HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH VARIANCE 81-8 10-05-81DATE:
September 30, 1981
:50 PUBLIC HEARING
Inter-Corn
TO:
FROH:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Chairman and Planning Agency Members
Community Development Department
Variance No. 81-8
Location: 14882-14942 Newport Avenue, R3(1750) District
Applicant: Cal State Associates CCLV "A"
REQUEST:
Authorization to convert the 296 unit apartment complex at 14882-14942 Newport
Avenue into residential condominiums, and to vary with the open space require-
ments set forth in the Planned Development District Regulations.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Due to the complexity of this proposal, it is recommended that the Planning
Agency review and approve the zoning code considerations of the site and
continue the review of the building code items until the October 19, 1981
meeting.
BACKGROUND:
The Californian Apartments were developed in November of 1969 as authorized by
the now defunct Architectural Review Committee. Since its inception, the
complex has gone through a number of owners and an apparent lack of adequate
maintenance. The City Council and staff in recent years have received numerous
complaints regarding problems with the water and heating systems, and the roofs
and stairwells. The City Planning and Building staff have been working exten-
sively with contractors representing the owners since October of 1980 on a case
by case basis to ensure compliance with building codes. The latest permit
applied for (September 29, 1981) was for roof repair of one structure.
DISCUSSION:
Due to the extensive building problems, the question of conversion to condo-
miniums for this project must be divided into two distinct aspects. In
addition to the zoning and site design consideration normally reviewed, the
City should seriously look into the adequacy of the structures and their
components for condominium ownership and management.
To ease the hearing process, staff is recommending that these two aspects,
zoning and building, be reviewed separately due to the scope of the project.
The report for this meeting will center around the zoning requirements of the
Planned Development District (PD). It is recommended that the next meeting
deal solely with the building concerns. By that time, staff should have
completed an analysis from the City's Building consultant regarding code
problems with the structures.
SITE AND DESIGN REVIEW:
In order to comply with the provisions of the PD District, the architect has
proposed the following modifications to the 296 unit complex:
The construction of two 22g space parking structures (one along each
interior side property line). The total of 598 spaces satisfies
minimum requirements. A parking space allotment plan has been sub-
mitted. The longest distance from any one unit to a reserved space
is 120 yards.
e
A portion of the rear property line abuts the City-owned tennis
courts along School Lane. The applicant is therefore requesting
authorization to develop the 45% open space as allowed in the PD
District.
3. In order to attain the 45% open space, the applicant is requesting
the following:
a)
The inclusion of 14,890 square feet of developed open space
leased from the Tustin School District into the project's net
land area. This should be accomplished by subdivision with a 35
year lease agreement.
b)
The allowance of approximately 5300 square feet of first and
second floor covered patios in the open space allotment. The
applicant is agreeable to removing the roof covering on all the
second floor patios.
Without these considerations the proposal would fall short of the
open space requirements. The lease agreement land, which will
require a parcel map, is about 6% of the open space area and the
covered patios are approximately 2% of the open space.
Emergency access through the project is to be provided with the aid of a
combination walkway and turf block system along the rear quarter of the
project. This emergency route would be open only for emergency purposes. The
remainder of the time it will form a part of the landscaped open space. The
parking structures must be designed to a minimum clearance of 13'-6" to allow
for fire vehicles and the roadway should satify all fire department require-
ments.
A tentative and final map will be required to be filed for a condominium
conversion.
All future buyers of these units will require notification that Newport Avenue
may be extended southerly to connect with Edinger St. Notification of same by
the developer should be a condition of approval of both this variance/use
permit and the tract map.
The extension of Newport Avenue could have an impact on some of the future
buyers/residents of this development, especially those units adjacent to and
near Newport Avenue.
Most of the public improvements have been constructed with the previous apart-
ment development. However, any missing or damaged improvements adjacent to
this development will require replacement.
There is an approximate I 1/2:1 slope at the back edge of sidewalk sloping
down to the on site development. Either this slope should be regraded to
provide a one foot wide level area at the back of sidewalk or a fence/wall
should be installed to prevent pedestrians from falling down the slope.
An on site trash collection program needs to be clarified and reviewed by the
refuse hauler (SCA). Interior pickups to one or two central stations for
collection has been discussed.
The parking structures should be modified for hammer head turn around capacity
and the ramp design should be studied for adequate width and motorist
visibility.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The useable on site open space will increase by the consolidation of
parking and the addition of the lease land.
The on site noise level generated by the railroad should be reduced
by the incorporation of a sound attenuation wall in the south parking
structure.
3. The vacant school district property will be improved by the incor-
poration of passive open space activities.
The development will satisfy the intent of the PO District regula-
tions.
BUILDING REVIEW:
As suggested earlier in this report, it is recommended that the Agency tenta-
tively approve the site plan proposal. Then it would be appropriate for the
Agency to take further testimony regarding Building Code items. Staff under-
stands that a great many of the concerns by the tenants will revolve around
these items. From this testimony and input from the Building Consultant,
staff will prepare an in-depth study for the next meeting.
Specific subjects which will be discussed in that report include:
1. Roof leakage
2. Heating problems
3. Water problems
4. Structural concerns with the stairways
5. Tenant purchase and relocation plans
6. Phased construction program
AGW/llh
NVIIII~IllVO
NYINilO,:I I'iYO 3HL
NVI NIlO:l I"IVO JILL
-b