The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSR - TTM-0036-15 - WASHINGTON HAMLIN TRACTAGENDA ITEM November 10, 2015 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council THRU: Rick Otto City Manager R FROM: William Crouch, AICP, AIA, NCARB, LEED (AP) Community Development Director ReviewedNerif ed City Manager Finance Direc or To Be Presented By: Chad Ortlieb Cons Calendar _ City Mgr Rpts Council Reports Legal Affairs Boards /Cmtes Public Hrgs Admin Reports Ylan/Environ 1. SUBJECT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 0036 -15 (17645), WASHINGTON HAMLIN TRACT (THE OLSON COMPANY), SOUTH OF THE EAST WASHINGTON AVENUE AND SOUTH HAMLIN STREET INTERSECTION 2. SUMMARY The applicant proposes a Tentative Tract Map for Condominium purposes. A single lot with public utility and access easements would result. No specific number of units, site plan, floor plans, or building elevations are associated with the proposal. No site plan or design review components are associated with the proposal. At their October 5, 2015, meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny the request. A draft resolution for project denial is included as Exhibit A. 3. RECOMMENDATION _7�71 APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 10895 A resolution of the City Council denying Tentative Tract 0036 -15 (17645) for residential condominium purposes on triangularly- shaped property located north of the southeasterly terminus of Washington Avenue and Hamlin Street 4. FISCAL IMPACT If the recommended action is approved there is no anticipated fiscal impact other than application archiving and maintenance costs. ITEM -Uy 1 11/10/15 1 5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL(S) 1. Provide for a safe community Strategy: a) Provide and maintain infrastructure necessary to ensure the safety of the public. b) Enhance the emergency management system to provide public safety during times of disaster. c) Assure the development of the City occurs in a fashion that maximizes public safety. 3. Enhance and promote quality of life in the community Strategies: a) Support and enhance attractive, diverse living environments. 5. Recognize, promote and preserve Orange's rich heritage Strategy: a) Celebrate Orange's rich heritage 6. GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION As presented, the project does not meet the General Plan Goals and Policies as discussed in Attachment 1. 7. DISCUSSION and BACKGROUND Existing Site The site is vacant, flat, and devoid of vegetation due to routine grubbing. Proposed Project The applicant proposes to establish a Tentative Tract Map (Exhibit A) for residential condominium purposes only. One lot for residential condominium purposes is proposed. Public Utility and access easements are proposed as shown on the Tentative Tract Map. No site plans, unit counts, unit layout, or specifically designated street layout is proposed with the request. However, the implication is that the "PUBLIC UTILITY & ACCESS EASEMENT (TYP)" listed on the tract map would be future streets. No other applications are associated with the request. At their October 5, 2015, meeting, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council deny the request. The Commission vote was 2 to 1, with one absention and one absence. ITEM 2 11/10/15 Evidence introduced into the record at the Planning Commission September 9, and October 5, 2015, hearings indicated that the tentative tract map approval sought by the Applicant was one step, or a segmented part, of a project as a whole that would lead to development of the site. Over the past two years the Applicant has had numerous discussions with the neighborhood regarding their project and recently held a community meeting to discuss development of the site. The Applicant has developed and provided detailed site plans to the community which reflect their desire to develop the site. The Applicant repeatedly reassured the Planning Commission that it was their intent to develop the site in a manner consistent with the plans and information shared with the community. The Applicant testified that the community has seen the nuts and bolts of their site plan and was well aware of what they intend to develop on the site and that it had been discussed and shared with members of the community many times. The Applicant stated that they will bring the actual development plans under a separate application. Based upon the testimony of the Applicant and information received into the record at the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the Applicant's request for tentative tract map approval because it is a segmented action of a whole project, as defined by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15378, rather than a stand -alone Tentative Tract Map application. Additional evidence bolstering the applicant's development objectives exists in that the applicant initially filed a project with a site plan and elevation drawings, and then withdrew the application after initial Design Review Committee consideration. Subsequently, the applicant filed the subject application for only a tract map but continued to conduct community outreach for a project of greater detail. Furthermore, as stated in the General Plan findings in attached draft City Council Resolution 10895, which cites potential areas of inconsistency with the General Plan, the project cannot be determined to be consistent with the General Plan because it will rely on a future plan, which evidence indicates exists and has been vetted with the community, however, has not been submitted or evaluated by the City in conjunction with the proposed map. No public comments exist for transmittal at the time of staff report creation. Any public comments received will be transmitted under a separate memo. 8. ATTACHMENTS Attachments to Report: 1. City Council Resolution No. 10895 2. Vicinity Map 3. Existing Site Photographs 4. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated October 5, 2015 (including draft resolution) 5. Planning Commission Resolution 28 -15 6. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Dated October 5, 2015 7. Planning Commission Staff Report and draft Planning Commission Resolution 28 -15 Dated September 9, 2015 ITEM 3 11/10/15 8. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Dated September 9, 2015 Exhibits: A. Tentative Tract Map 0036 -15 (17645) date stamped November 10, 2015 cc: The Olson Company, Doris Nguyen 3010 Old Ranch Parkway #100 Seal Beach, CA 90740 ITEM 4 11/10/15 RESOLUTION NO. 10895 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING TENTATIVE TRACT 0036 -15 (17645) FOR RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES ON TRIANGULARLY - SHAPED PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON AVENUE AND HAMLIN STREET APPLICANT: THE OLSON COMPANY, DORIS NGUYEN WHEREAS, Tentative Tract 0036 -15 (17645) was filed by The Olson Company, Doris Nguyen in accordance with the provisions of the City of Orange Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Tentative Tract 0036 -15 (17645) was processed in the time and manner prescribed by state and local law; and WHEREAS, on August 12, 2015, the Staff Review Committee reviewed Tentative Tract 0036- 15 (17645) and recommended that the application proceed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted two duly advertised public meetings on September 9, 2015, and October 5, 2015, for the purpose of considering Tentative Tract 0036 -15 (17645) for the triangularly- shaped property located north of the southeasterly terminus of Washington Avenue and Hamlin Street and, at their October 10, 2015, meeting, the Planning Commission approved a motion on Planning Commission Resolution PC 28 -15 recommending that the City Council deny the request. The Commission vote was 2 to 1, with one absention and one absence; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orange hereby denies Tentative Tract 0036 -15 (17645) for residential condominium purposes based on the following findings: SECTION 1 — FINDINGS General Plan: 1. The project must be consistent with the goals and policies stated within the City's General Plan. Without a defined site plan and number of units, which evidence indicates exists and has been shared with the community, it cannot be determined that the project would be consistent with the General Plan, specifically the below General Plan Goals and Policies: