Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH 2 USE PERMIT 78-18 05-05-80OATE: TO: FROH: SUBJECT: May 5, 1980 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 2 Inter-Corn Planning Agency Community Development Department Amendment to Use Permit No. 78-18 APPLICANT: L. C. "Bob" Albertson, Jr. REQUEST: To amend item 2-b.10 of Resolution 1776 to authorize residents 18 years and older in the Village Homes condominium. LOCATION: 1101-1181 Packers Circle BACKGROUND In August of 1978, the Tustin Planning Agency approved Use Permit No. 78-18 authorizing the construction of Packers Square Senior Citizen Condominiums. To insure that the project would have a senior citizen population Item 2-b.10 was included as a condition of Resolution 1776: "Preparation of C.C. & R.'s for approval by the City Attorney to include provisions that the subject residential units shall only be purchased and occupied by persons who are 50 years of age or older." This provision was included due to the developers request that only 1.5 parking spaces be required in lieu of the standard 2 spaces per unit. The Developer argued that senior citizens would not own as many vehicles as a younger working population. The agency accepted the concept. In order to enforce the importance of maintaining a senior citizen community for a project of sub- standard design, the Agency included item 2.C: "In the event the applicant or subsequent owners fail to maintain the requirements of this use permit, that'the residential portion of the site is limited to persons aged 50 or older, the Planning Agency shall revoke the Use Permit 78-18 and require the owners to reapply and meet the requirements of the PD zone." DISCUSSION Included in the application packet as justification for the request is a parking demand study performed'by Market Profiles. The conclusion of the study states that at current demands an 18 year Amendment to Use Permit No. 78-18 May 5, 1980 page 2 old and older population would have a 1.5 parking space demand per unit and a future demand of 1.38 spaces. Some startling aspects of this included: The parking demand is less for an overall younger. population than an older one. This would be a dramatic change in vehicle use and ownership. ~ That 12% of the single adults (in one bedroom units) will not have vehicles and increase to 27%. Adult Families have less demand for parking than young married. This would also reverse trends in which fami- lies with teenagers have more vehicles than families without teenagers. An important part of the study includes an analysis of the Wood- bridge Village Green (project in Irvine). This project is stated to be similar in nature to Village Homes and the parking demand will also be similar. One rather major difference is evident, however. In discussion with the City of Irvine, in order for a condominium project to have less than 3 parking spaces per unit, the project would have to meet low and moderate income require- ments. It appears that this project, with its low parking ration and prices ($56,100 - $56,600) falls into that category. The units here in Tustin with monthly payments of~830~.~for a person with an annual income of $~.0__0~._.cannot be considered a low and moderate income unit. Those who live at these units will have an income sufficient to have additional vehicles unlike those living in low and moderate units. ANALYSIS The staff does not have anY current studies which counter the results of the applicant's findings. Their report does go against all previous conceptions of parking requirements.. If the Agency agrees with the applicant request, approval should be based on future consideration for an ordinance change for parking requirements on condominiums. Staff has looked at the site plan and has noted that there is a possibility to add approximately 30 spaces on site by removing landscaping and re-stripping for compact spaces. In addition, a portion of the private street could be modified and Stripped for more spaces. Amendment to Use Permit No. May 5, 1980 page 3 RECOMMENDED ACTION Pleasure of the Agency. AW:ss 78-18