Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 - March 15 APPROVED MINUTES March 15,2004 Monday - 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission City of Orange PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: IN RE: IN RE: INRE: (1) Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Domer, Pruett, Smith None Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager/Secretary Gary Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer Jerre Wegner, Recording Secretary PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN: None CONSENT CALENDAR: APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF FEBRUARY 2, 2004 (CONTINUED FROM THE MARCH 1,2004 MEETING), AND MARCH 1, 2004 Minor corrections to the meeting minutes were noted. Commissioner Domer moved to approve the meetings' minutes, and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Smith. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: IN RE: (2) Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Domer, Pruett and Smith None None None MOTION CARRIED NEW HEARINGS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-0001, ZONE CHANGE NO. 1226-04, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2496-04, VARIANCE NO. 2136- 04, MINOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 328-04, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 1727-04 - EDWARDS HOUSE RELOCATION (JOE AND LINDA DAY) NOTE: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1727-04 was prepared for the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The mitigation measures are outlined in the Mitigated negative Declaration. Leslie Aranda Roseberry introduced the item, and Senior Planner Dan Ryan gave the staff report. Planning Commission APPROVED March 15, 2004 A proposal to relocate a two-story 1921, Craftsman residence from the Main Library site on Chapman Avenue to a residential lot at the SEC of Almond Avenue and Lemon Street. The proposal will require: . A General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to address the property's split designation and zoning from Old Towne Mixed Use and C-2 (General Business district) to medium Density Residential and R-4 (Multi-family Residential). . A Conditional Use Permit to allow two-story development within the Old Towne Orange Historic District. . A Variance to allow tandem parking, a reduction in required parking, and a reduction in the number of required covered (enclosed) parking spaces and minor adjustments for setbacks. . Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration to address the relocation of the historic Edwards House. The lot where the house will be moved has been vacant for some time. It is 60 x 178 sq. ft., and is 10,680 sq. ft. The property appears almost as two parcels. There are existing buildings on the property (a 2-story and a I-story building). There are a total of 7.1 parking spaces required. There are 2 garage spaces and 2 open spaces existing, and the proposal is for 3 (total) garage spaces and 2 open spaces. There is a proposal to allow an existing tandem parking space (currently not permitted) to be permitted in order to meet the total parking required of 7.1 spaces. Staff is asking that there be photo documentation of the disassembly and reassembly of the structure prior to relocating it, to guide the restoration of the house at the new site and to ensure that any portions of the building that are contributing will be restored as original. The applicant has satisfied the requirement to hire an experienced and qualified Historic House Mover to carry out the work required to move this historic structure. (Note: On Planning Commission Draft Resolution PC- 0904, Page 5, items 7 and 8 are repeated, and item 8 should be deleted. Also delete the blank item 9 which is carried over to Page 6.) The Commissioners had the following questions: . There is an area marked on the comer of the lot for handicap access to the existing sidewalk (enlarge what is currently there) - will that impact the yard of the property? Two and a half feet further will be added to meet the current ADA standards. It will impact the existing yard no more than two feet. . The cement and brick appurtenances on the front of the building - will it be disassembled and reassembled? The diamond pattern currently existing is comprised of bricks that are not available today. It is indicated in the new plan that the diamond pattern will be reproduced through use of photo documentation and drawings, as it is the only structure in Old Towne that has that particular brick pattern. . How is the photo documentation record achieved, exactly, and where will it reside once completed? One of the conditions of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is 2 APPROVED Planning Commission March 15, 2004 that the applicant will meet the exact requirements of the photo-record, and it will be approved by staff prior to any demolition work beginning. A set of the photo documentation will be kept at the library for archiving purposes. In addition, the Community Video Advisory Board has awarded a firm to do a half-hour documentary on the Edwards House (past, present and future). . Regarding the mixed zoning, was it specified how much was commercial versus residential zoning? When the plan was done, the resulting maps indicated exactly what was commercial and what was residential. . The parking that is proposed is for the whole lot, not just the Edwards House? Correct. . What is the purpose of the area jutting out from the drawing of the proposed garage? Extra storage (not a washer/dryer). . When, exactly, will the house be moved? There are a number of steps to be taken leading up to the actual move. The public hearing was opened to introduce the Edwards House owner. Public Participation: Linda Day, 1103 E. Wilson, Orange. (Co-Owner with her husband of the Edwards House). . Tentative date for move is June 21 S\ the house will begin moving at about 11 :00 p.m. or midnight and will be completed by about 4:00 a.m. Questions from the Commissioners continued: . In terms of relocating a historical building, does it have any implication to the existing structures in terms of having to upgrade or alter the existing structures to meet certain current codes, if at all? The existing structures are contributing historic structures and they would fall into the State Historic Building Code, and nothing is required by the owner to do anything to these buildings other than maintain them. . Will there be notification to the people along the move route? Yes, it is required that everyone within a 300 foot radius of the move be notified. . What will happen to the site from which the Edwards House is moved? The site will be prepped to house the Friends of the Library (in a temporary trailer) and will remain that way for the year and a half necessary for the construction of the new library. The trailer will go away when the new library is built, and the site will be used as additional parking for the library. Public Participation: Janet Crenshaw, 400 N. Shaffer - made presentation of the book "The Little House" to owner and daughter and to City of Orange Librarian. 3 APPROVED Planning Commission March 15,2004 Anne Siebert, 340 S. Olive - expressed excitement to have the comer in the quadrant completed, and felt the addition of a 2-story structure fit well into the existing area. Moved by Commissioner Brandman, and seconded by Commissioner Smith, to adopt Resolution PC No. 09-04 recommending to the City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1727-04 as being prepared in compliance with he California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and recommending to the City Council approval of: . General Plan Amendment No. 2004-0001 . Zone Change No. 1226-04 . Conditional Use Permit No. 2496-04 . Variance No. 2136-04 . Minor Site Plan Review No. 328-04 . Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1727-04 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Domer, Pruett and Smith None None None MOTION CARRIED (3) APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE NO. 3871-03 DETERMINATION OF BUILDING ELEVATIONS, SIGNS, AND LANDSCAPE PLAN - CARE AMBULANCE Leslie Aranda Roseberry introduced the item. A proposal to remodel an existing tilt-up industrial building to be used as an ambulance facility located at 1517 Braden Court. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities). There was an additional item that was dealt with by the zoning administrator for an adjustment for parking. That is not a part of this appeal and not a part of the Planning Commission's actions on this item. Before Care Ambulance acquired the site, there were 155 parking spaces on the site. Care Ambulance re-striped the site to bring it up to 164 spaces, but code required that they have 182 spaces. Staff did a parking study to determine what the actual needs were, and found that what was currently on-site exceeded their needs, and therefore staff recommended to zoning administrator to do an administrative adjustment. The applicant, Rick Richardson (co-owner with his brother Dan Richardson) spoke regarding this project. Care Ambulance will celebrate 35 years in business, and they have 50 ambulances that have over 75,000 responses to request for service per year, and have exclusive contracts with St. Joseph's Hospital and UCI Medical Center. They did not want a plain tilt-up industrial building 4 APPROVED Planning Commission March 15,2004 (as currently exists on the property) and so they hired a specialty design firm to do some unique improvements to the building that would speak to the company's image and building. The firm researched old fire and ambulance facilities and prepared the proposed design. They worked closely with city planners, and made changes that were recommended by the ORC in order to comply with the ORC's primary concerns (the authenticity and integrity ofthe existing building). Care Ambulances believes that the ORC's requirements are overly restrictive, and they are unable to totally comply without totally abandoning their desire for a building that reflects who they are and the services they provide, and Care Ambulance is appealing the ORC's denial. Care Ambulance received letters of support from the three neighbors immediately adjacent to the site. Chairman Pruett acknowledged that they had received copies of these letters, as well. Members of the Commission asked the following questions: . How many vehicles can be washed at one time in the proposed car wash? Thirty ambulances will be washed (automated) per day, and a reclamation system will be in place for the water utilized. . How many people are employed by the firm? A total of 260 employees are employed, however they work on 3 different shifts, and only about 1/3 of them are on-site at anyone time. . The facility would be opened 24-hours per day and there is security for the site? Yes, and there would be a locked gate with security cameras as well. Neighbors have been notified, and are pleased that the area would not remain dark at night and will be occupied. . How long did you search for this site? Over five years. . What is the purpose of the two trailers on the site? They will be removed as soon as the project redesign is finished. . Will current window covering be kept? The architect, Chip Gulley, of 30th Street Architects, 2821 Newport Boulevard, Irvine was introduced. He noted a materials board (on display) that showed the proposed exterior surfaces. They are proposing a solar gray storefront glazing, so from angles it will appear reflective, but it is not a true high performance coated glazing, but it does have solar glazing to mitigate heat gain and ultraviolet rays that would damage the furniture and interiors. Questions continued from members of the Commission: . What happened to the faux finishes that were proposed? There was some exception, by the members of the ORC to the use of some ofthe exterior insulating finishing systems. It's the industry standard for this type of finishing of a building. The ORC suggested they look at true materials that had more architectural integrity. In an effort to please the ORC, they went to a true lath and plaster exterior that would have to be applied by real craftsmen, and eliminated the faux cornices and arches. After reviewing these changes with the ORC, it became apparent to Care Ambulance and its designer that the ORC did not have a problem with the faux finish as much as the whole concept of coming in and proposing the arches and cornices. 5 Planning Commission APPROVED March 15,2004 Gary Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney, explained to the Commission the process necessary to uphold the appeal, and asked that there be resolution as to the final type of materials to be utilized so that the Planning Commission could take an action on the appeal. The applicant is appealing the denial from the DRC, so to uphold their appeal, the project is approved as submitted. If the appeal is denied, then the decision of the DRC is upheld as stated in the staff report. Chairman Pruett further explained that the Planning Commission's role (if they decide to uphold the appeal) is to approve the design, and it is up the applicant and their design team to decide which materials best meet their requirements for what they're trying to achieve. He asked staff to clarify which proposal was being appealed, and Leslie Aranda Roseberry responded that it was for the lath and plaster design. Commissioner Brandman stated that one of the items noted by the DRC was that they wanted to keep the existing look of the light industrial buildings (zoned M-1). She received clarification earlier from staff that the Commission had, indeed, approved other requests where light industrial buildings were adjacent to residential sites. She also felt that it was important to note that the adjacent building owners were in approval of the new design. Commissioner Smith requested additional information on the roofing plan (the height and function of the mechanical equipment on the roof) that was not approved by the DRC. Staff explained that the appeal could be upheld with a notation that the mechanical aspect of the roof and it's shielding be approved by staff prior to approval of the project. Commissioner Bonina moved to uphold Appeal No. 494-04, with the addition of the faux finish and staff review of the rooftop mechanical, and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Smith. Members ofthe Commission wanted to thank the DRC for their diligence on this project, and to reiterate the fact that the Commission will continue to work towards the upgrade of communities. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Domer, Pruett and Smith None None None MOTION CARRIED (4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2473-03 - CINGULAR WIRELESS A proposal to attach a wireless telecommunication antenna on an existing Southern California Edison (SCE) electrical transmission tower and construct a 210 sq. ft. equipment cabinet enclosure. The site is located at 2750 North Cannon Street. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines 15303 (Class 3 - New Construction or 6 APPROVED Planning Commission March 15,2004 Conversion of Small Structures), and 15311 (Class 11 - Accessory Structures). Commissioner Domer noted there were quite a few applications for cell sites coming before the commissioner. Alice Angus, Community Development Director, noted that the applications coming before the commission are to plug holes in coverage, and the City does encourage co- location, but that most operators would tell the Commission that they have to have a certain amount of separation of location of sites due to bandwidth, etc. The City is proactively looking for new ways to address this issue, as well as potentially partnering cell site location specialists as well as with a firm that builds new cell sites. Commissioner Bonina also noted that if the City acted pro actively on this issue, and located some of the cell sites on city owned property, then the City could potentially generate a source of income that would not otherwise exist. Rob Perez, 1225 W. 190th, Gardena, CA 90248, was introduced. He represents the carrier, Cingular Wireless. He addressed the issue of the multitude of applications for cell sites. He stated that the federal government issued licenses to the carriers, who were then under a mandate to provide service in such a way that any customer could have access to the service. In this particular case, there are coverage gaps and a lot of calls being dropped. As the number of users increases, the requirement for additional sites increases. Commissioner Bonina addressed the issue of pending acquisition by Cingular Wireless of AT&T. The applicant responded that they would be treated as two separate companies until a decision is made on how to merge the systems, as they are two different types of wireless systems technology. Moved by Commissioner Domer and seconded by Commissioner Bonina to Adopt Resolution No. 10-04 approving Conditional Use Permit 2473-03. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Bonina, Domer, and Pruett None Commissioners Brandman and Smith. None MOTION CARRIED (5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2491-04 - PASTA POMODORO, INC. A proposal to allow an Alcoholic Beverage Control Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place) license for the opening of a new restaurant on a proposed pad within The Village at Orange (formerly known as The Mall of Orange) and make a finding of Public Convenience or necessity. The site is located at 2214 North Tustin Street, Suite B. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines 15303 (Class 3 - new Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) and Section 15332 (Class 32, In-Fill Development). 7 APPROVE 0 Planning Commission March 15, 2004 Art Rodriguez, 709 Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena - is the agent for the applicant Pasta Pomodoro. The restaurant has 32 licensed stores in the state of California, and they have nine other applications pending, including the one for the City of Orange. Of the 32 stores operating with a beer and wine license, the company has never had one single violation ofthe A.RC. (Alcoholic Beverage Control Board) act. They train their employees, and they make sure that the employees know to whom they can sell to, and to whom they cannot (not just minors, but people who are obviously intoxicated, etc.). Mr. Rodriguez had issues with the following two items of condition: . Condition #12 states that the restaurant must stop selling alcohol one hour prior to closing (the proposed hours of the restaurant would have it closing at 10:00 p.m.). Chairman Pruett stated that this is a standard condition for all restaurants within the City of Orange. Several options were discussed with the applicant, including allowing his restaurant to stay open an additional hour. . Condition #27 states that "no alcohol can leave the premises." The applicant cited a Business and Professions Code, # 23396.5, under the A.RC. Act which states that if a party comes in and orders a bottle of wine and they decide that they don't want to drink it all, they may have the waiter put a cork in it and they may take it home. Assistant Attorney Sheatz explained that the intent behind the condition was that no one be allowed to buy liquor for removal from the site. Moved by Commissioner Bonina and seconded by Commissioner Smith to adopt Resolution No. 07-04 approving Conditional Use Permit 2491-04. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Domer, Pruett and Smith None None None MOTION CARRIED As there were no other items on the agenda to cover, Chairman Pruett asked for a motion to adjourn. Moved by Commissioner Brandman and seconded by Commissioner Domer to adjourn. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Domer, Pruett and Smith None None None MOTION CARRIED The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. 8