proposed standards for second residential units in the CR Zoning District are summarized in the following table. Proposed changes and additions to the existing citywide standards for second residential units are shown in bold print. CR District Second Unit Development Standards VA W6 01 r*,m WWA L 1, Conditional Use Permit required No No Maximum height 30 feet 30 feet Minimum building site 12,000 square feet None Maximum overall lot coverage 50 percent 50 percent City Council Report May 5, 2015 CA 2015-001 Page 3 Maximum lot coverage for the 30% of rear yard and None second unit 30% of side yard Minimum front yard setback 50 feet -(detached) 50 feet -(detached) 20 feet -(attached) 20 feet -(attached) Minimum front yard setback for off- 50 feet 50 feet street arkin Minimum side yard setback 10 feet -corner 10 feet -corner 5 feet -interior 5 feet -interior Minimum rear yard setback 5 feet 5 feet Minimum off-street parking Assigned two -car garage One car garage or carport 50% of primary single-family Maximum floor area of second unit 10% of lot area dwelling, not to exceed 600 square feet Architectural review Yes Yes Impact to historic structures on California Register Impacts not permitted Impacts not permitted Concurrent or subsequent Yes Yes construction required Entrances to the rear and not visible Yes Yes from public right-of-way (attached and detached) (attached and detached) Owner occupancy No No City Council Action on April 21, 2015 CA 2015-001 was noticed for an April 21, 2015, public hearing, at which time the City Council opened the public hearing, staff provided a presentation, and nine (9) members of the public provided testimony (see Attachment A — April 21, 2015, City Council Report and Attachment B — March 24, 2015, Planning Commission Report). The public speakers expressed their support, opposition, concerns, and comments regarding the proposed CA, which included the following: • The proposed CA should not be applied only to Old Town. • On -street parking is congested in Old Town. • Pen -nit parking should be implemented in Old Town. • Many garages are used for storage. • Accessory guest rooms should continue to be allowed and be deed restricted. • Impact fees should be disclosed. • Additional CEQA analysis is necessary. • Residential density should be decreased. • Additional residential units will not improve the quality of life in Old Town. • The proposed CA is a good compromise. • The proposed standards are appropriate. City Council Report May 5, 2015 CA 2015-001 Page 4 The City Council deliberated the matter and continued consideration of CA 2015-001 and the associated concerns of the Planning Commission to May 5, 2015, to provide adequate time for staff to develop a more specific recommended approach to address the issue of parking in the CR District. ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION: Parking was the predominant issue raised by the public at the April 21, 2015, public hearing. There were also comments made regarding the purpose and applicability of the proposed ordinance to Old Town. The following analysis briefly addresses these two issues. Parking in the CR District According to residents of the CR District, who spoke at the April 21, 2015, City Council public hearing and at the workshops and Planning Commission meetings, or who communicated directly with staff, Old Town currently has parking problems. Many vehicles are parked on the residential streets adjacent to properties with existing rental units and in locations close to businesses and multiple family residences (see Attachment C — Emails dated February 27, 2015, and April 27, 2015, and photographs). Residents are concerned that the proposed CA would exacerbate the parking problems in Old Town. To address the parking concerns in the CR District, the following actions could be taken: • The implementation of permit parking on all residential streets within the CR District. On October 7, 2008, the City Council approved a policy and procedures for preferential permit parking on public streets (see Attachment D). This policy is intended to mitigate spillover parking that may impact the quality of life and affect public safety in single family detached neighborhoods. The City Council has implemented permit parking in several single family locations throughout the City and in the following single family blocks in the CR District: Myrtle Avenue between Second Street and Main Street, and the north side of Main Street between Pasadena Avenue and Pacific Street. The existing policy was created for traditional single family detached neighborhoods. The CR District has unique characteristics, in that some areas are developed with multiple family housing, retail commercial buildings, offices, and public/institutional uses such as churches and the senior center. Accordingly, the current parking permit policy and procedures may not be appropriate for Old Town. Instead, it may be necessary to develop a separate permit parking policy that addresses the specific needs and characteristics of the CR District using a hybrid approach. City Council Report May 5, 2015 CA 2015-001 Page 5 Should the Council wish to consider permit parking in the CR District, staff could conduct an analysis of the on -street parking situation in the Old Town area and then schedule a public workshop with the Planning Commission. It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct the workshop in their role as the advisory body to the City Council on all matters relating to historic and cultural resources and as the liaison between the residents and property owners within the CR District and the City Council. The results of the staff analysis and the public input received could then be brought back to the Council for consideration. • Enhanced enforcement of on -street parking violations within the CR District. Additional parking enforcement by the Police Department is an additional way to address parking issues in the CR District, such as vehicles that are obstructing the sidewalk or access to driveways and ADA accessible ramps. The Police Department is aware of the public's desire for increased parking enforcement in Old Town and is prepared to respond accordingly. Purpose of Code Amendment 2015-001 At the April 21, 2015, City Council meeting, there were questions as to why the Code Amendment is being proposed and why it only applies to the CR District. The proposed code amendment is intended to benefit residents within the CR District and provides more options and flexibility for the Old Town area. The proposed code amendment would provide all property owners within the CR District the opportunity to have second residential units which could be rented out for additional income and/or could provide housing options to their grown children, parents, friends and relatives. The proposed code amendment is based on the unique historic development pattern and character of Old Town; the size, shape, and configuration of many of the properties and residences within the CR District; and the desire of many residents to have and/or rent out second residential units. In providing for second residential units on lots of all sizes in the CR District, the following points should be considered: • Preserve the single family neighborhood and the character of Old Town The proposed maximum floor area of 600 square feet is intended to allow only ancillary and accessory second residential units to preserve the unique character of Old Town, and particularly its single-family neighborhood. • Potential to legalize some existing non -permitted and/or illegally established units The proposed CA 2015-001 may provide an incentive for property owners to legalize existing non -permitted accessory guest quarters and second residential units in the CR District, if all development standards can be met and compliance with the Building Code can be achieved. City Council Report May 5, 2015 CA 2015-001 Page 6 • Second residential units are optional and voluntary If the proposed CA 2015-001 is approved, 149 additional properties would be eligible for second residential units in the CR District. However, based on the placement of the existing single-family dwelling and the configuration of the property, it may not be practical to construct a second residential unit on every eligible property. In addition, many property owners are not desirous of having a second residential unit; therefore, those property owners would not avail themselves of the provisions of the proposed ordinance. • Second residential units are affordable by nature and size There was expressed concern regarding meeting a housing affordability requirement in Old Town. The provision of these units does not meet the City's affordable housing requirement per se; however, Assembly Bill 1866 identifies second residential units as one of the ways to create affordable housing. Second residential units are affordable by their nature due to their size. By promoting second residential units, a community may ease rental deficit, maximize limited land, resources, and infrastructure, and assist homeowners with supplemental income. These units also provide an affordable housing option for extended family members rather than affordable housing for the community at large. Therefore, second residential units primarily benefit the individual property owners and their families, unlike affordable units elsewhere in the city. Assembly Bill 1866 identifies second residential units as a valuable form of housing in California at below market prices within existing neighborhoods, and requires that these units be allowed without discretionary review. ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposed CA 2015-001 is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as found in Public Resources Code Section 21080.17. CONCLUSION: The proposed CA 2015-001 would provide options to residents of the CR District to have and rent second residential units while allowing a multi -generational type of housing, preserving the appearance and nature of the single family neighborhood, providing a way to legalize existing non -permitted units, and protecting the character of the CR District. Staff recommends that the City Council approve CA 2015-001 and direct staff to conduct an analysis and workshop to address on -street parking, to address residential privacy through plan check, and to enforce illegally converted structures in the CR District. City Council Report May 5, 2015 CA 2015-001 Page 7 Autt LZA Scott Reekstin Principal Planner Elizabeth A. Binsack Director of Community Development Attachments: A. April 21, 2015, City Council Report B. March 24, 2015, Planning Commission Report C. Email dated February 27 and April 27, 2015, and photographs D. Policy and Procedures for Preferential Permit Parking on Public Streets E. Draft Ordinance No. 1454 (Code Amendment 2015-001) F. Existing Tustin City Code Sections 9223 and 9252j with redlined changes