RES-8218 Denying General Plan Amendment No. 4-93RESOLUTIOH HO. 8218
A RESOLUTIOH OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ORANGE OVERRULIHG THE RECOJIMENDA-
TIOH OF THE PLAHHIHG COMHISSIOH OF THE
CITY OF ORANGE AND DEHYIHG THE GENERAL PLAN
CLASSIFICATIOH OP PROPERTY SITUATED WEST OF
MONTGOMERY STREET, EAST OP PA1UtER STREET,
HORTH OF LA VETA AVEHUE AND SOUTH OF PALMYRA
AVEHUE.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-
93 APPLICANT: CITY OP
ORANGE
RECITALS:After due public hearings as required by law, the
City Council of the City of Orange considered a recommendation of
the Planning Commission of the City of Orange recommending,
by Resolution No. PC-24-93, that certain property
situated west of Montgomery street, east of Parker street, north of
La Veta Avenue and south of Palmyra Avenue be redesignated
from the Industrial Designation to the low-medium
density residential, and denied said recommendation after finding
and determining the hereinafter described facts. The real property which is
the subject of the redesignation is more particularly described
on Exhibit "
A" which is attached.Upon the Public Hearing before
the City Council, the
following facts were established:1. The proposed area, previously known as
SubArea "B" of the Old Towne rezoning requests, consists
of 75 parcels that total 8.7 acres in area and that
are located west of Montgomery Street (AT & SF Railway),
east of Parker street,north of La Veta Avenue and
south of Palmyra Avenue.Properties under consideration of
rezoning are addressed as:504, 512, 518, and 522 to
619 West Culver Avenue,604, 614, and
656 West Palmyra Avenue,307 to
490 s. Pixley Street,505 to 639 West
La Veta Street, and
418 to 480 Montgomery 2. The proposal is to change the zoning for
the 75 parcels from R-3 (Residential
MUlti-Family) and M-1 (Light Manufacturing)to R-2-
6 (Residential Duplex, 6,000 square foot minimum lot size). In
addition to the zone change this would
require a General Plan Amendment to redesignate
the existing industrial parcels along Montgomery to
the Low-Medium Density Residential designation (6-15 dwelling
units per acre). Attached to this report
are base maps which illustrate current zoning,
land
3. The "Committee of 300" (Southwest Quadrant Old Towne Orange)
presented a petition to the City Council on January 25, 1992
requesting that certain portions of the Southwest Quadrant
in Old Towne be rezoned from R-4, and R-
3 (Multi-Family Residential) to R2-6 (Duplex
Residential). The City Council referred action on this
petition to the Community Development Department with a
request that the staff planners review their
request and make recommendations regarding the proposed zone changes
and/or retention of present zoning. State Law permits the
property owner or the City Council to initiate a change of
zone on any specific piece of property. Council
has initiated similar zone changes in the past to support
the long term policy directions of the
City's General Plan.4. On March 23, 1992 and May 26, 1992,
two study sessions were held with the Planning Commission on
this and several other rezoning requests. The purpose of
the first study session was to review background information
and to solicit Planning commission input regarding the type
of data and survey information necessary to study
these requests. The second study session focused on the process,
format and context of data. Staff proposed and
the Planning Commission concurred that there was merit in reviewing
these requests in five separate sub-areas
or neighborhoods. This provided a focused approach on each of
the five individual areas, as well as provided for
more manageable and adequate public meetings. There was a
series of five workshops scheduled from June 10 through August
19, 1992, which covered four areas of the Southwest Quadrant,
with a fifth study area located on East Culver in
the
Southeast Quadrant of Old Towne.On May 13, 1992, the
City Council and Planning Commission were provided with
additional background information on the City's Updated Historic Building
Survey Report and a status report on the City'
s Preservation Planning Program. The information provided a general
context and overview of the status of the city'
s historic resources
and ongoing preservation planning program.5. Planning staff examined
this rezoning proposal in relation to several major areas;
existing land use patterns, historic resources, bUlk/mass/
density, land use conflicts, non-conforming uses, access to
parcels, and pending impacts
of proposed street widening projects.
A. Existing Land Use Patterns Of the 75 parcels in the
study area, 65 are residential in use, and 10 are
industrial in use. Currently three of the residential parcels located
at 504, 512, and 518 West Culver are zoned
M-1 (Light Industrial). At 505 West La Veta
and 480 Montgomery, two industrial uses currently occupy two
R-3 zoned parcels. Of the 65 residentially used
parcels, 52 or
residential, nine or 14% of the parcels are duplexes,
three of the parcels are developed with triplexes, and
one parcel is developed with a four-plex. sixty-
one of the sixty-five parcels would be
conforming under the R2-6 Duplex zoning, 4
parcels would be non-conforming.Of the non-conforming
structures, one is on La Veta Avenue, and will be
removed as
part of the
street widening program.B. Historic Resources:Forty-four
of the 75 existing structures contribute to the historic
context of this neighborhood due to their
representing historic periods, and wide range of
architectural styles. These structures range in date from
1895 through 1936, with a majority being constructed in
the early to mid 1920's.
The architectural styles vary from Early
Victorian,California Bungalow, Mediterranean Revival, Pressed
Tin Western False Front, Craftsman, Cottage, Spanish
Colonial Revival to Provincial Revival. The
remaining structures are classified as non-
contributing. These structures are typically
in-fill structures constructed after the mid 1940's.
Forty-two of the historic structures were
rated as to their originality, or architectural integrity, of which 26
had a rating of 4 which indicated no apparent change to
the buildings historic fabric, 9 had a
rating of 3 indicating minor and reversible changes or
appropriate changes to the original structure, 3 structures
had a rating of 2 indicating a
collection of minor,inappropriate changes and
four structures had major inappropriate changes. Thirty-four of the
historic structures in this study area retain
a high degree of their originality. Of
the forty-two historic sites,thirty-five
retain their original setting of site features. Of the
eight contributing structures along West La Veta Avenue, only
three, (addressed 535, 617 and 637) have an architectural integrity
rating of four and are also rated
as being in good condition.
These structures could be possible candidates for relocation.C. Bulk,
Mass and Density:Thirty-eight of the 75 parcels in the
study area have lot areas less than 6000
square feet in area and are sub-standard to the
R-3 and proposed R2-6 development standards for lot
sizes. These lots range in size from 2500
square feet to 5740 square feet with the average sub-
standard lot being 4185 square feet. Small homes cover
a majority of the twenty lots having
less than 5000 square feet in area. Sixty of
the sixty-seven residentially used parcels are developed
with single story structures. Most of the
structures in this
scale. Staff recommends use of the RCD (Residential
Combining District) overlay for those parcels proposed
for R2-6 zoning as a method of addressing height
of future
buildings.D. Land Use
Conflicts:Several parcels have been identified in which land
use is not consistent with the zoning. Three
properties located at 504, 512 and 518 West Culver Avenue,
are zoned as M-1 (Light Industrial), however
they are developed with residential units. Also two
parcels are zoned R-3, however they are
developed with industrial uses (480 Montgomery and 505 West
La Veta Avenue).
E. Non-Conforming Uses:If the proposed zone change is
approved, and La Veta Avenue is widened (thereby
eliminating a triplex) three parcels with multi-family
units would be made non-conforming.
Staff is suggesting that appropriate language be included in
the zoning code update that would permit
these non-conforming structures to be rebuilt to current
R-3 standards (within a one year period) if
they were destroyed by fire. Staff will
review development standards in relation to buffering in compatible
land uses in such
cases where residential property abuts industrial property.The
proposal to rezone the Montgomery Street properties from M-
1 to R2-6 would create non-conforming
uses on all ten parcels. Staff does not recommend
rezoning these parcels because of
the proximity of the
Railroad Tracks and vehicular access limitations.F. Access
to Parcels:Presently there is limited vehicular
access to the industrial parcels on Montgomery. Montgomery Street is
not an improved public street and a portion
of the paving is located in the ATFS Railroad right-
of-way.This access problem limits this site
for any kind of development. This problem will be compounded when the
lots at 505, 513 and 517 West La
Veta are acquired for street widening. After the acquisition
of these lots there will not be
sufficient room to reconsolidate new residential lots. Staff would recommend
that the parcel at 480 Montgomery
be acquired
at that time to
facilitate consolidation and development of new residential properties.G. Street Widening
Impacts:When La Veta is widened, twenty feet will be taken off
of the parcels on the north side
of the 500 and 600 block. Staff would recommend
that the adopted
for the identified three historic structures if
economically feasible or that the parcels be
reconsolidated and new housing be developed on these
parcels. The city has acquired one of these parcels
and will be negotiating on others as part of the street
widening project. This will complicate any
consideration of a zone change on these parcels as the
city is the applicant. Careful consideration will have
to be given on how to re-consolidate these lots, as
the widening will create or leave several
sub-
standard lots.HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Orange that the recommendation of the
Planning commission be overruled and that General Plan Amendment
4-93 redesignated the subject property to the
Low-Medium Residential Density designation be denied
for the following reason:1. The proposal is not needed to ensure
proper
planning of this area.ADOPTED this 10th
day of August
1993.Marilyn J. Jensen City Clerk of
the City of Orange I hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the
10th
of
August ,
1993.
ATTEST:AYES:NOES:ABSENT:COUNCIL MEMBERS: SPURGEON,
BARRERA, MAYOR BEYER,
MURPHY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COONTZ COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
Mar.ilyn J Jensen City Clerk of
the
City
of Orange Clerk SSH:dg 5-
10J
0J
00
f'f'
322
328
338
40
52
362
366
78
n
o
f'
11
29V I~~I)
PALMYRA
AVE.o
OJ
to
Illi'
f:\\\:
f\\\\\\
a2A t\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\i::;
z.323 331
341
347
355
61
371
373
377
l\\\
wW:::
1\\\\\~\\I\\
t\\~$g I'ill\
ll~I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\i{
f":1~~lcl~
n ~nto
to
CUL VER
1\ VE.OJ ~n
n
to to
419 t-
457
j)cr:
471
w cr:
0...
4
C'
4N \
C"J
In
5...................... NO
3..
5.................... N0. _q.CONFORMING@::II:i:'. 3 UNITS
PLUS
DUPLEX iiAh}}}:}J;:{.;";;:;t.........rr;,jj\:'
1llllillllilll
418
1 1
I :;;
I
442
1
448 I
4~
1'
46472
1
4801 g!:?
tilJ Kl:;:o
V:':-..
in:'~
0,.:
UI lI -illEXHIBITA
La;
a:u.
r::::-