HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH CONT. VAR 82-10 10-04-82DATE:
October 4, 1982
CONTINU~D PUBLIC HEARING
Inter-Corn
TO:
FROM:
S UBJ ECT:
Honorable Chairman & Planning Agency
Community Development Department
Variance 82-10
Applicant: Phillip B. Schindler
Location: 15601 Newport Avenue
R£COI~I4ENDED ACTION
Pleasure of the Agency; however, staff has received a phone call from the
adjoining property owner requesting the matter be continued to the October
20, 1982 meeting.
DISCUSSION
On September 20, 1982, the Planning Agency held a public hearing on the
subject variance. Because of questions concerning traffic conditions in
the area, and possible impacts of the proposed project, the matter was
continued to this date.
In response to the Agency's discussion of traffic as related to the
proposed project, the following information is submittted as a supplement
to the attached staff report of September 20, 1982.
1. The established traffic volume, as determined by the City Engineer, on
Newport Avenue immediately along the frontage of the subject property is
26,258 average daily trips (ADT), while the ADT for Newport at the
freeway underpass is 28,900.
Neither of these figures represent capacity volumes for Newport Avenue.
Estimated traffic generation that would be created by the project as
submitted would be 36 ADT (based on Orange County Commercial Trip
Generation Factor of 20 trips per 1,000 square feet).
At the last meeting, concern was voiced over potential increase in
police costs that may arise because .of traffic-related problems.
Accident records indicate that there were seven vehicle accidents at the
freeway offramp/Newport-Nisson intersection in 1981 and there has been
only one such incident in 1982. These are considered very low figures
in relation to traffic volume.
Also, as a matter of information, attached is a copy of the "Data Sheet"
describing various aspects of the subject property issued by the California
Department of Transportation prior to its sale.
JSD:jh
p~a::::~.'_: ,)¢fi~ia(z ;o delermm? ie~si~:iiir{ ci any .nLand'~.,' use of th~ pr':per:y.
Access: ~* 05 Y~ on Naw~ort
..~n...,'~,r,' ~:~ ~o' mon%h. (30 day ~-'*~ ......... ~-='~ ~m notice ......... a
frcm close of escrow.)
or reser,'a::ons no~ ct record. Th~ Oepartm~ of Transportation d{~es nc~ a::u.,.= ....... .:,,} ':~
-.-*,,¢r ,¢ Such information ~s the Department e~ T~nsoor[aUon may have
r:ossect:'~e bicders 5houid consult ~'.:cal title compames if more -*~ '='~ ' '
Of the '~'",
,. ....... ,, ~s ~eqmred.
,~n,~,-- ':~ u~en request, ma'/ insoec:, lhe property and cond::c~ rom_ .... .~r soil sample
},
DATE:
September 20, [982
PU~ _C ~.ARING NO. 1
Inter-Corn
FROH:
SUBd ECT:
Honorable Chairman & Planning Agency
Community Development Department
Variance 82-10
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Phillip B. Schindler
15601 Newport Avenue (C-1 District)
Authorization to vary with Zoning Code provisions to develop a
lot of substandard width and to construct a driveway apron not
in conformance with City standards
BAC~GI~UNO & DISCUSSION
The subject property is adjacent to the south bound exit from the Santa Aha
Freeway (5) to Newport Avenue. The unusual configuration of the property
is the' result of the freeway construction and this property is a remnant
piece of the ~ght-of-way dedication.
The property has been zoned Retail Commercial (C-l) since the adoption of
the Zoning Code. The proposed use as an office site is in conformance with
the Land Use provision of this district. The district does, however,
require a minimum lot frontage of 50 feet and the subject lot at the public
right-of-way line is only 21.08 feet in width.
The proposal calls for a 20-foot wide two-way driveway to Newport Avenue.
City standard for a two-way driveway is 25 feet in width. The applicant
has tried to contact the neighboring property owner to the south to work
out a share driveway easement, but they were unable to come to any
agreement. Currently, there are two separate driveway aprons onto Newport
Avenue. It is the applicant's request that the two aprons be joined at the
property line to form a shared 35-foot apron. The driveways behind the
property lines would not be shared.
The proposed building would have approxiately 1,800 square feet of floor
area within two stories. The architectural style is similar to the "Queen
Anne" type of the recently completed Gfeller Development on Main Street.
The height of the structure to the tallest spire is 38 feet. The maximum
allowable height in this district is 35 feet.
Along the southern property line there is a chain link fence which is
overgrown with plan material and it extends to the public right-of-way.
Chairman & Planning Agency Nembers
September 20, 1982
Page 2
FZlI)IMGS & CONCLUSIO#S
Because of the substandard lot width, a narrow, 20-foot wide, two-way
drive is the largest that can be provided. This access may cause
congestion problems at the freeway off ramp because of slow vehicle
entry and exit from the site.
The proposed joint driveway apron between properties requires approval
from both adjacent property owners. The applicant is requesting a
waiver from this requirement (Section 9271x) since he has been unable to
reach agreement with the adjacent property owner. If the driveway apron
is constructed to City standards, the net driveway width (flat area of
the apron) will be only ten feet. The City Engineer has recommended
against approval of the narrow ten-foot driveway apron and against the
unified drive apron without an shared onsite driveway.
The style of architecture would lend itself as an appropriate entrance
from the freeway the Old Town, area just to the north. The minor height
variance (three feet) will not negatively impact the area since the
spire is at least 90 feet from Newport Avenue.
The fences along each side property line may cause sight distance
problems for motorists entering and exiting the site. These fences
should be removed from the front setback area (15 feet from Newport
Avenue). An accurate survey should be performed by licensed land
surveyor to properly locate and determine fence ownership.
If this project is approved and constructed, the adjacent property owner
may be encouraged to develop and then enter into a mutual access
agreement.
RECOPlq~DED AL~IO#
Pleasure of the Agency. While staff is concerned about the access problems
of the site, it is believed that the development will help redevelopment in
the immediate area and will present an attractive entry for visitors to
E1Camino Real.
AGW:jh
9-13-82
Development Review Summary
Project:
District Requirement
Location/District:
Action: V,/~. 1~2,J 4AJ£ .lin
Proposed
Building:
Front Setback
Side Setback
Rear Setback
Gross Sq, Ft.
Net Floor Sq. Ft.
Height
~umber of Stories
Materials/Colors
Lot Size
Lot Coverage
Parking:
Number of Spaces
Ratio (space/sq.
% Compact Spaces
Type
Uses:
No. of Public Notifications: (Owners)
* no standard
//
RESOLUTION NO. 2061
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
28
The Planning
follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT
OF AN OFFICE BUILDING AT 15601 NEWPORT AVENUE
AND TO VARY WITH THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND
BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING
CDDE
Agency of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
I. The Planning Agency finds and determines as foliows:
A. That a proper application, (Variance No. 82-10), was
filed by Phillip B. Schindler, requesting authorization
to vary with the requirements of the Retail Commercial
District, and the general requirements of the Zoning
Code to construct an office building at 15601 Newport
Avenue.
B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and
held on said application.
C. That because of special circumstances applicable to
the subject property, relative to size, shape, topo-
graphy, location or surroundings, a strict application
of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive subject
property of privileges enjoyed by other properties
in the vicinity and under identical zone classification,
evidenced by the following findings:
1. The use is in conformance with the land use
element of the Tustin Area General Plan;
2. The use will enhance the appearance and val'ue of
the property and area;
3. A hardship exists with the unusual shape of the
property as a result of land dedication for freeway
uses.
D. That the granting of a variance as herein provided
will not constitute a grant of special privilege in-
consistent with the limitations upon other properties
in the vicinity and district in which the subject
property is situated.
E. That this project is categorically exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act.
F. That the granting of the variance as herein provided
will not be contrary to the intent of the Zoning
Ordinance or the public safety, health and welfare,
and said variance should be granted.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
~8
,Resolution No. J61
September 20, 1982
Page Two
G. Proposed development shall be in accordance with the
development policies adopted by the City Council; Uni-
form Building Codes as administered by the Building
Official; Fire Codes as administered by the Orange
County Fire Marshal; and street improvement require-
ments as administered by the City Engineer.
H. Final development plans shall require the review
and approval of the Community Development Director.
II. Planning Agency hereby grants a variance as applied
for, to authorize the development of an office building
thirty-eight feet (38') in height and substandard driveway
apron, subject to the following conditions:
A. The final site plan shall be standardized and
reflect all appropriate City standard drawing numbers.
The developer shall construct all missing or damaged
street i~rovements to said development per the City of
?ustin "Minimum Design Standards of Public Works" and
"Street I~rovement Standards". This work shall consist
of, but is not limited to: curbs and gutters,
sidewalks, street pavement, street trees, water service
and sewer lateral. The drive apron may be constructed
beyond the subject property to form a joint apron
between properties.
B. The office building is to be designed in a Victorian
style of architecture as proposed by the applicant.
C. A survey of the property shall be performed by a
licensed land surveyor to determine the location of the
property lines in relation to the side property line
fences. The fences are to be removed within the front
setback area if they are totally on the applicant's
property.
D. The building shall be provided with an automatic
fire sprinkler system per N.F.P.A. Standard 13D due to
insufficient emergency access and turn-around area.
E. On site fire hydrant(s) shall be provided as
required by the Orange County Fire Marshal's office.
F. A six-foot, eight-inch (6'-8") block wall shall be
provided between this property and the residentially
zoned property to the west.
G. The existing catch basin and local depression to the
north of the proposed driveway shall be plotted on the
plan.
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. _J61
September 20, 1982
Page Three
H. Submission of a final grading plan for review and
approval.
I. Payment of Orange County Sanitation District No. 7
sewer connection fees.
J. Payment of East Orange County Water District fees.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning
Agency held on the~day of , 1982.
Richard B. Edgar, Chairman
Janet Hester
Recording Secretary