Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 TENT P.M. 93-176 07-05-94aGENDA NO. -2 / 7r5-94 DATE: JULY 5, 1994 Inter-Corn TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 93-176 (BARTDUESLER) RECOMMEND_______ATIO~ It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: Certify the Final Negative Declaration as adequate for the project by adopting Resolution No. 94-77; and Approve Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 by adopting Resolution No. 94-78, as submitted or revised. FISCAL IMPACT There are 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 subject property is 12,100 square feet (.27 acre) in size and was developed approximately thirty (30) years ago with two 2,002 square foot duplexes (a total of four units) and two attached 458 square foot two-car garages. At the time of construction, the property was under the jurisdiction of the County of Orange and was not annexed into the City of Tustin until 1980. The applicant is.requesting authorization to subdivide the subject property into two parcels. No new construction or development is proposed for the site at this time. On June 13, 1994, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3268 approving a variance from several of the City's development standards and Resolution No. 3269 recommending approval of the proposed Parcel Map (Attachment A). The variance was necessary because some of the City's development standards could not be satisfied on the two new, smaller parcels as the duplexes were originally built according to County standards and do not satisfy the City's current development standards. city Council Report TPM 93-176 July 5, 1994 Page 2 The subject property, situated on the westerly side of Green Valley Avenue south of Mitchell Avenue, is situated in an urban setting and is zoned Duplex Residential (R-2). Surrounding development to the north, south, and east is also residential and consists of similar duplexes. A public elementary school is located to the west of the subject property. 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 the Police Department. The applicant was informed of the availability of a staff report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SITE PLAN The applicant proposes to create two parcels so that each duplex building would be located on a separate lot. The proposed lot line would extend from the rear of the property to the Green Valley Avenue frontage. The proposed subdivision would create one 6,160 square foot parcel and one 5,940 square foot parcel. The larger of the two proposed parcels (Parcel 1) is located at 14311 Green Valley Avenue, and the smaller parcel (Parcel 2) is located at 14321 Green Valley Avenue. There are two (2) 18 foot wide driveways off of Green Valley Avenue which provide access to the two (2) garage parking spaces provided for each duplex. The subject property is designated with a Medium Density Residential Land Use Designation in the Tustin Area General Plan which would allow up to fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre. The proposed tentative parcel map would be consistent with the Land Use Designation in that Parcel 1 would have a density of 7.1 dwelling units per acre and Parcel 2 would have a density of 7.3 dwelling units per acre. In order for the city Council to approve a subdivision it must be determined that the proposal is in compliance with applicable zoning requirements. A variance from the City's development standards, was approved by the Planning Commission on June 13, 1994. City Council Report TPM 93-176 July 5, 1994 Page 3 The development standards of the Tustin City Code and the proposed site conditions are outlined in the Statistical Summary (Attachment B). The proposed subdivision required a variance for several of the development standards contained in the Tustin City Code which are highlighted below: To reduce the required number of parking spaces from one (1) garage space and one (1) open or covered space to one (1) garage space per dwelling unit; and To reduce minimum front yard setbacks from twenty (20) feet to fifteen (15) feet, minimum rear yard setbacks from ten (10) feet to 9.8 feet and minimum side yard setbacks from five (5) feet to 4.9 feet; and To reduce minimum building site from 7,200 square feet to 6,160 and 5,940 square feet; and To reduce minimum lot width from sixty (60) feet to 56 and 54 feet; and To reduce minimum lot area per family unit from 3,500 square feet to 3,080 and 2,970 square feet. CONCLUSION With the Planning Commission's approval of Variance 94-001, the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code, the City's Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act. Based upon the information presented above and the Planning commission's recommendation of approval, it is recommended that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 by adopting Resolution No. 94-78, as submitted or revised. Scott Reekstin Assistant Planner SCR:br:/TPM 93-176 Attachments: Christine A~ ~ngleton Assistant Cit~/Manager Community Development Location Map A - Planning Commission Reso. Nos. B - Statistical Summary Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 Resolution Nos. 94-77 and 94-78 3268 and 3269 MAP,/" 141GO NO SCALE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19! 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 RESOLUTION NO. 3268 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COM~ISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING VARIANCE 94-001 TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PA~RKING SPACES FROM ONE (1) GARAGE SPACE AI~D ONE (1) OPEN OR COVERED SPACE TO ONE (1) GARAGE SPACE PER DWELLING UNIT; MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACKS FROM TWENTY (20) FEET TO FIFTEEN (15) FEET, MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACKS FROM TEN (10) FEET TO 9.8 FEET AND MINIM~JM SIDE YARD SETBACKS FROM FIVE (5) FEET TO 4.9 FEET; MINIMUM BUILDI-NG SITE FROM 7,200 SQUARE FEET TO 6,160 AND 5,940 SQUARE FEET; MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FROM SIXTY (60) FEET TO 56 AND 54 FEET; AND MINIMUM LOT AREA PER FAMILY UNIT FROM 3,500 SQUARE FEET TO 3,080 AMD 2,970 SQUARE FEET ON THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 14311 AND 14321 GREEN VALLEY AVENUE, TUSTIN. 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, Variance 94-001, has been filed by Mr. Bart Duesler to reduce the required the required number of parking spaces from one (1) garage space and one (1) open or covered space to one (1) garage space per dwelling unit; minimum front yard setbacks from twenty (20) feet to fifteen (15) feet, minimum rear yard setbacks from ten (10) feet to 9.8 feet and minimum side yard setbacks from five (5) feet to 4.9 feet; minimum building site from 7,200 square feet to 6,160 and 5,940 square feet; minimum lot width from sixty (60) feet to 56 and 54 feet; and minimum lot area per family unit from 3,500 square feet to 3,080 and.'2,970 square feet on the properties located at 14311 and 14321 Green Valley Avenue, Tustin. That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held by the Planning Commission on June 13, i994. The Pl~nning CommissioD has reviewed the subject request for a variance %o reduce the required number of parking spaces, minimum setbacks, minimum building site, minimum lot width and minimum lot area per family unit and has made the following findings: Granting the variance shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and distric~ in which the project is ATTACHMENT A Resolution No. 3268 Page 2 II. situated in that the majority of the lots on the block contain only one duplex each. In fact, six (6) of the lots on the block are identical to the proposed lots with respect to configuration, dimensions and parking spaces. There are unusual or exceptional circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the area, in that with the existing structures remaining on the site, the maximum amount of parking, setbacks, building site, lot width and lo~ area per family unit are provided. In addition, the subject property is one of the few properties on the block which has not yet been subdivided. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission hereby approves Variance 94-001 to reduce the required number of parking spaces from one (1) garage space and one (1) open or covered space to one (1) garage space per dwelling unit; minimum front yard setbacks from twenty (20) feet to fifteen (15) feet, minimum rear yard setbacks from ten (10) feet to 9.8 feet and minimum side yard setbacks from five (5) feet to 4.9 feet; minimum building site from 7,200 square feet to 6,160 and 5,940 square feet; minimum lot width from sixty (60) feet to 56 and 54 feet; and minimum lot area per family unit from 3,500 S~uare feet to 3,080 and 2,970 square feet on the properties located at 14311 and 14321 Green Valley Avenue, Tustin, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution Nc. 32~9, incorporate~ herein by reference. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3268 Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of June, 1994. BARBARA REYE~ Secretary KATHY WE~L Chairperson STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, BARBARA REYES the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3268 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of June, 1994. · /BARBARA REYES ~ Recording Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 3269 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 93-176 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds .and determines as follows: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 93-176 was submitted to the Planning Commission by Mr. Bart Duesler, for consideration. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed -and held for said map on June 13, 1994 by the Planning Commission. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. Do That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan, the Tustin Municipal Code and Subdivision Map Act. That the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public-at-large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. Go That the design of the subdivision is not likely, to cause serious public health problems. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 93-176, subject to the conditions attached hereto as E>~hibit A. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25: 26 ~7 28 Resolution No. 3269 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of June, 1994. Secretary- Chairperson STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, BARBARA REYES, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3269 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of June, 1994. BARBARA REYES ~ Recording Secretary GENER3%L (~) 1.1 (1) ~.2 (m) (~) 1.4 (~) EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 3269 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE PARCEL PIAP 93-176 Within 24 months from tentative map approval, the Subdivider shall file with appropriate agencies, a final map prepared in accordance with subdivision requirements of the Tustin Municipal Code, the State Subdivision Map Act, and applicable conditions contained herein unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 9361(d) of the Tustin Municipal Code. Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in the Exhibit shall be complied with prior to approval of the Final Map, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. Prior to. any sale of the individual buildings, the Subdivider shall record the Final Map in conformance with appropriate tentative map. Prior to final map approval: ao Subdivider shall submit a current title report. Subdivider shall submit a duplicate mylar of the Final Map, or 8½ inch by 11 inch transparency of each map sheet prior to final map approval and "as built" grading, landscape and improvement plans prior to certificate of acceptance. Subdivider shall confc_--m to all applicable requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant and property owner shall hold harmless and defend the City of Tustin for all claims and liabilities arising out of the City's approval of the entitlement process roi' this project. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (2) CEQA MITIGATION (3) UNIFOR/~ BUILDING CODE/S (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (7) PC/CC POLICY Exhibit A Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 Page 2 (~) The applicant and property owner shall sign and return the "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form. PLA/FNING DIVISION (4) 2.1 Ail parking and landscaped areas shall be maintained free of trash and debris. (4) 2.2 Ail graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours of a complaint being transmitted by the City to the property owner. Failure to maintain said structure and adjacent facilities will be grounds for City enforcement of its Property Maintenance Ordinance, including nuisance abatement.procedures. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (5) 3.1 Preparation and recordation of a final parcel map will be required. (5) 3.2 Prior to recordation of the Final. Map, the Subdivider will be required to execute a monumentation agreement and furnish a monumentation bond as required by the City Engineer. (5) 3.3 In addition to the normal full size plan submittal process, all final development plans including, but not limited to: tract maps, parcel maps, right-of-way maps, record of survey, public works improvements, private infrastructure improvements, final grading plans, and site plans are also required to be submitted to the Public Works Department/Engineering Division in computer aided design and drafting (CADD) format. The acceptable formats shall be Intergraph DGN or Auto Cadd DWG file format, but in no case less than DXF file f~rmat. The City of Tustin CADD conventions shall be followed in preparing plans in CADD, and these guidelines are available from. the EDgineering Division. The CADD files shall be submitted to the City at the time the plans are approved, and updated CADD files reflecting "as built" conditions shall be submitted once. all construction has been completed. Exhibit A Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 Page 3 FEE~ (1) 4.~ Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the County Clerk, in the amount of $25.00 (twenty-five dollars) to enable the City to file with the County Clerk, the appropriate environmental documentation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. If within such forty eight (48) hour period, the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above noted check, the approval for the project granted herein shall be considered automatically null and void. In addition, should the Department of Fish and Game reject the Certificate of Fee Exemption filed with the Notice of Determination and require payment of fees, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department within forty eight (48) hours of notification, a cashier's check payable to the County Clerk in the amount of $850.00 (eight hundred fifty dollars) if an EIR was prepared or $1,250 (twelve hundred fifty dollars) if a Negative Declaration was prepared. If this fee is imposed, the subject project shall not be operative, vested or final unless and until the fee is paid. .ATTACF2~ENT B STATISTICAL SD-M]~ARY TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 93-176 Reuuirement Building site (sq ft) Lot Coverage Lot Width at Property Line Lot Area per Family Unit (sq ft) Building Setbacks Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Garage Parking Spaces Other Parking Spaces 7,200 min 50% max 60 ft min 3,500 min 20 ft min 5 ft min 10 ft min 2 nin 2 bin Proposed Parcel 1 Parcel 2 6,160 5,940 40% 42% 56 ft 54 ft 3,080 2,970 15 ft 15 ft 14.1 ft, 12.2 ft, 4.9 ft ' 4.9 ft 9.8 ft 9.8 ft 2 2 0 0 ATTACHMENT B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 94-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 93-176 INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: The request to approve Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 is considered a project pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review. Whereby, the City Council of the City of Tustin has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject Negative Declaration. The City Council has evaluated the proposed final Negative Declaration and determined it to be adequate and complete. II. A Final Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The City Council, having final approval authority over Tentative Parcel Map 93-176, has received and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration, prior to approving the proposed project, and found that it adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed project. The City Council has found that the project involves no potential for an adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources and makes a De Minimis Impact Finding related to AB3158, Chapter 1206, Statutes of 1990. On the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public review process, the City Council has found that the proposed projects could not have a significant effect on the environment. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 25 26 27 Resolution No. 94-77 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 5th day of July, 1994. Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk THOMAS R. MAYOR SALTARELLI 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. 94-77 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin city Council, held on the 5th day of July, 1994, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mary E. Wynn, city Clerk 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. 94-78 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 93-176 The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 93-176 was submitted to the City Council by Mr. Bart Duesler, for consideration. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said map on June 13, 1994 by the Planning Commission and on July 5, 1994 by the City Council. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan, the Tustin Municipal Code and Subdivision Map Act. That the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public-at-large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. That the design of the subdivision is not l~kely to cause serious public health problems. That 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 or has been conditioned to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub-Element. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23i 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 94-78 Page 2 II. The City Council hereby approves Tentative Parcel Map No. 93-176, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3269, incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 5th day of July, 1994. Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk THOMAS R. MAYOR SALTARELLI 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. 94-78 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 5th day of July, 1994, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk No. 2 7-5-94 DATE: JULY 5, 1994 Inter-Com TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT~ VARIANCE 94-001 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 93-176 On June 13, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Variance 94-001 and recommended approval of Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 to the City Council. These two actions were requested by the applicant in order to subdivide the developed property located at 14311 and 14321 Green Valley Avenue into two parcels, such that one of the two existing duplexes would be located on each parcel. Approval of a variance was required because the property was developed under County standards and does not conform to several of the City,s existing development standards. Prior to the June 13, 1994 public hearing, staff received an inquiry from a nearby property owner, Berklee Maughn, who had received notice of the hearing. Mr. Maughn expressed concerns regarding the implications of the requested variance on the nonconforming status of the property. Mr. Maughn was present at the public hearing and expressed additional concerns about the variance actually being a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. The primary concern was based on the fact that in the event of a disaster, the property owner with the variance could rebuild on his property with very similar duplexes, while the other property owners would be required to rebuild according to current City standards. Section 9273 (c} of the Tustin City Code requires non-conforming buildings destroyed to the extent of more than 50% of its value must be restored or rebuilt to current city code standards. The purpose of this provision of the city code is to achieve conformity to current city standards whenever possible. In preparing the Planning Commission staff report and in response to the concerns raised at the public hearing, staff conducted thorough research of both City and County records of the properties on the street. City records show that the portion of Green Valley Avenue south of Mitchell Avenue was annexed into the City in 1980. At the time of annexation, eight (8) of the original ten (10) lots in the Tract had already been subdivided such that each lot contained only one duplex instead of two duplexes. The County records show that the duplexes were constructed in 1963 and that an area variance was approved that same year for front and rear yard setbacks and for eave widths. County staff did not provide City City Council Memo Variance 94-001 Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 July 5, 1994 Page 2 staff with evidence of any other development standard variances, and there is no record of subdivision variances. The County Code of 1963 only required one usable automobile parking space for each family unit. This parking was provided as a single garage space for each of the residential units. Given the background information that was available to City staff, the following facts have been determined: The existing duplexes would be considered legal nonconforming with respect to parking (Tustin City Code requires one garage space and one covered or open space for R-2 properties). * Front and rear yard setbacks are legal as constructed. Eight (8) parcels were legally subdivided when the area was part of Unincorporated Orange County and are legal nonconforming to City of Tustin standards. With approval of Parcel Map 93-176, there would only be one remaining parcel on the block which would not have been subdivided. Staff will be exploring two options for Green Valley Avenue which could potentially satisfy the concerns expressed by Mr. Maughn. The first option would involve a blanket variance for all of the parcels in the neighborhood. The second option would involve an amendment to the City's Nonconforming Uses Ordinance (Section 9273 of the City Code) to provide an exemption clause. Staff will be studying each of these options and reporting back to Mr. Maughn and the Planning Commission on how best to deal with Mr. Maughn's concern. SCR: br\greenva t