Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 Z.C. 94-002 07-18-94 NO. 1 7-18-94 Inter-Corn DATE: JULY 18, 1994 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPART~LENT ZONE CHANGE 94-002 (GLENN G. RILEY) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 94-87, denying Zone Change 94-002, as submitted or revised. FISCAL IMPACT There would be no fiscal impacts associated with this project, as this is an applicant initiated project. The applicant has paid application fees to recover the cost of processing this application. BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting to change the current zoning designation for the subject site from R-4 (Suburban Residential District) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District). The subject site, located on the westerly side of Red Hill Avenue, between Lance Drive and San Juan Street, is comprised of a 79.73 foot wide and 115 foot deep parcel which is approximately .21 of an acre in size. Currently the subject site is developed with one single-family detached residence of 1,072 square feet and one detached garage. The surrounding properties are also developed as residential and consist of single and multiple family dwellings (see Attachment A). The densities of the,nearest properties range in density from six (6) to nineteen (19) dwelling uni=s per acre. The zoning designation of properties to the north is R-4 which allows a maximum density of four=een (14) dwelling units to the acre, to the south and west is R-3 (2700) which allows a maximum density of sixteen (16) dwellin~ units to the acre, and the property to the east across Red Hill Avenue is designated R-4 PD which allows a maximum density of fourteen (14) dwelling units to the acre (see Attachment B). city Council Report ZC 94-002 July 18, 1994 Page 2 On June 27, 1994, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3282 (Attachment D), recommending denial of Zone Change 94-002 to the City Council based on the following: The proposed Zone Change would be considered "spot zoning"; The proposed Zone Change would be incompatible with land use densities in the vicinity; The proposed Zone Change would allow development which is 66% more dense, has significantly greater building mass and less landscape open space than the development allowed under R-4 zoning; The proposed Zone Change would create a zoning district boundary at an illogical location; and The proposed Zone Change is inconsistent with the General Plan. A public hearing notice identifying the time, date and location of the public hearing on this project was published in the Tustin News. Property owners within 300 feet of the site were notified of the hearing by mail and notices were posted on the site, at city Hall and at the Police Department. The applicant/property owner was informed of the availability of a staff report on the matter. DISCUSSION The proposed Zone Change would result in an increase in the allowable density of development on the subject property from fourteen (14) dwelling units per acre to twenty four (24) units per acre. Due to the size of the project site, this proposed change in zoning would result in the potential for two (2) additional dwelling units than could be accommodated under the existing R-4 zoning, with a maximum potential for five (5) dwelling units. The following table summarizes the development standard differences between the subject site's current zoning designation of R-4 (Suburban Residential District) and the requested R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District) zoning. City Council Report ZC 94-002 July 18, 1994 Page 3 DeveloDment Standard Current R-4 Pr_r~_posed R-3 Minimum lot area per family unit Maximum Height: Minimum Building Site: Minimum Lot Wid%h: Maximum Lot Coverage: 3,000-square feet 35 feet 7,200-square feet none specified none specified 1,750-square feet 35 feet 7,000-square feet 70 feet 65 percent Front Yard Setback: Side Yard Setback: 20 feet 10 feet(corner) 5 feet(interior) 15 feet 10 feet(corner), 5 feet(interior) Rear Yard Setback: 25 feet 10 feet In considering a Zone Change, an evaluation must be made concerning consistency with the city's General Plan and how the change will effect the general health, safety and welfare of the surrounding community. The project site is currently designated on the Land Use Element map in the General Plan as a High Density Residential land use designation (see Attachment C). According to the city's Land Use Element, this designation allows for multiple family development with a density between fifteen (15) and twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre. Now that the City's new General Plan has been adopted, it is anticipated that new Zoning Code provisions would be developed to determine what zoning changes citywide will be needed to comply with the General Plan and what criteria will be utilized to determine the permitted range of between fifteen (15) and twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre to which certain properties will be permitted to develbp under the High Density Residential Land Use designation. In addition to consistency with the Land Use designation of the General Plan, a Zone Change must also be evaluated against the stated goals and policies of all the elements of the City's General Plan. The following goals, policies, and implementation measure would be relevant to this project: City Council Report ZC 94-002 July 18, 1994 Page 4 Preserve the low-density quality of Tustin's existing single- family neighborhoods while permitting compatible multi-family development to meet regional housing needs where best suited from the standpoint of current development, accessibility, transportation and public facilities. (Land Use Element, Policy 1.1, Page 12) Provide incentives to encourage lot consolidation and parcel assemblage to provide expanded opportunities for coordinated development and redevelopment. (Land Use Element, Policy 1.9, Page 12 and Implementation Measure 1., Page 53) Improve the overall quality of Tustin's multi-family neighborhoods through: a) improved buffers between multi- family residences and adjacent freeway edges, commercial and industrial uses; b) provision of usable private and common open space in multi-family projects; c) increased code enforcement; and d) improved site, building, and landscape design. (Land Use Element, Policy 6.6, Page 17) e Ensure that future land use decisions are the result of sound and comprehensive planning. (Land Use Element, Goal 2, Page 13) Provide an adequate supply of housing to meet the City's need for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse socio- economic needs of all community residents. (Housing Element, Goal 1, Page 32) Increase the percentage of ownership housing to ensure a reasonable balance of rental and owner-occupied housing within the city. (Housing Element, Goal 3, Page 35) Regarding the first General Plan Policy listed above, the proposed Zone Change would allow the development of residential multiple family units which would be surrounded by properties with significantly lower densities of between six (6) and nineteen (19) dwelling units per acre, as noted in the Background Section of this Report. The parcel specific densities are indicated in Attachment A. Therefore, the proposed development on the subject property could be considered to be incompatible with the existing development on the neighboring properties. However, the proposed Zone Change would allow residential units which would be located accessible to transportation and conveniently served by public facilities. city Council Report ZC 94-002 July 18, 1994 Page 5 The potentially higher density development on the site that this Zone Change would permit at the maximum density permitted by the current R-3 zoning regulations could affect the overall quality of this residential neighborhood by reducing the amount of open space and limiting design alternatives. As currently envisioned and consistent with General Plan policy, proposed comprehensive revisions to the City's Zoning Code would only permit development at the maximum density permitted by the General Plan for larger lots and where additional development amenities are provided. The actual density ~anges permitted would likely be structured around lot sizes as an incentive for lot consolidation. If future proposed housing on the site is considered affordable, the future proposed development would provide a housing type which would potentially meet the diverse socio-economic needs of the community. The proposed Zone Change may a/so be considered inconsistent with the goal to increase the percentage of ownership housing in that the property owner intends to construct rental units on the property. The rezoning would increase the potential development on the property from three (3) units to a maximum of five (5) units. However, this increase of two (2) rental dwelling units would only minimally impact the balance of rental and owner-occupied housing within the City. Furthermore, and more importantly, the proposed rezoning of this property could be considered to create an isolated zoning district and could be interpreted as "spot-zoning" which is not recommended or supported by sound planning practice. Spot zoning occurs when individual parcels or small groups of parcels are zoned or rezoned with little or no consideration given to comprehensive planning. A comprehensive approach to rezoning would ensure that adequate buffers are provided between land uses and that identical or very similar land uses are clustered in a logical way. In the event the Zone Change was approved, there would be no logical transition between properties zoned R-3 (1750) and those zoned R-4 and R-3 (2700) because there would be no effective separation or buffering, such as a street, between the differing residential densities. The zoning designations and actual land uses and densities are shown on Attachments A and B. The exhibits show that several of the adjacent parcels average about thirteen (13) dwelling units per acre. In addition, there would be no logical separation between the one higher density parcel and the surrounding parcels of a lower density. Therefore, the Planning Commission and staff would be unable to recommend approval of the rezoning as currently proposed. A more acceptable alternative to the proposed rezoning would be to rezone the property ~o R-3 City Council Report ZC 94-002 July 18, 1994 Page 6 (2700), which is consistent with the zoning of adjacent properties. This designation would allow a maximum of sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. However, based on the size of the subject property, no additional units could be accommodated above what the existing R-4 would allow and thus the property owner could not develop the property with the four (4) dwelling units he proposed as part of the original Design Review of the project. In the event a Zone Change to R-3 (1750) were considered, there would be no guarantee that the property could be developed to its maximum potential of twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre, as new Zoning Code provisions developed in conjunction with the City's General Plan would establish criteria such as minimum lot sizes, setbacks, parking and open space requirements which would need to be considered in any design of structures on the property. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIB Based upon the review of Zone Change 94-002, staff has prepared a Negative Declaration for the project pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. If the Zone Change were approved, the mitigation measures identified throughout the Initial Study for the project would need to be imposed as conditions of approval mitigating the potential impacts that this project could have to a level of insignificance. CONCLUSION Based upon the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial and given that approval of the requested zone change would be contrary to sound planning practice and comprehensive planning as well as inconsistent with some of the goals contained in the City's General Plan, it is recommended that the city Council deny Zone Change 94- 002 by adopting Resolution No. Scott Reekstin Assistant Planner Attachments: Location Map 94-87, as submitted or revised. 'Christine ~. 'Shi~eton Assistant city M~nager Community Development SR: br: zc94002, sc r A - Existing Land Uses and Densities B - Current Zoning Designations C - Current General Plan Land Use Designations D - Planning Commission Resolution No. 3282 Resolution No. 94-87 LOCATION MAP,~.f BRYAN LEAR ~NDREWS CT_ ST ",~T'~I ~1 ,. DR NO SCALE I un;t ,2 uq~S · o f fl~)e ~ 3nN3,~v F' 72 units 95 units ATTACHMENT A Land Uses/Densities P&I ~ ® ® ® j©_.- ~ I ATTACHMENT B Zoning ® '~HDR HDR ~o ATTACHMENT C General Plan 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 3282 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOM~4ENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF ZONE CHANGE 94-002 A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13641 RED HILL AVENUE FROM R-4 (SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) TO R-3 (MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) 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, Zone Change 94-002, was filed by Mr. Glenn G. Riley to change the designation of the property located at 136'41 Red Hill Avenue from R-4 (Suburban Residential District) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District). That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said application by the Planning Commission on June 27, 1994. That the proposed Zone Change to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District) is not in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the surrounding area as evidenced by the following: The proposed zone change would be considered "spot zoning" which is not recommended or supported by sound planning practice. 2 o The proposed zone change would be incompatible with land use densities in the vicinity as it would permit an incraase in density from fourteen (14) dwelling units per acre to twenty four (24) dwelling units per acre which is inconsistent with the adjacent properties to the north, south, east and west of the site, which are limited to densities ranging between fourteen (14) and sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. ATTACHMENT D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. Page 2 3282 II. The proposed Zone Change would allow development which is 66% more dense than the development allowed under the R-4 (Suburban Residential District) zoning. This development would have significantly greater building mass and typically less landscape open space. The change would create a zoning district boundary at mid-block rather than at a more logical boundary, such as a street. Red Hill Avenue or San Juan Street, as roadways, provide for a more natural, orderly separation between a zoning district rather than a mid-block location. That the proposed zone change to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District) is not consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan in that the change would be inconsistent with the goal to increase the percentage of ownership housing in the city and the goal to ensure that future land use decisions are the result of sound and comprehensive planning. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the city Council denial of Zone Change 94-002 a request to change the zoning designation of the property located at 13641 Red Hill Avenue from R-4 (Suburban Residential District) to R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential District). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. Page 3 3282 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning commission of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on. the 27th day of June, 1994. BARBARA REYE~ Recording Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) KATHY WEIL Chairperson I, BARBARA REYES, the ~ndersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3282 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 27th day of June, 1994. BARBARA REYE~/ Recording Secretary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27~ 281 RESOLUTION NO. 94-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DENYING ZONE CHANGE 94- 002 A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13641 RED HILL AVENUE FROM R-4 (SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) TO R-3 (MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: That a proper application, Zone Change 94-002, was filed by Mr. Glenn G. Riley to change the designation of the property located at 13641 Red Hill Avenue from R-4 (Suburban Residential District) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District). Be That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said application by the Planning Commission on June 27, 1994 at which time the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3282 recommending to the City Council denial of Zone Change 94-002. CJ That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said application by the City Council on July 18, 1994. That the proposed Zone Change to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District) is not in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the surrounding area as evidenced by the following: The proposed Zone Change would be considered "spot zoning" which is not recommended or supported by sound planning practice. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 II. 2 o The proposed zone change would be incompatible with land use densities in the vicinity as it would permit an increase in density from fourteen (14) dwelling units per acre to twenty four (24) dwelling units per acre which is inconsistent with the adjacent properties to the north, south, east and west of the site, which are limited to densities ranging between fourteen (14) and sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. The proposed Zone Change would allow development which is 66% more dense than the development allowed under the R-4 (Suburban Residential District) zoning. This development would have significantly greater building mass and typically less landscape open space. The change would create a zoning district boundary at mid-block rather than at a more logical boundary, such as a street. Red Hill Avenue or San Juan Street, as roadways, provide for a more natural, orderly separation between a zoning district rather than a mid-block location. That the proposed zone change to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential District) is not consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan in that the change would be inconsistent with the goal to increase the percentage of ownership housing in the City and the goal to ensure that future land use decisions are the result of sound and comprehensive planning. The City Council hereby denies Zone Change 94-002 a request to change the zoning designation of the property located at 13641 Red Hill Avenue from R-4 (Suburban Residential District) to R-3 (Multiple- Family'Residential District). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 94-87 Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the city of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the 18th day of July, 1994. THOMAS R. SALTARELLI Mayor Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the city Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the city Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 94-87 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin city Council, held on the 18th day of July, 1994, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk