02-21-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RECONVENED - 6:15 P.M. - All Councilmembers present except Councilmember Richardson WORK STUDY SESSION Planning and Building Agency Executive Director Robyn Uptegraff reviewed the agenda for the work study session and a proposed schedule of five additional study sessions relating to development policies and standards for the community. Mayor Pulido encouraged audience members to comment or question any part of staff's presentation. Planning Manager Ken Adams outlined the Planning Department's vision for Santa Ana in the year 2020 through a verbal tour of the City from the southwest quadrant along major arterials to Mainplace in the north, and described amenities and infrastructure envisioned in seven major districts. He indicated that while staff was primarily responsible for implementation, the purpose of the current work study sessions was to ensure that staff and the Council were in congruence on the 25-year plan. Adams went on to review development regulations since 1984, noting that 35 planning- related ordinances had been adopted revising City's planning and zoning standards. Councilmembers identified problems relating to stringent application of the standards. Councilmember Mills requested staff provide the Council with a copy of Planning's architectural policies and design standards. Senior Planner Charles View briefed the Council concerning various aspects of the City's Nonconforming Code including: historic background, Santa Ana's nonconforming standards compared to other cities', standards imposed by other City agencies when a use changed, and case studies illustrating application of the nonconforming code. He clarified that while a "use" on a property might have been legal at one time, Santa Ana Municipal Code or statutory changes such as increased parking requirements could cause a use not to be in conformance with current standards resulting in a "legal nonconforming use." View explained that a property could exist in that state indefinitely, but that when a property owner vacated a use for more than a 12-month period, or proposed to rehabilitate or expand a building beyond a certain level, that property became subject to current Code requirements. He showed slides demonstrating upgraded properties resulting from application of the nonconforming code. View distributed a memo proposing several changes to the Nonconforming Code which would allow staff more discretion in applying standards. Coun¢ilmembers discussed the issues at length. Uptegmff emphasized the need for Council and staff to have a clear understanding regarding application of nonconforming standards to minimize confusion and appeals to the Planning Commission and City Council. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 47 FEBRUARY 21, 1995