Loading...
RES-8199 Approving General Plan Amendment No.RESOLUTION NO. 8199 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THB CITY ORANGB OVERRULING THE RECOMMENDATION OP THB PLANNING COMMISSION OF THB CITY OP ORANGB AND APPROVING NEGATIVE DBCLARATION 1425-93, GBNERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 3-93 AND ZONE CHANGB 1159-93. ZONE CHANGB 1159-93 GBNERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 3- 93 APPLICANT: CITY OF ORANGB RECITALS:On May 25, 1993, after due public hearing as required by law, the city Council of the City of Orange did consider a recommendation of the Planning commission of the City of orange that Negative declaration 1425-93 not be certified as completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and that General Plan Amendment 3- 93 and Zone Change 1159-93 be denied.The real property subject to reclassification under said General Plan Amendment and Zone Change (the "Property") are as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and are addressed as follows:504 to 816 E. CUlver Avenue (even numbers on south side)406 to 444 S. Cambridge street (even numbers on west side)425 to 447 S. Shaffer Street (odd numbers on east side)400 Block S. pine street, parcels 2 and 3 (810 E. Culver subdivision)Under said General Plan Amendment, the Property would be reclassified from Low Density Residential (2 to 6 units per acre)to Low Medium Density (6 to 15 units per acre) and under said Zone Change, the Property would be reclassified from the R- 1-6 (Single Family Residential) to the R-2-6 (Duplex Residential).At the close of the public hearing the City Council accepted Negative Declaration 1425-93 and found that there was no substantial evidence presented to the Council that the proposed reclassifications may have a significant effect on the environment or on wildlife resources. NOW, THBREFORE, BB IT RESOLVBD by the City Council of the city of Orange, that:A. the city Council does certify said Negative Declaration 1425-93, with the addition of the mitigation measure set forth in paragraph B below, as being completed in conformance with CEQA,based upon the following facts as found based upon the evidence,written and oral, presented at the public hearing:1. the facts as found by the Environmental Review Board and staff in the Negative Declaration document.2. no credible evidence was presented that existing on any lot comprising the Property historic structure. historically contributing are, uniformly, contributory only because of their age and architecture rather than any individual historic significance and none of the structures have been identified as individually constituting an historic resource in the city. 3. the unusual size and shape of most of the lots included in the reclassifications, unique in comparison to other properties in the Old Towne area, would, in many instances, permit build out at the new classifications without demolition of existing structures and make demolition economically infeasible or unattractive, thus minimizing both any potential adverse impacts on historic resources and any potential encouragement of other land owners in the Old Towne area to seek development potential increases. Application of the mitigation measures incorporated in the Negative Declaration, especially when coupled with these factors and the application of the city's existing Demolition Ordinance are sufficient to reduce any such potential adverse impacts, both directly related to this project and when considered cumulatively, to a level of insignificance. 4. several of the lots not of the unusually large size contain structures that are non-historically contributing and/ or substandard in size. Where such lots are substandard, after application of development standards, they would not support any additional development not already available under the current classification with the application of the City's "Granny Flat"ordinance permitting accessory second units, thus further reducing any potential impacts of the reclassifications.5. the City's adopted Capital Improvement Program will provide sufficient public infrastructure (streets, sewers, etc.) in sufficient time that no significant adverse impact is anticipated from any potential additional development under the new classifications.B. The City Council hereby adopts the following additional mitigation measure to Negative Declaration 1425-93:4. The City staff will promptly prepare and process for City Council consideration, through normal City procedures, an ordinance requiring a Conditional Use Permit for any development project that would result in more than two dwelling units on any R-2-6 lot in the City of Orange. Pending City Council consideration and adoption or denial of such an ordinance, no building permits shall be issued for any construction or improvements that would result in more than two dwelling units on any lot subject to Zone Change 1159-93 unless the city council, after duly noticed public hearing, grants a permit therefor based on the findings required under the Orange Municipal Code for a Conditional Use Permit and an additional finding that the proposed dwelling units in excess of two on the affected lot will not have a significantly greater impact on public resources and infrastructure or on the single family scale of the streetscape than would two dwelling units on the same lot.C. the recommendation of the Planning Commission be overruled and that General Plan Amendment 3- 93 and Zone Change approved for the following reasons, based on substantial evidence in the record of the public hearing taken as a whole: 1. the new classifications are consistent with and not detrimental to surrounding and contiguous land uses. 2. the reclassifications will allow currently underdeveloped property to be used to a higher and better use; encourage potential for affordable housing; and minimize disfavored land use divisions, lots without frontage on public streets, single family residential units less desirable and/or marketable than other similar units in other areas of the City without the unusual size and shape of the lots at issue and potential for conflicts between neighboring owners over maintenance of common drives, etc., all of which could be detrimental to the orderly development of the neighborhood and to surrounding land uses. 3. the reclassifications will strike a reasonable balance between General Plan and other public policies discouraging greater dwelling unit density in the West Orange area, promoting opportunities for affordable forms of housing, sensitivity to the desires and property rights of owners of unique parcels of land within the City, and promoting orderly development in accordance with existing surrounding land uses. 4. for the reasons stated in A above and because of the unique nature of the lots comprising the Property, the reclassifications will not promote, encourage, or set precedent favoring increased density in other, more sensitive neighborhoods in the Old Towne and West Orange areas. D. Severability - Should any sentence, section, clause, part or provision of this resolution be declared invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the resolution as a whole or any other part thereof.ADOPTED this 24th r/ t,4-d",4<4JM fft &k.ur eputy City erk ATTEST: 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 24th of Auqust, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BARRERA, MAYOR BEYER, MURPHY COONTZ SPURGEON 3- of Orange Reso No. 8199