Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 01-C0620 RESOLUTION NO. 01-C62 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE VARIANCE NO. V-2001-01 FOR A REDUCTION IN THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK AND A REDUCTION IN THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR A NEW FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE- THROUGH SERVICE AT 126 NORTH AZUSA AVENUE WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Azusa has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held a public hearing on May 30, 2001, on the application of Jack In The Box Inc. c/o Lorenzo Reyes with respect to the requested Variance No. V-2001-01. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after carefully considering all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case as presented at the public hearing, conditionally approved a variance for a reduction in required front yard setback and a reduction in the required parking for a new fast-food restaurant with drive-through service. WHEREAS, on June 18, 2001, in response to a complaint by the owner of the Western Inn, the City Council directed staff to schedule this item for a subsequent City Council public hearing to determine whether the Planning Commission's decision should be overturned or modified. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Azusa has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held a public hearing on July 16,200 1, on the application of Jack In The Box Inc. c/o Lorenzo Reyes with respect to the requested Variance No. V-2001-01. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and the finding has been made that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 2: That in accordance with Section 88-320 of the Azusa Municipal Code, it is found that the project would not unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity, and would not adversely affect the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, and provided the conditions of approval are adhered to, the City Council hereby approves said Variance based on the following findings: 1. That the strict application of this chapter would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this chapter. Strict adherence to the development standards with regards to parking and the front yard setback would result in a design which would be inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Scenic Highways, Circulation and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. Since the project site is located along Urban Route 39, a designated scenic highway and an important City corridor; and, because the site is located within the Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area, aesthetics and good design play a critical role in the development of the site. Without the variance to reduce the front yard setback, placement of the drive-through would most likely be located at the front or side of the lot, which would make it more visible from the public right-of-way. The proposed design, however, places the drive- through at the rear of the lot and places the building closer to the sidewalk, which is conducive to a 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 01-C62 VARIANCE NO. V-2001-01 PAGE 2 of 4 pedestrian -oriented design and visuallymore appealing. Furthermore, without the variance to reduce the required parking, more paving would be needed to accommodate the additional 5 parking spaces, which would result in less area for landscaping. To emphasize the important role of landscaping on a key City corridor, the Circulation Element states that "The application of landscape treatment, as a unifying and softening element throughout the street system, guides efforts for visual improvement." To be sure, granting of this variance is essential to implementing some of the goals and objectives of the General Plan. 2. That there are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or the intended use or development of the property do not apply generally to other property in the same zone or neighborhood. The subject lot is currently undeveloped and unpaved and research indicates that no prior building permits have been issued for the lot. Because it is flanked by existing development to the north, south, east and west, development of this interior lot would be considered an infill project. Although infill developments are not normally considered exceptional circumstances, the fact that the project site is located along a designated scenic highway (Urban Route 39), is within the Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area and is an infill project, means that good design and aesthetics play an important role in promoting the goals and objectives of the Scenic Highways, Circulation and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. Specifically, these three Elements stress the importance of visual enhancements along important corridors through the use of landscaping, appropriate architecture and good design. To be sure, granting the variance to reduce the required parking allows a visually pleasing design which maximizes landscaping while minimizing the amount of paving on the lot. Furthermore, allowing a reduced front yard setback encourages a pedestrian -oriented design and allows more space in the rear of the lot for the placement of the drive-through. 3. That the granting of such a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the zone or neighborhood in which the property is located. The granting of the variance relating to the reduction of the required parking from 35 spaces to 30 spaces will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to otherproperties in the vicinity since street parking is available along Azusa Avenue and because regular bus service is provided along Azusa Avenue. By reducing the required parking by 5 spaces, additional landscaping can be accommodated on the site which contributes to "street aesthetics," a concept introduced in the Circulation Element of the General Plan which promotes street enhancements and visual improvement. The proposed design, which concentrates on providing landscaping along public views, promotes this concept. Furthermore, the granting of the variance relating to the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet will not have detrimental effects to the public welfare or injurious to other properties within the vicinity because the reduced front setback supports the revitalization efforts within the Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area which encourages a more pedestrian orientation within the project area (in this case, along Azusa Avenue). Additionally, a reduced front setback allows the drive-through to be located at the rear of the lot, as opposed to the side or front of the lot, further promoting a more pedestrian orientation (rather than a vehicle orientation) and a more aesthetically pleasing design. 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 01-C62 VARIANCE NO. V-2001-01 PAGE 3 of 4 4. That the granting of such a variance will not be contrary to the objective of any part of the General Plan. The granting of this variance will not conflict with the goals, policies or objectives of any part of the General Plan. Contrarily, the granting of this variance will support the goals and objectives of the Scenic Highways and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. The project site is situated along a designated scenic highway, Urban Route 39 (Azusa Ave.), and one of the goals of the Scenic Highways Element is to "enhance the scenic resources within scenic corridors." Moreover, one of the objectives of this Element is to "regulate the quality of development within corridors of designated scenic roadways." With these aims in mind, the reduction of required parking from 35 spaces to 30 stalls allows for a more aesthetically pleasing design of the site which accommodates more landscaping and less paving. Additionally, the reduction in the required front yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet allows the drive- through to be placed in the rear of the site, as opposed to the more visible (and less aesthetically pleasing) placement along the side or front portion of the lot. Similarly, granting the variance for reduced parking and a reduced front yard setback further supports one of the goals of the Land Use Element which is to "encourage the revitalization of the central downtown business district." Because the project is an infill project located within the Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area, good architectural design and attractive landscaping are critical to the realization of this goal. As stated above, a reduction in the required parking and front yard setback allows for better site design which supports more landscaping, less paving and a drive-through which can be accommodated at the rear (and less visible) portion of the site. SECTION 3: Based on the aforementioned findings, the City Council does hereby approve Variance No. V-2001-01, for the property located at 126 North Azusa Avenue, subject to the conditions attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and incorporated herein by reference, as though set out in full and at length. SECTION 4: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 16 day of July 2001. A CRUZ -MADRID, MAYOR I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Azusa at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 16 day of July 2001 by the following vote of the Council: 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 01-C62 VARIANCE NO. V-2001-01 PAGE 4of4 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Hardison, Stanford, Rocha, Chagnon, NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 'Madrid ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None APPROVED AS TO FORM: