Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 2004-123 - Uphold Planning appeal . . RESOLUTION NO. 2004-123 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING ADOPTING DETAILED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT THE JUNE 21, 2004, CITY COUNCIL DECISION TO UPHOLD THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION AND DENY TENT A TIVE SUBDIVISION MAP APPLICATION S-9-03 AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN PD-3-03. WHEREAS, on June 21,2004, after considering the environmental Mitigated Negative Declaration and its supporting documentation and the staff report and other information in the record for Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-9-03 and Planned Development Plan PD-3-03 (Memory Park Subdivision and Planned Development Plan) and after considering all testimonial and written evidence submitted prior to and during the public hearing, the City Council voted to uphold the appeal and reverse the decision of the Planning Commission to approve Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-9-03 and Planned Development Plan PD-3-03; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed Planning staff to return to a subsequent Council meeting with detailed findings to support the June 21, 2004, decision; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redding that the findings of fact attached as Atta.chment "A" are appropriate and proper to support the preliminary decision made on June 21, 2004, which upholds the appeal and reverses the decision of the Planning Commission and denies Tentative Subdivision Map ApplicationS-9-03 and Planned Development Plan PD-3-03 for the reasons as set forth in the findings of fact. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was introduced, read, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on .the 20th day of July, 2004, by the following vote: A YES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Cibula, Kight, Mathena, and Stegall None N 71 R, Mayor ATTEST: FORM APPROVED: ~. I. " : ~ ... " LYNETTE M. FREDIANI, Interim City Attorney ~ ~.- . CONNIE stROHMA. ~Eity Clerk By:/3:'~g/ BARRY E. DEW AL T, Assistant City Attorney 0- ~ 1 - IV VJ -::: ., . " . . ATTACHMENT "A" FINDINGS ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The City Council has determined that the subject project cannot be approved. The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to projects which are disapproved. The decision to deny Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-9-03 and Planned Development Plan PD-3-03 is therefore statutorily exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15270, "Projects Which are Disapproved," of the California Environmental Quality Act. No action is taken on the Negative Declaration for the project. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAp FINDINGS (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66474) Pursuant to Government Code 966474, the City Council must deny approval of a tentative map if it makes any of the following fIndings: 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451. Although the proposed tentative subdivision map density is consistent with the General Plan designation of the property, which is "Residential, 2 to 3.5 units per acre," the map as designed is not consistent with the character of the existing neighborhood as required by the City of Redding General Plan Guiding Principles, which are to "Promote quality building that enhances community identity and complements neighborhood character." This determination is based on the following facts: a. The existing neighborhood character is established by the type and style of development in the area east of Farm House Lane, west of the Sacramento River, south of Nicolet Lane, and north of South Bonnyview Road. This area reflects the existing boundaries of the "RS-3" zoning district, with the exclusion of developments that have primary street access directly from East BOlmyview Road. The character of the residential development in the area surrounding the project site is one of open and accessible public subdivisions, providing unrestricted. access throughout the area. The project is designed as an inward- looking private development with private streets, alleys, and other improvements. All common facilities within the bounds of the project are designed for the sole purpose of serving only the residents of the project. b. The average density in this area is 1.3 units per acre, as depicted on Exhibit 1 attached hereto. The proposed lot sizes in the project development average approximately 12,444 square feet in area, while the average lot size in the surrounding area, as defIned in Finding 1.A. above, averages approximately 33,000 square feet in area. c. According to the City of Redding Zoning Code, Section 18.31.030(B), in order to attain an increase in density, it must be demonstrated that the adjusted density is acceptable considering the following factors: site topography; public-street access; availability of utilities; and existing neighborhood characteristics, including the average density of surrounding development. As demonstrated by the oral and written evidence submitted Attachment "A" Findings, S-9-03/PD-3-03 Page 2 . . at the public hearing, the low-density residential development of the area establishes a semi-rural character that is reflected in parcels which are generally larger in size than the proposed project; rural uses, such as barns, small-scale domestic animal-keeping; and substantial undeveloped areas of meadow, pasture, and woodland. The proposed tentative map is not compatible with the low-density development of the neighborhood because it proposes a density of3.5 units per acre, which significantly exceeds the average density of 1.3 units per acre in the surrounding neighborhood. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Based on the whole of the record, the City Council has determined that the design or improvements of the proposed subdivision are not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Options for redesign of the project are possible to address these issues; however, the applicant has chosen not to pursue this option. Specifically, the following design characteristics of the project will have adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood and properties for the reasons as set forth below: a. The design of the project incorporates the use of perimeter alleys along the west, north, and east property linl~s. The design of the alleys will route vehicle traffic serving the development along the side and rear property of adjacent developed lots. By routing vehicular traffic along the perimeter of the project, adjacent developed lots will be impacted by vehicular noise activity along the adjacent property lines. Therefore, the proposed project design is inconsistent with the General Plan as follows: (1) General Plan Goal CDD9, which directs that projects should "preserve existing community character and fabric and promote the development of livable and cohesive neighborhoods and character." (2) General Plan Policy CDD9C, which states in part, ". . . Promote compatibility between land uses by minimizing impacts to privacy, views, and noise and from intrusion of nonneighborhood traffic. (3) Redding Municipal Code Section 17.33.010, which states that "in residential subdivisions, the street systems shall be designed to serve the needs of the neighborhood [emphasis added] and to discourage use by through traffic." b. As proposed, garages will line the alleys and will face towards adjacent development, thereby directing noise from alley and garage activity towards the adjacent properties. The adjacent developed lots will be impacted by alley and garage activity and noise associated with the proposed design. To partially address this issue, a solid noise- attenuating fence or harrier is proposed along the property lines. These design elements are inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Redding General Plan and its implementing measures, including the Redding Municipal Code. Specifically: (1) General Plan Goal CDD9, which directs that projects should "preserve existing community character and fabric and promote the development of livable and cohesive neighborhoods and character." Attachment "A" Findings, S-9-03/PD-3-03 Page 3 ,'~ -., -.,; '" I" : ...~-: ." -. '''~,- . - .~.;,; n__ . . . (2) General Plan Policy CDD9C, which states in part, ". . . Promote compatibility between land uses by minimizing impacts to privacy, views, and noise and from intrusion of nonneighborhood traffic. (3) General Plan PolicyNIF, which states in part, "Discourage the use of noise barriers and walls constructed exclusively for noise attenuation purposes, where possible..."; and General Phm Policy NID "Encourage the use of site planning and building materials Idesign as primary methods of noise attenuation." (4) Redding Municipal Code Section 17.33.010, which states that "in residential subdivisions, the street systems shall be designed to serve the needs of the neighborhood [emphasis added] and to discourage use by through traffic." c. The alleys will only be accessible from the project and will not be available for use by adjacent properties, providing no benefit of the alleys to the surrounding property, which is inconsistent with General Plan implementation measures as set forth in Municipal Code Section 17.33.010, which states that "in residential subdivisions, the street systems shall be designed to se:rve the needs of the neighborhood and to discourage use by through traffic. " d. The vehicular circulation of the surrounding neighborhood does not include the use of alleys, and as described herein, their use in the project would not be consistent with the existing or planned land use character of the surrounding area. Specifically: (1) General Plan Goal CDD9, which directs that projects should "preserve existing community character and fabric and promote the development of livable and cohesive neighborhoods and character." (2) General Plan Policy CDD9C, which states in part, ". . . Promote compatibility between land uses by minimizing impacts to privacy, views, and noise and from intrusion of nonneighborhood traffic. (3) Redding Municipal Code Section 17.33.010, which states that "in residential subdivisions, the street systems shall be designed to serve the needs of the neighborhood [emphasis added] and to discourage use by through traffic." 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. Although, the project's density is within the range allowed by the General Plan, the project is not physically suitable to accommodate this type of project with regard to density without standard modifications as discussed. further in response to Finding 1 above and as set forth below. a. Section 18.53.050, "Modifications to Standards ofthis Code." This code section specifies that the approving body may approve a Planned Development Plan that deviates from the lot size, setback, height, and other physical limitations defined in the base district or other provisions of the Zoning Code provided that the approving body makes the required Planned Development Overlay District findings. Attachment "A" Findings. S-9-03/PD-3-03 Page 4 . . b. Lot Width. Proposed Lots 4,6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, and 15 are less than the required 70 feet lot width required under the "RS-3" zoning district. c. Setback. The garages on Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 have less than the required 25-foot backup area for covered spaces required under Code Section 18.41.070A. d. Improvements. Per City Street Standard 112.00, the required width for a local street is 56 feet. The project design proposes a street varying from 28 feet to 26 feet on-site. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINDINGS (REDDING ZoNING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 18.53.060) The City Council must deny th(~ planned development plan if one or more of the criteria set forth in Redding Zoning Ordinance are not met. The pertinent criteria set forth in Redding Zoning Ordinance Section 18.53.060 ar,e as follows: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, standards, and programs of this code and of the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, including density and intensity limitations that apply. This element is not met because the project is not consistent with the character of the existing neighborhood with regard to density or design. This determination is based on the aforementioned facts adopted herein in Tentative Map Findings 1 and 2. 2. The site for the proposed development is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and all yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls andfences, parking area, loading areas, landscape, and other features required. The project's depth limits the number of potential lots. In order to increase the number of potential lots to an amount greater than the maximum base density for this project site (three units per acre), the proposal requires exceptions to the typical subdivision regulations. This element is not met because the proposed density of the project dictates the need to approve exceptions to the typical subdivision yard, setback, and improvement requirements as established in the Ordinances of the City of Redding. As a result, the project is specifically inconsistent with the following ordinance provisions: a. Section 18.53.050, "Modifications to Standards ofthis Code." This code section specifies that the approving body may approve a Planned Development Plan that deviates from the lot size, setback, height, and other physical limitations defined in the base district or other provisions of the Zoning Code provided that the approving body makes the required Planned Development Overlay District findings. b. Lot Width. Proposed Lots 4,6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, and 15 are less than the required 70 feet lot width required under the "RS-3" zoning district. c. Setback. The garages on Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 have less than the required 25-foot backup area for covered spaces required under Code Section 18.41.070A. d. Improvements. Per City Street Standard 112.00, the required width for a local street is 56 feet. The project design proposes a street varying from 28 feet to 26 feet on-site. Attachment "A" Findings, S-9-03/PD-3-03 Page 5 . , . . 3. The proposed development, as conditioned, will have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding property or the permitted use thereof and will not be compatible with the existing and planned land use character of the surrounding area. This element is not met because the design characteristics of the proposed project will have substantial adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood and properties and are not compatible with the existing character of the surrounding area. This determination is based on the aforementioned facts adopted herein in Tentative Map Findings 1 and 2 and incorporated herein by reference. Based on items of the Tentative Subdivision Map Findings and the Planned Development Findings as identified above, the proposed project is inconsistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the policies and requirements of the Redding General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the City Council finds and determines that, based on the whole record and upon substantial evidence, Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-9-03, Memory Park Subdivision, and Planned Development Plan PD-3-03 is not consistent with all the provisions of the City of Redding General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and is hereby denied. AITACHMENT: Neighborhood density map 7-14-04 RESOICC\S903-PD303-MemoryPark-Rev-L T-CC.wpd Attachment "A" Findings. S-9-03/PD-3-03 Page 6 . . ~ SOURCE: GIS DIVISION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP MTG. DATE: ~1~ ITEM: 4- 1,(<0) ATTACHMENT: A.I I o 200 400 FEET .J 600 5-09-03 & PD-03-03 \ MEMORY PARK 5609 KOFFORD LANE APN. 048-360-020 DWG. NO: \PlANNING\ 50903 DATE PRODUCED: AUGUST 13, 2003