Loading...
RES-10895 Denying Tentative TractRESOLUTION 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 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 abstention 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: Land Use Element Number Statement Potential Non - consistency Policy Balance economic gains The project could be incompatible with 1.2 from new development surrounding neighborhoods if improper while preserving the heights or density were to result, character and densities of especially with regard to development residential neighborhoods.along interfacing perimeters. Policy Ensure that new Without accompanying plans, it is 1.4 development reflects unknown if resulting development existing design standards,would reflect contextual design to qualities, and features that adjacent development or be sensitive to are in context with nearby privacy of adjacent dwellings. development Policy Minimize effects of new Same as above. 1.6 development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods. Goal Advance development Without a fully defined project it is 6.0 activity that is mutually unknown if the development would be beneficial to both the beneficial to the environment or environment and the community. Specific areas of concern community.include: Without a specified density or unit configuration, potential future project impacts could cause blight to the area via traffic or parking congestion. Health, safety, and /or aesthetic impacts could arise to on and /or off - site residents due to project density impacts in the form of inadequate circulation, fire access, or interference with access to proposed units. Safe and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation, both on and off -site, may not result. Adequate ingress and egress to the site may not occur. It is unknown if adequate water su ply or water pressure for Resolution No. 10895 Resolution No. 10895 It is unknown if adequate water supply or water pressure for firefighting will be available for the density proposed at the time of a future project. It is also unknown how water quality best management practices will be implemented on- site. Policy Ensure that new Without accompanying plans, it is 6.1 development is compatible unknown if resulting development with the style and design of would reflect contextual design to established structures and adjacent development or be sensitive to the surrounding privacy of adjacent dwellings. environment. Policy Reduce pollutant runoff It is unknown what Best Management 6.5 from new development and Practices would be utilized or where urban runoff to the they would be located for a future maximum extent project. Hence the effectiveness of a practicable.Water Quality Management Plan cannot be determined. Policy Enhance the walkability of Walkability enhancements cannot be 6.6 both new and current evaluated without a plan. development. Policy Maximize landscaping It is not known how much area a future 6.8 along streetscapes and plan would or could allocate toward within development streetscape and development projects to enhance public landscaping features. Hence health and environmental compliance with the policy remains benefits.unknown. Policy Mitigate adverse air, noise, Without an environmental analysis of a 6.10 circulation, and other known site layout, it is unknown how environmental impacts sound walls, landscape buffers, and caused by new traffic control measures would mitigate development adjacent to adverse air, noise, circulation, and other existing neighborhoods environmental impacts. through use of sound walls, landscaping buffers, speed limits, and other traffic control measures. Resolution No. 10895 GOAL Encourage active If the tentative tract map is approved, a 8.0 involvement of residents,final map may be filed. Therefore, 1.0 businesses, and agencies in without a tract map accompanying a the planning and decision future site plan, future project review making process.could terminate at the Planning demands, and sustains Commission, rather than the City quality of life in Council, unless appealed. Absence of neighborhoods. an additional public meeting at the City Council for the future site plan review could be viewed as discouraging active involvement in the process. Policy Continue to provide Same as above. 8.1 opportunities for public impacts in the form of inadequate education and involvement circulation, fire access, or in land use planning interference with access to proposed decisions through public units. hearings, community Safe and adequate vehicular and meetings, study sessions, pedestrian circulation, both on and electronic media, and any off-site, ma not result. other appropriate and available means. Circulation and Mobility Element Number Statement Potential Non - consistent GOAL Provide a safe, efficient, and Without a fully defined project 1.0 comprehensive circulation Specific areas of concern include: system that serves local needs, meets forecasted Without a specified density or unit demands, and sustains configuration, potential future quality of life in project impacts could cause blight neighborhoods.to the area via traffic or parking congestion. Health, safety, and /or aesthetic impacts could arise to on and /or off - site residents due to project density impacts in the form of inadequate circulation, fire access, or interference with access to proposed units. Safe and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation, both on and off-site, ma not result. Resolution No. 10895 Adequate ingress and egress to the site mav not occur. Growth Management Element Number Statement Potential Non - consistency GOAL Reduce traffic congestion Without knowing future density, a 1.0 within the City.traffic analysis cannot be conducted to reduce the amount of know if there will be traffic impacts. Policy Reduce pollutant runoff It is unknown what Best Management 2.14 from new development by Practices would be utilized or where requiring use of the most they would be located for a future Policy effective Best Management project. Hence the effectiveness of a 2.15 Practices (BMPs) currently Water Quality Management Plan available.cannot be determined. Public Safety Element Number Statement Potential Non - consistency Policy Employ strategies and Without a site plan, it is unknown what 2.4 design features that will strategies would be used to reduce reduce the amount of impervious surface area. impervious surface (i.e. focal points by neighboring properties. paved area) within new development projects. Policy Minimize the amount of Without a site plan, the amount of 2.15 impervious surfaces and impervious surface area is unknown. associated urban runoff The use and type of Best Management pollutants in new Practices to minimize pollutant runoff development and significant is also unknown. redevelopment throughout the community. Natural Resource Element Number Statement Potential Non-consistenc Policy Encourage the retention and Without a site layout and building 7.5 enhancement of scenic elevations, it is not known if a future corridors and visual focal project would hinder views to visual points within the focal points by neighboring properties. community. Resolution No. 10895 Public Protect lives and property of Without a site plan, it cannot be known Safety,Orange residents and if adequate emergency vehicle service GOAL businesses from urban and to the site can be accommodated for a 3.0 wildland fire hazards.proposed layout and density. It can needs of residents and also not be determined if adequate businesses. access to dwellings for firefighting purposes can be accommodated, which would prevent fire spread to off -site structures. Policy Provide adequate fire Same as above. 3.4 equipment access and fire less than currently available. Policy 1.1 suppression resources to all Same as above. developed and open space areas. Infrastructure Element Number Statement Potential Non - consistent Infrastructure,Ensure water, sewer,Without a site and utility plan showing GOAL 1.0 and storm drain site layout, number of units, location of systems that meet the infrastructure, it is not known if needs of residents and infrastructure for the project will be businesses.adequate. Also, prediction of future water need and availability cannot be assumed without knowing the number of units and baseline for water supply. Hence future water supply could be less than currently available. Policy 1.1 Provide sufficient Same as above. levels of water, sewer, and storm drain service throughout the Comm unit . Urban Design Element Number Statement Potential Non - consistent GOAL Encourage contextually Without a site plan showing the site 6.0 appropriate infill layout and building elevations, it cannot development projects and be known if the infill development property renovations.project is contextually appropriate. Resolution No. 10895 Policy Encourage consistent high Without knowing the site, building, and 6.1 quality design of landscape design, it cannot be development projects, and determined that the project would be of provide development high quality design. With just a standards that ensure tentative tract map, it cannot be building and site design that determined that development standards is well integrated with of the municipal code, which implement infrastructure and the General Plan, will be able to be circulations stems.adhered to. Policy Ensure that new infill Same as above. 6.2 development contributes positively to the quality of the surrounding corridor or neighborhood, including the potential to provide additional park space, and minimize the visibility of on -site parking. Tentative Tract Map: 1. The requirements for the filing of subdivision maps shall be governed by the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title 16 of the Orange Municipal Code (OMC). All maps shall comply with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the City Zoning Ordinance, Title 16 of the OMC, and any other ordinance, statute or law pertaining to the use, sale, leasing or subdivision of land. California Government Code Section 66474 states: "A legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, if it makes any of the following findings: " a) That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451. As stated in the General Plan findings, 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 Planning Commission in conjunction with the proposed map. Resolution No. 10895 This finding cannot be met. b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. As stated above and in the General Plan findings, which cites potential areas of inconsistency with the General Plan, the project design or improvement cannot be determined to be consistent with the General Plan because it will rely on a future plan not submitted with the proposed map. This finding cannot be met. c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. The site is likely physically suitable for residential condominium development, as the zoning and General Plan permit but, the tract map for condominium purposes invites carte blanche for unit counts, within the General Plan density limits, for future site plan submittal. It is not known how many units, within the permissible General Plan range, would be suitable for the site. A threshold may exist whereby a proposed density is not physically suitable, especially given the single story overlay designation for the site. The lack of an associated site plan which this Commission believes exists, but has not been submitted with the proposed map, causes this finding not to be made. d) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density ofdevelopment. The density of development is not known and depends on a future site plan being approved. Without knowing a specific density, this finding cannot be made. e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There is no design of the subdivision included with the tentative tract map, however evidence at the hearing indicates that one exists. Therefore, an evaluation of environmental damage, including aesthetic impacts, cannot be fully examined and determined by the Planning Commission by reviewing a segmented portion of the project. Resolution No. 10895 8 This finding cannot be made. f) That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. There is no design of the subdivision included with the tentative tract map, however evidence at the hearing indicates that one exists. Therefore, an evaluation of public health problems, such as those related to circulation, firefighting and emergency vehicle access, cannot be fully examined and evaluated by reviewing a segmented portion of the project. This finding cannot be made. g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use ofproperty within the proposed subdivision. There are no known easements for public access purposes on the property. This finding can be made. SECTION 2 — ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In addition to the statutory exemption from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines 15270 for projects rejected or disapproved by a public agency, the City Council finds as follows: Evidence introduced into the record 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 hasseenthenutsandboltsoftheirsiteplanandwaswellawareofwhattheyintendtodeveloponthe site and that it had been discussed and shared with members of the community many times. The Resolution No. 10895 9 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, the City Council denies 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. ADOPTED this 10" day of November, 2015. q L'M- E. Smith, ayor, it eofOrg ATTEST: Mary E., , City Cle , ity ge I, MARY E. MURPHY, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do 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 10 of November, 2015, by the following vote: MOTION:COUNCILMEMBER: SECOND:COUNCILMEMBER: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: Murphy Nichols Alvarez, Murphy, Nichols Whitaker, Smith None None Mary E. M , City Cler ange Resolution No. 10895 10