Loading...
Item 5 - VAR 95-11 Ammnd to DR 94-07 Shea Homes - AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY - TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James l. Bowersox, City Man~ ^ INITIATED BY: John D. Fitch, Assistant City Manager11 t lit Reba Wright-Quastler, Director of Planning Services ~ DATE: December 19, 1995 SUBJECT: Variance 95-11 and Amendment to Development Review 94-07, Shea Homes, ADD 11 cant ABSTRACT A request to permit the substitution of the single-story plan for two-story plans on five lots, and encroachment into the required twenty-foot rear yard setback for Lots 30, 53 and 57 and required ten-foot street side yard setback for lots 53 and 57 in order to accommodate the placement of single-stories on these lots. The lots are located within Poway Oaks, located on Whispering Tree Lane and Poway Oaks Drive, in the RS-7 zone. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW - The subject project is considered exempt, under the provisions of the California - Environmental Quality Act, Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. FISCAL IMPACT None. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE - Public Notice was published in the Poway News Chieftain and mailed to 125 property owners within 500 feet of the project boundaries. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve Variance 95-11 and Amendment to Development Review 94-07, subject to the conditions contained in the attached proposed resolution. ACTI ON '" ""'" 1 of 9 DEe 1 9 1995 ITEM 5 .__.._------~-----,- -"~--.-.....--...--"-_._- -- - ---,...._"".,..,--,~._-_..._...---------""._-_.. AGENDA REPORT CITY OF POW A Y TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Man~. ~.\: INITIATED BY: John D. Fitch, Assistant City Manager ," d( Reba Wright-Quastler, Director of Planning Services ~ Marijo Van Dyke, Associate Planner DATE: December 19, 1995 MANDATORY ACTION DATE: January 16, 1996 SUBJECT: Variance 95-11 and Amendment to Develooment Review 94-07. Shea Homes. Aoolicant: A request to permit the substitution of the single-story plan for two-story plans on five lots, and encroachment into the required twenty-foot rear yard setback for lots 30, 53 and 57 and required ten-foot street side yard setback for Lots 53 and 57 in order to accoll1lllodate thEf placement of single-stories on these lots. The lots are located within Poway Oaks, located on Whispering Tree lane and Poway Oaks Drive, in the RS-7 zone. APN: 317-211-04 (Portions) BACKGROUND The plotting for the lots within the Poway Oaks development was originally - approved under Development Review DR 94-07. As sales have proceeded on Phases I and II, it appears that there is a greater than expected desire for the single- story model on the part of buyers. The developer is requesting approval to substitute an additional five single story models (Plan 1) for two story models originally plotted for Phases III and IV. In order to accomplish that goal, three lots will require rear yard setback variances and two of the same lots will also require street side yard setback variances. FINDINGS Two of the new Plan l's are proposed for the corners of Whispering Tree lane and Poway Oaks Drive, two are located along Whispering Tree Lane backing up to Poway Creek, and two back up to Pomerado Road. ACTION: 2 of 9 DEe 1 9 1995 ITEM 5 -, -- Agenda Report December 19, 1995 Page 2 The advantages of plotting single-story models on oPposin9 corner lots is that it reduces the vertical massing of structures as you approach the intersection, giving the appearance of greater space and variation of rooflines. The models being added on the south side of Whispering Tree Lane, Lots 42 and 44, will reduce the overall impact of the predominantly two-story models backing up to Metate lane. A 1'6" street side yard setback variance is requested for lot 53 and a 4 inch variance for lot 57. A rear yard setback variance of 3'10" is requested for Lot 30, a 2'10" for Lot 53, and a 3'4" for Lot 57. Staff concurs that these proposed changes will enhance the overall appearance of the project as well as offer opportunities to a broader range of buyers. The distribution of the lots proposed for the substitution will improve the variation in the street scene. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW - The subject project is considered exempt, under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. FISCAL IMPACT None. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE - Public Notice was published in the Poway News Chieftain and mailed to 125 property owners within 500 feet of the project boundaries. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve Variance 95-11 and Amendment to Oevelopment Review 94-07, subject to the conditions contained in the attached proposed resolution. JLB:JDF:RWQ:MVD:kls Attachments: A. Proposed Resolution B. Zoning and Location Map C. Proposed Site Plan E:\CITT\PLANNING\REPORT\VAR95".AGN 3 of 9 DEe 1 9 1995 ITEM 5 --- - -- -- - ._.__...._----_.~----_._--- RESOLUTION NO. P- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA APPROVING VARIANCE 95-11 AND AMENDING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-07 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 317-211-04 (PORTIONS) WHEREAS, Vari ance 95-11 and an amendment to Development Review 94-07 submitted by Shea Homes, Applicant, requests the substitution of the single-story floor plan for two-story plans on five lots, and encroachment into the required twenty-foot rear yard setback for Lots 30, 53 and 57, and the required ten-foot street side yard setback for Lots 53 and 57 of the Poway Oaks subdivision, in order to accommodate the placement of single-story homes on these lots, which are located on Whispering Tree Lane and Poway Oaks Drive, in the RS-7 zone;and WHEREAS, on December 19, 1995, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing to solicit comments from the public, both pro and con, relative to this application. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1: Environmental Findinos: The City Council finds that Variance 95-11 and amendment to Development Review 94-07, are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Categorical Exemption Class 5, as the project is a minor alteration to land use limitations. Section 2: Findinas: Variance 95-11 1. The approved project is consistent with the general plan in that it - proposes the construction of homes within lots which are designated for residential use. 2. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, and because of this, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classification. The special circumstances include the fact that the tract model proposed for the subject lots is a single-story model with a larger footprint, this making it difficult to site the home on the lot while meeting all the setback requirements. 3. That granting the variance or its modification is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zoning for which the variance is sought, in that customers of the Poway Oaks development are requesting that the Plan 1 Model be built more frequently. There are no single-story homes proposed on any of the nearby lots. Therefore, the mix of units is enhanced by the use of this model, but a variance is needed in order to fit them on the lots. 4 of 9 ATTACHMENT A DEe 1 9 1995 ITEM 5 Resolution No. P- Page 2 4. That granting the variance or its modification will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. S. That the granting of this variance does not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in that the property is located in an area where, although the lots are of similar size, there is some variance in lot dimension which precipitated a problem in plotting the new homes. 6. That the granting of thi s variance does not allow the use or activity which is not otherwi se expressly authorized by zoni ng development regulations governing the parcel or property in that the proposed project is the construction of new single-family homes in the Residential Single-Family 7 zone. Amendment to Develooment Review 94-07 1. The approved project is consistent with the general plan in that it proposed construction of single-family homes in an area designated for residential use. The use of additional single-story models is in keeping with the intent of the General Plan Goal of increasing the diversity of home designs available in tract developments. 2. That the approved project wi 11 not have an adverse aesthetic, health, safety, or architecturally related impact upon adjoining properties, because the lower rooflines on a greater number of homes will open up view corridors along Metate Lane and also within the interior neighborhood. - 3. That the approved project encourages the orderly and harmonious appearance of structures and property within the City, because the lower rooflines on a greater number of homes within the new development will help the new project to blend visually with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. That the approved project is in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance, except with regard to minimum building setbacks on three lots for which a variance has been approved. In all other respects the homes meet the development standards of the underlying zoning. Section 3: Citv Council Oecision: The City Counc il hereby approves Variance 95-11 and Amendment to Development Review 94-07, subject to the following conditions: Within 30 days of approval (1) the applicant shall submit in writing that all conditions of approval have been read and understood; and (2) the property owner shall execute a Covenant on Real Property. 5 of 9 DEe 1 9 1995 ITEM 5 - -_._-"-_.-._---~-- --------,~,,-_._------"~....._----_.~..._'-----_.- Resolution No. P- Page 3 COIIPLIANCE IIITH THE FOllOIIING CONDITIONS IS REQUIRED. COMPLIANCE SHAll BE APPROVED BY THE DEPARTIIENT OF PLANNING SERVICES. SITE DEVElOPMENT 1. Site shall be developed in accordance with the amended site plans on file in the Planning Services Department and the conditions contained herein. 2. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of buildin9 permit issuance. 3. All conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. P-95-10 which approved Development Review 94-07, shall remain in full force and effect. 4. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within two years from the date of project approval. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Poway, State of California, this 19th day of December, 1995. - Don Higginson, Mayor ATTEST: - Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk DEe 1 9 1995 ITEM 5 6 of 9 \ - - \ I - RR-A PF -------- --1~-\---1 ) i-Oj 1\ \ I - - SABRE SPRINGS 2S - PC CITY OF POW A Y ITEM: @ SCALE, TIT L E: ZCNING & I.O:ATICN IW' "NCNE A TT ACHMENT : B 7 of 9 DEe 1 9 1995 ITEM 5 ------- _._--------- - ~- - '[JIG': I II ,. . II I '," I II ff1 ~'!~:i:i w .I~'~IJI~ o f~ I r I j . I' a tL j j f.- lBi J j , !L · I1Il ";-1/ ," ~ III II I ~ '--' I~-"';;;;J,,;; - ~ ::\ ! If' "'! '1 h' !:l . pl'iu I i;i~ !rJ ~ I ~~ II ~ i~f -L~f ~ll' ~ I ~': ' ' r ;,:. , < I - - w, ~ .' ~. '. " .." w;t ~ ~ ~. fi:;t.; l: II, {'fA .. inllll I, . \ · I!. ., -,~.. . i-t:( ,01"1. '.!l ' ( \. .l.U"" ~ '~"", ...~ r~.L:~~ "y 1- ' - I 1'~ ,~ ,.'~. ... ~ ..L--'::::::~', . '1,...1., .' 3N1Kl '../""O>..-:?" !QI Iii, tar,- "'j- '" oJ" ! S~"O ^~ >,,~_'" "'\-;--f/ ' ~~f ... . -...l.. , _ ~ , . c ; -~ ~:-..~' j~l; 1J.~: r I f~' ~~~; 1-. _ " J I... ~ 11\,' il · -/1 ~. n I' Eo- ('I') ~k5 I ~~f. ~~l I. !Ii 1:, z ; - ~..- - ~'.::-;-' :- " r.;I W · 'II ) - Iill'-.-.., /1 'l~ _ (J) II ~~f_~I....;J1 ~~~4. ~..... ~, '/. 0 <C !: I "" ='. I'lL., F.'::!c- oh. "'~ _ ~ :r ~ - -::::~ ~ '-T_ -::.-" ; ", I"' I ,~. J ~'l ~ 0.. ~ ~r-. ,.V1i' ~!; I \.il i,~ -; ~~ ~ ~ E~f:i ,. '-ltl ~ ill.t.h ~'. Ii , Ii,! I I -.. .. - L, , ;t:;. I , ,I' \H-~-. ,,~\~ = ~, # , " . IE (.!J I 1*1 - Lr L ~a ~- lon'- :;;;: - ~,z4 /11 '1. ,-~. :- r\ ,'~~ ~ -'. /11 !li i, "l I. ~ C' '. .F', tr -'''~''h '" 11 l:i! '... - .. ' I,): 15..LJ. t ~.- ~. ,___ ~ \ " i ui ~~' -~ ~ / ~ ...;:' I 1,' l -!. . ,v wt.! I ...-J . -<l) ,., ~ . 1\ , []"':rl E~f U l.( - I I I l \, · ~.~. .. I~l~ / .... l~1 t! r- ~ L Y/~:~ 1:1!1 · > .. r' Ir .. b i: ~t JIl / rr:Hf ~ &! L.::-;x. I l'l~fi ' . ~I - ~ .. . I l'I!1111 . V '. · · ~ IiJ.H ~!rr - I' .JIDIlli ~ !! ~ ...II.em.. 5 8 of 9 . ilj :i- ,~ .'1 \ ~ !T: > ~l ' f6 ! =a i" 1;; , ! j ~ N Ln " H ~!~ I ! I- I J I -- I I" II ~ II" I d ~ ~ I ,~ i ~. I I ~ ~ I ,~ ![JlI ; .. I ."-",,,-. \11 . , i , i TO I . - ~ ~ -w ~ l~ w CIJ ' "...-_.-........-~, ~, <( 'C . W' II:t ::I: f- a. ~ ::E ~II .-,- Ii!' - IIi' f' - ilij I I (I i I', 11, , I t:, -' ..., I - ~ l~ I I . '.rn... It I , 1;; .....- n W I " II' f .' I"fin . ' ~ III .. I ill!fil l'rlI! ,Ih! z ",rw:s 111:~! , IlnUI ! 9 of 9 5 ~._--_._~~._._--"--- .------. ._-~._.