Staff Report to The

Staff Report to the

Planning Commission

October 3, 2005

Item No. 2

2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION(Motion)

2b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005-00163(Resolution)

2c. VARIANCE NO. 2005-04653(Resolution)

2d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005-132(Motion)

2e.WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 542 - SOUND

ATTENUATION OF RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS(Motion)

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:

(1) This irregularly-shaped 0.8-acre property consists of two parcels. Parcel 1 is an irregularly-shaped parcel having a frontage of 133 feet on the south side of Burton Street, a maximum depth of 129 feet and is located 889 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Parcel 2 is an irregularly-shaped parcel having a frontage of 26 feet on the south side of Burton Street, a maximum depth of 129 feet and is located 1,022 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street (1400 East Burton Street).

REQUEST:

(2) The applicant requests approval of the following:

Reclassification No. 2005-00163 – to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) Zone to the RS-2 (Residential, Single-Family) Zone, or less intense zone.

Variance No. 2005-04653 – waivers of the following under authority of Code Section No.18.74.040.010 to construct four single-family residences:

(a)SECTION NO. 18.04.050Minimum lot width (70 feet required along Burton Street; 37 to 50 feet proposed)

(b)SECTION NO. 18.04.040Minimum lot area (7,200 square feet

required; 5,025 to 5,588 square feet proposed on Lots 1, 2 and 3)

Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-132 – to establish a 4-lot, 4-unit detached single-family residential subdivision.

(3) The applicant also requests approval to waive Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects.

BACKGROUND:

(4)At the request of the applicant, this item was continued from the September 7, June 27, and July 25, 2005, Commission meetings to allow time for the applicant to revise exhibits to reflect articulated exteriors and reconfigured driveways as recommended by staff and due to the applicant’s subsequent request for continuance to today’s meeting.

SR RCL2005-00163cf.doc

(5) This property is currently vacant resulting from the SR-91 (Riverside) freeway improvements The General Plan designates this property for Low Density Residential land uses. Surrounding General Plan land use designations are Low Density Residential in all directions. The applicant states the property was developed with a single-family residence surrounded by other single-family homes and apartments prior to freeway improvements. An existing apartment complex is located on the north side of Burton Street directly across from this property.

PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:

(6) There are no prior zoning actions pertaining to this property.

DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:

(7) The applicant proposes to develop a 4-lot single-family residential subdivision. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-132 indicates four lots ranging in area from 5,025 square feet to 19,182 square feet, all fronting on Burton Street and rearing onto the SR-91 (Riverside) Freeway.

(8) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the proposed lots would require waivers of two development standards of the RS-2 Zone; minimum lot width and minimum lot area as shown in the table below.

(9) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5) indicate two-story residences with four different models ranging from 2,912 s.f. to 3,611 s.f. Floor plans indicate three models with similar floor plans for a 4-bedroom/3-bath home with a 2-car garage and one model with 5-bedrooms/4 baths and a 3-car garage.

(10) Elevation drawings indicate four different elevations with stucco exteriors, tile roofs and structural heights up to 26’ 4”. The elevations feature articulated elevations with Spanish style architecture to complement an existing 1920’s Spanish style home to the east.

(11) The tentative parcel map indicates an existing 15-foot high Caltrans sound wall along the majority of the southerly property line adjacent to the SR-91 Freeway and a proposed 10-foot high masonry sound wall (at the back of a 5-foot wide landscaped setback) overlapping and extending from the Caltrans wall to the westerly property line of Lot 4 continuing north to the Orange County Flood Control District property line. A 6-foot high wood fence is proposed adjacent to the northwesterly property line of Lot 4 to screen the view of the channel.

View of south property abutting the SR-91 (Riverside) freeway

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:

(12) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.

EVALUATION:

(13) The applicant is requesting a reclassification to the RS-2 zone. This zone classification implements the property’s General Plan designation of Low Density Residential. This designation permits up to 6.5 dwelling units per acre and this proposal has a density of 5 units per acre; therefore, the reclassification and proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan.

(14) Waiver (a) pertains to minimum lot width. Code requires a lot width of 70 feet measured from the 25-foot setback line of a curvilinear or cul-de-sac street. Waiver (b) pertains to minimum lot area. The table in paragraph (8) above indicates the proposed lot widths and lot size per parcel.

(15) The applicant has submitted the attached Justification of Waiver forms to justify the above-mentioned waivers. The justification is based upon the irregular shape of the property combined with its location on the curved portion of a cul-de-sac and also abutting the SR-91 (Riverside) Freeway. There are also special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity. The irregular configuration of the property concentrates a disproportionate amount of lot area in Lot 4. If the lot had more proportioned dimensions, all of the lots would meet the minimum lot area requirements.

(16) The applicant requests approval of a waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. This policy states the following:

“It is the policy of the City Council that a noise level analysis shall be performed for any proposed residential development located within 600 feet of any existing or adopted freeway, expressway, major arterial highway, primary arterial highway or railroad and that the Planning Commission be authorized to waive specific requirements, subject to appeal to the City Council.

The following noise attenuation features shall be incorporated in these residential developments as required to reduce the noise levels as indicated.

In single-family residential developments located within six hundred (600) feet of any existing or adopted freeway, expressway, major arterial highway, or primary arterial highway there shall be a sound barrier capable of reducing the sound of motor vehicles to a maximum of 65 dB CNEL at any point six (6) feet above ground level within the development. The sound barrier shall consist of an earth berm, a masonry wall or a combination thereof, provided that a masonry wall which is used as a sound barrier shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. Where vehicular or pedestrian access through the barrier is permitted gates or baffles may be provided; however, said access shall be designed to minimize sound transmission.

(17) As indicated in the preliminary noise analysis summary, all four single-family homes within this subdivision are proposed to be within 600 feet of the SR-91 Freeway. The studies conclude that with the existing Caltrans sound wall, “the noise levels inside the lot where the proposed houses are to be constructed ranged from 63.1 to 71.1 dBA.” The study recommends the construction of a 10 foot high sound barrier wall around the large irregular yard area of Parcel 4, to absorb and reflect sound from the freeway. The location of the proposed sound barrier wall is depicted on the plan below. The noise study indicates a 10 foot high sound barrier wall should be sufficient to reduce noise levels on the property consistent with the Council Policy but would exceed the maximum sound barrier height of 6 feet contained in the policy and therefore, a waiver is being requested.. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring a final noise analysis prior to construction of the sound barrier wall or prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the first dwelling unit, whichever occurs first, to ensure compliance with noise attenuation standards

(18) A majority of the future housing opportunity sites in the City, as identified in the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan, would be located adjacent to major arterials, railroad tracks, and freeways. To apply more appropriate noise standards to these future housing projects, Planning Services Division staff is in the process of drafting an amendment to this Council Policy pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. This amendment will be agendized for Planning Commission review in the near future.

FINDINGS:

(19) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any variance is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any variance is granted by the Commission, it shall be shown:

(a)That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and

(b)That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.

(20) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tentative parcel map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan.

Further, the law requires that the Zoning Administrator make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denial of a parcel map:

1.That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.

2.That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.

3.That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

4.That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

5.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.

6.That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

1. 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."

RECOMMENDATION:

(21) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, that the Planning Commission approve the petitioner’s request by taking the following actions:

(a) By motion, approve a Negative Declaration for the project.

(b) By resolution, approve reclassification No. 2005-00163 to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) Zone to the RS-2 (Residential, Single-Family) Zone by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein.

(c) By resolution, approve Variance No. 2005-04653 for waiver of minimum lot width and lot area to construct four single-family residences by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein.

(d) By motion, approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-132 to establish a 4-lot, 4-unit detached single-family subdivision based upon the attached conditions of approval and that the design and improvement of the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan.

(e) By motion, approve a waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects adjacent to a freeway, as recommended by staff, to allow a sound barrier up to 10 feet in height based upon the finding of the noise study that the sound attenuation provided by the existing freeway sound wall together with the proposed wall would comply with the sound attenuation requirement of 65 dB CNEL.

Page 1