Zoning Administrator. Agenda Item

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Zoning Administrator. Agenda Item"

Richard Leonard
5 years ago
Views:

1 Zoning Administrator Agenda Item August 6, 2014 TO: THRU: FROM: Rick Otto Zoning Administrator Leslie Aranda Roseberry Planning Manager Chad Ortlieb Senior Planner SUBJECT PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE NO. VAR , GOLSHANI RESIDENCE, 1902 N. ZION STREET SUMMARY The applicant proposes to construct two 8-foot tall columnar features at the front property line in connection with a pronounced property entry stairway and, two slope-stepping, staggered, retaining walls. A retaining wall with a railing on it alongside the left side of the property entry stairs and, the innermost retaining wall with a wrought iron or tube steel fence on it are the two features that require a Variance because they are over 42 inches high. The 8-foot columns do not require a Variance because they are not considered walls or accessory structures by definition of the Orange Municipal Code and pursuant to a determination of the Community Development Director. RECOMMENDED ACTION Approve Variance No. VAR AUTHORIZATION/GUIDELINES Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Section D.3. authorizes the Zoning Administrator to review and take action on the requested variance for a waiver of wall height requirements. The columns proposed may be considered part of the greater retaining wall scheme for the project.

2 Page 2 PUBLIC NOTICE On July 24, 2014, the City sent a Public Hearing Notice to a total of 31 property owners/tenants within a 300-foot radius of the project site and posted the site with notice of the hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Categorical Exemption: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines (Class 3 New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) because the project is creating accessory retaining walls and associated improvements for a front yard hardscape/landscape theme. There is no public review required. PROJECT BACKGROUND Applicant: Property Owner: Property Location: Existing General Plan Land Use Element designation: Existing Zoning Classification: Specific Plan/PC: Site Size: Circulation: Existing conditions: Surrounding land uses and Zoning: Previous Applications/Entitlements: Mike Golshani Mike Golshani 1902 N. Zion Street Low Density Residential 2-6 du/ac (LDR) Single Family Residential, 6,000 square foot minimum lot size (R-1-6) None 9,148 square feet Access from N. Zion Street The site is developed with an existing single family residence. The property previously exhibited a retaining wall at the front property line. The residence is sited at the top of a mild slope, a characteristic limiting a flat front yard area more so than most properties on Zion Street and surrounding streets. All surrounding zones and uses are the same as the subject property. None applicable. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes to construct two 8-foot tall columnar features along the front property line in connection with a pronounced property entry stairway and, two slope-stepping, staggered, retaining walls. The retaining wall with a railing on it alongside the left side of the property entry stairs and, the innermost retaining wall with a wrought-iron or tube-steel fence on it are the two features that

3 Page 3 require a Variance because they are over 42 inches high. The 8-foot columns do not require a Variance because they are not considered walls or accessory structures by definition of the Orange Municipal Code and pursuant to a determination of the Community Development Director. The columns and exterior visible retaining walls would be constructed of concrete masonry brick with a flagstone exterior to match the adjacent mailbox pedestal on the sidewalk. The retaining walls will be located between the columns at the left side of the property. The first retaining wall closest to the sidewalk will be 2.5 feet tall from sidewalk grade and exhibit curvature inward to the property but will connect at the ends with the columns. The second retaining wall will be stepped back 2.5 feet from the first retaining wall, will be 3 feet, 11 inches tall from sidewalk grade, will match the curvature of the first retaining wall, will connect with the columns at the ends, and will have a threefoot tall wrought iron or tube steel fence on top of it. The Orange Municipal Code (Section D.) requires a 5-foot separation between walls unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director. For this instance, the Community Development Director has approved the 2.5 foot distance separation for the retaining walls. Other components of the project not subject to the Variance include the 8-foot tall columns, stair end columns, support railings under 42 inches high, a driveway adjacent column at the right side of the property elevation, a retaining wall at the right side of the property elevation, and a 36-inch high wrought-iron or tube-steel fence along the left side property line. The columns and retaining walls would also be clad in flagstone to match the site-adjacent mailbox pedestal. Development Standards Required Proposed Code Section Fence height Front yard/first 20 feet 3.5 feet maximum height Two project components require a Variance: 1) An innermost retaining wall with wrought-iron or tube-steel fencing on top of it that together total about 4.5 feet from soil level of the first retaining wall. 2) A property entry stairway encased on one side by a retaining wall with wrought-iron or tube-steel fencing on top of it that together total about 6.5 feet from sidewalk grade. Section

4 Page 4 APPLICATION(S) REQUESTED/ REQUIRED FINDINGS Variance: The applicant is requesting a Variance from the Orange Municipal Code (Section B.) to allow a 6.5 foot tall retaining wall with a railing on it alongside the left side of the property entry stairs and, an approximately 4.5 foot tall innermost retaining wall with a wroughtiron or tube-steel fence on it. Required Findings: 1. 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 enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. The property slope is the justification for the Variance. Most properties in the City of Orange with single family residential zoning, including most of the properties in the tract which the subject property is located in, have a front yard area that is relatively flat. The proposed application is seeking to establish a flat front yard area through the use of staggered retaining walls and, columns that support the retaining walls and associated perimeter wrought-iron or tube-steel fence. At the point where the property would be rendered flat by the retaining wall system, the only features that will be above grade will be the 36-inch high wrought-iron or tube-steel fence feature (which would otherwise be code compliant on any other property with a flat grade) and the two columns which will be 4-feet, 1-inch above grade. At the point where the retaining walls render the front yard flat, the 4-feet, 1-inch extension of the columns would be 7-inches higher than the 42-inch wall height maximum of the municipal code. However, the decorative, slopeembedded nature of the columns are not considered walls or accessory structures and, are for the purpose of aesthetically embellishing the end caps of the retaining wall scheme. The columns are authorized without a Variance under determining authority of the Community Development Director. The applicant is not seeking a design that is inconsistent with an open street scene in that the retaining walls are staggered to step up the grade differential between the sidewalk and the house. The wrought-iron or tube steel fence on top of the retaining walls can be seen through. The end columns accentuate the ends of the retaining walls and mark the grade differential. Hence, the project will not create a mass of wall at the street front and a gradation of landscaped frontage will result, encapsulated by end columns. 2. The variance granted shall be subject to such conditions which will assure that the authorized adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is located. As stated in the above finding, the use of the columns, retaining walls, and metal cap fence would provide the property with a flat front yard area similar to most other

5 Page 5 properties in the tract and in the City. Hence, the granting of the Variance will not be a special privilege rather, the Variance will allow the property to enjoy a flat front yard area with a wrought iron or tube steel fence that is 36-inches tall from the flat grade that would be created from retaining wall use. Fences under 42-inches high are permitted in front yards. Hence, the property owner would be enjoying a yard perimeter fence around the flat area of the front yard in the same manner that other properties with flat front yards could enjoy a fence or wall 42-inches high or less in their yards. The project will not create a mass of wall at the street front and a gradation of landscaped frontage will result, encapsulated by end columns. ANALYSIS/STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES Issue 1 Column Height: In finding Number 1 above, staff states that At the point where the property would be rendered flat by the retaining wall system, the only features that will be above grade will be the 36-inch high wrought-iron or tube-steel fence feature (which would otherwise be code compliant on any other property with a flat grade) and the two columns which will be 4-feet, 1-inch above grade. At the point where the retaining walls render the front yard flat, the 4-feet, 1-inch extension of the columns would be 7-inches higher than the 42-inch wall height maximum of the municipal code. However, the decorative, slope-embedded nature of the columns are not considered walls or accessory structures and, are for the purpose of aesthetically embellishing the end caps of the retaining wall scheme. The columns are authorized without a Variance under determining authority of the Community Development Director. Under the Orange Municipal Code (OMC), columns are structures but columns are not defined as a wall, building or accessory structure because they do not have a roof and are not intended for shelter or enclosure. Therefore, columns can t be regulated by the setback provisions of the OMC for accessory structures nor can columns be considered walls regulated by the wall height regulations of the OMC. Therefore, the Community Development Director has determined that the subject columns are appropriate for this project and a Variance is not required. However, any future column requests for other properties in the City that appear to be exceeding neighborhood character should to be brought to the Community Director for a determination of adherence the spirit and intent of the OMC and General Plan until such time that the City Council approves language for the OMC to specifically address columns. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION Staff Review Committee: The Staff Review Committee did not review the project because there were no matters outside of the Planning Division purview.

6 Page 6 ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS Attachments to Report: 1. Recommended Zoning Administrator Action Letter with recommended conditions 2. Vicinity Map 3. Site Photos 4. Applicant Justification Letter Exhibits provided to the Zoning Administrator: A. Submitted Plans and Exhibits date stamped August 6, 2014

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: MAY 1, 2013 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Fox and Members of the Design Review Committee Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Jennifer Le, Senior