Loading...
RES-8219 Denying Zone Change No. 1160-93RESOLUTION NO. 8219 A RESOLUTION OJ!' THB CITY COUlfCIL OJ!' THB CITY OJ!' ORARGB OVERRULING THE RECOMMENDA- TION OJ!' THE PLANNING COMMISSION OJ!' THB CITY OJ!' ORARGB AND DBNYING THB RECLASSI- J!'ICATION OJ!' PROPBRTY SITUATED WEST OJ!' MONTGOMERY STREBT, BAST OJ!' PARKER STREBT, NORTH OJ!' LA VETA AVBIlUE AND SOUTH OJ!' PALMYRA AVEIlUE. ZORE CHARGE 1160- 93 APPLICANT: CITY OJ!' ORARGE 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 reclassified from the R-3 and M-1 Districts to the R2- 6 District, 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 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-l (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 80% are single family residential, nine 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 area have retained their original small scale and 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 mitigation measures in the La Veta EIR 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 Zone Change 1160- 93 reclassifying the subject property to the R2-6 District 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. ATTEST:Marilyn J. Jensen City Clerk of the City of Orange CL~_Deputy Ci~lerk 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, by the following vote: ---- AYES:NOES:ABSENT:COUNCIL MEMBERS: SPURGEON, BARRERA, MAYOR BEYER, MURPHY COUNCIL MEMBERS: COONTZ COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE Marilyn J. Jensen c'ty Clerk of the city of Orange SSH:dg 5- 10 J 0J o f'f' 322 328 338 40 52 362 366 78 n o f' 11 29V l L~) I 2cJ3 o J) to PALMYRA AVE.r:.}, ,,~#.~~:$ to l'~':': ':il: .:;t,t.to ~ II~ 1\\\.\1 .\I~\t,,:"~: t~"~~i2B~ii~i:323 331 341 347 355 61 371 373 377 InICI\; CUL VER 1\ VE.OJ ~n n to to 419 t- 457 j)cr: 471 w cr: 0... mm:: tttWiilio rr,::,:::::: .~4. 6:0. ~j)8....4........ ; r-W x 0... j (' 40. 1\ n..5Qltt. lit:: 8~::: 8:~:~::::::::;:;:::::: ri::::::::::::::{k:;):; 1;:.... :::;:;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::01 3$ 1111, i::;:-:':':':':':':': 1t:>.4II. 71:::'::::"': NON- X:.:;:;:.,}:;};:::,:, CONFORMING 3 UNITS PLUS J Ln SINGLE FAMIL: 75:}}: t: ~ DUPLEX W: J:0: it: f Illliiil!lllij 418 .I I :~:II l 4Ifi'; n; -: : Cj I 472 .1 480 HtMiI 4.';:; 0 I'@~ I.o J'J0.1EXHIBIT A L a;a: u.r-;:::-