The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008-31 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-31 KO-09/17/08 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2008-16 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE STREET FRONTAGE STANDARDS IN THE TWO- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-2) ZONING DISTRICT IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A 1,113 SQUARE FOOT DWELLING UNIT WITH AN ATTACHED TWO-CAR GARAGE AT 2252 WEST JUDITH LANE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant is requesting approval of Variance No. 2008-16 to allow a reduction the street frontage standards in the Two-Family Residential (R-2) • zoning district in order to construct a 1,113 square foot dwelling unit with an attached two-car garage at 2252 West Judith Lane. B. Variance No. 2008-16 came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on September 22, 2008. C. Variance No. 2008-16 has been filed with the City of Santa Ana seeking to reduce the required street frontage from 75 feet of street frontage to 56 feet. D. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-247.7(b) requires a minimum of 75 feet of street frontage in order to construct a second single-family residence on an R-2 zoned property. E. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a variance upon making certain findings. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. • Resolution No. 2008-31 Page 1 of 5 Special circumstances exist in that this lots irregular shape, • due to its location on a quasi-cul-de-sac, has limited its street frontage to 56 feet although it is 19,339 square feet in area. This reduced street frontage has created a hardship by preventing the owner from building a second dwelling unit although the lots R-2 zoning and LR-7 General Plan land use designation allows for the second unit which will meet all of the other development standards in the R-2 zoning district. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The granting of this variance would allow the property owner the opportunity to develop this site with a second single- family residence that meets all other applicable development standards and which is a permitted use in the R-2 zoning district. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The proposed single-family dwelling will have no detrimental • impacts on the surrounding properties or neighborhood. The lot is being developed with an appropriately sized and scaled single-family residence that will harmoniously blend with the primarily two-family residential character of the neighborhood. The proposed residences location towards the rear of the property and use of an existing driveway for access will further help to minimize the units' visual impact from the street. These efforts were made to comply with Policy 2.2 of the Urban Design Element, which encourages development that is consistent with the scale, bulk and pattern of existing residential neighborhood. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the City's General Plan in any way as the land use designation of Low Density Residential (LR-7) would allow up to three units on the subject property while only two are proposed. This is consistent with Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element which encourages development that is compatible in scale and consistent with the character of the neighborhood. This project also supports Goal 4 of the Housing Element, which • Resolution No. 2008-31 Page 2 of 5 encourages the development of a variety of housing • opportunities to accommodate current and projected housing needs. F. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15303(a). This Class 3 exemption allows for the construction of single-family residences in a residential zone. As a result, no further environmental review is needed. Environmental Review No. 2007-215 will be filed for this project Section 2. The Planning Commission after conducting the public hearing hereby approves Variance No. 2008-16, as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, to allow a reduction in the required street frontage from 75 feet of street frontage to 56 feet. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated September 22, 2008 and exhibits attached thereto and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 22nd day of September, 2008 by the following vote: • AYES: Commissioners: Alderete, Betancourt, Gartner, Leo, Yrarrazaval (5) NOES: Commissioners: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners: De La Torre, Mill (2) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0) ,~~ _~~ f ~ Christoph r Leo Chairman • Resolution No. 2008-31 Page 3 of 5 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney • • CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, Martha Ramirez, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2008-31 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on September 22, 2008. Date: ~ '~ ~~ a Plan 'ng Commissio ecreta City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2008-31 Page 4 of 5 ~.~ Conditions for Approval for Variance No. 2008-16 Variance No. 2008-16 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below rip or to exercising the rights conferred by this variance. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the variance. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the variance. A. Planning Division 1. The project shall remain in compliance with Site Plan Review DP No. 07-81. 2. Any amendment to this variance must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At this time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the variance must be amended. • 3. Provide landscaping in accordance with submitted landscape plan. 4. Show on the final landscaping plan, that the concrete in the rear yard behind the existing building has been reduced so that it is just a driveway leading to the attached garage of the new residence. Replace removed concrete with landscaping consistent with City regulations. Modified by Planning Commission on September 22, 2008 • Resolution No. 2008-31 Page 5 of 5 Exhibit A PROOF OF SERVICE (C.C.P. SECTION 1013(a), 2015.5) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the aforesaid county; I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to the within action; my business address is 20 Civic Center Plaza, Ross Annex Second Floor, Santa Ana, California 92701. I served the foregoing document described as: Resolution No. 2008-31 (Variance No. 2008-16) in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows: AI Maciel 2017 West Alco Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92703 Vicente Piedra 2252 West Judith Lane Santa Ana, CA 92706 [ ] I caused to be delivered by courier, such envelope by hand to the office of the addressee(s). [X] BY MAIL I am readily familiar with my employer's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Santa Ana, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. [ ]The document was transmitted by facsimile transmission and was reported as complete and without error. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on 10/15/08 at Santa Ana, California. ,~-'~ MARTHA RAMI EZ •