Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-20GAS: 7/10/00 ,~,, ;~,. RESOLUTION NO.00-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CONIlVIISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO VARIANCE NO. 98-OS FOR THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS IN THE PARKING LOT AND DENYING AN AMENDMENT FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS IN THE FRONT AND SIDE YARD FOR A CHURCH LOCATED AT 4821 WEST FIFTH STREET WHEREAS, this Commission held a public hearing on June 12, 2000, on an amendment to Variance Application No. 98-05, for relief from landscape requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING CONIlVIISION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: 1. Based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing this Commission finds and determines as follows: • A. 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 provision of the chapter; Because of the physical constraints of the narrow parcel, the variance permitted a reduction in the setbacks abutting the parking area in order for the project to meet the required parking count for a church use. The location of the building does meet the required setbacks on Fifth Street the front setback is 20 feet and on Rosita Street the side yard setback is 15 feet. The required setbacks must be landscaped with material identified in the code. The stamped concrete is not listed as an approved material. The approved project plans included a landscape plan submitted by the applicant that met the City's landscape requirements. The property size, shape, and building configuration remain the same as at the time the plans were approved by the City Council. B. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights; • 1 . The variance granted relief from the code requirements for setbacks in order to accommodate the development of this parcel. Approving the proposed amendment for the parking lot setbacks allows the applicant to maintain the existing setbacks and parking count rather than the financial burden of removing 6 inches to 2 feet of concrete. Denying the proposed amendment for the front and side yard setback brings the property into compliance with the approved building plans and does not prevent the use from continuing on the site or interfere with the members of the Huong Tick Temple from the enjoyment of the property. C. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property; The landscape setback requirements for a church use in a residential zone were enacted to promote visual linkages with the residential development pattern and buffer the use from the neighborhood. There is sufficient area within the existing parking lot setback to accommodate the landscaping approved for this area. The front yard setback for a church use in asingle-family residential zone is the same as required in the zone. The side yard setbacks and landscape requirements are based on the commercial standards that are greater than the residential • standards. The proposed changes in the front and side yard setbacks reduce the amount of landscaping originally approved by the City resulting in a reduction in the visual buffer protecting the surrounding properties. D. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the city; The proposed setback reduction along the perimeter of the parking lot will not reduce the landscape buffer or protection of the neighborhood since the depth of the setbacks remain sufficient to install the required type and number of landscape materials per code. However, the reduction in the landscaping in the front and side yard setbacks significantly reduces the buffer between the neighborhood and the church use. Therefore, the reduction in landscaped area does not preserve and protect the neighborhood as stated in the General Plan Land Use Element's policy plan. 2. Amendment to Variance No. 98-OS is approved in part, as conditioned, and denied in part, based upon the aforementioned findings. 2 . ADOPTED this ~2.-day of Ti TNF. , 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Mondo, Nalle, Solorio, Doughty, Verino, Cribb, and Richardson NOES: Commissioners None ABSENT: Commissioners None ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners None ATTEST: ~~ Sharon McCain Johnson Planning Commission Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: s ~- G A. hea Assist ttorne • 3