Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 - January 3(�/5_c I' - MINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Vern Jones, Planning Manager /Secretary, John Godlewski, Principal Planner, Mary Binning, Assistant City Attorney, Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer, and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary January 3, 2000 Monday - 7:00 p.m. IN RE: ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE - CHAIRPERSON FOR 2000 0 L -N?; "_"90 n 1, I0 Moved by Commissioner Romero and seconded by Commissioner Smith to elect Randy Bosch as Chairperson for 2000. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Smith and seconded by Commissioner Bosch to elect Ben Pruett as Vice- Chairperson for 2000. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ITEM TO BE CONTINUED 1. MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 122 -99 - PAUL & EILEEN HERTFELDER A request to demolish an existing garage and to construct two 1 1/2 story duplex units and a six -car garage behind an existing single family home. The site is located at 742 East Culver Avenue and is within the Old Towne Historic District and the National Register District. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1619 -99 was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of this project. Mr. Jones informed the Commission that the applicant requested to continue review after a revised proposal is submitted, and upon renotification. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Bosch and seconded by Commissioner Prue" to continue Major Site Plan Review 122 -99 indefinitely per staff's recommendation until revised plans can be reviewed by the Design Review Committee and that the item be renotified. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED 1 Planning Commission Minutes January 3, 2000 is proposed for use by residents of the development, while City standards only require 4,500 square feet for a total of five units. Even though the proposal satisfies the City standards, staff has raised a number of concerns about the proposal, both in discussion with the applicant and in the staff report. The property serves to provide drainage from the Olive Hills reservoir. Anaheim was granted the use of a 40 foot wide easement that runs east and west along the south edge of this parcel. The same area includes a 30 foot wide easement for an underground pipeline currently owned by Questar Southern Trails. These easements are indicated on the architect's and civil engineer's plans, but staff is somewhat uncomfortable that each of those entities will allow grading or modifications to the topography as proposed by the applicant. Staff has asked the applicant to be prepared to explain why this proposal is preferable to a conventional subdivision of 6,000 square foot parcels. Staff has raised a number of concerns about the findings. The property is wedge - shaped and a substantial amount of the land does not have a sufficient depth for development, whether the proposal were a conventional subdivision, or a P. U.D. The property has about 579 feet of frontage on Nohl Ranch Road. The first 375 feet measured from its western end is less than 100 feet deep, which is the minimum depth required for a parcel in the R -1 district. While the proposal satisfies the City's requirements for an outdoor recreation area, the space is provided primarily in private back yards rather than a common recreational facility. The majority of open space in the applicant's proposal will be developed as a drainage channel and isolated from the proposed residential development. And, land that would be set aside as non - buildable open space is already prevented from development by these existing easements. Use of the property is limited to the degree that City action to protect open space may not be necessary in staff's opinion. Staff also expressed concern about some of the technical design issues related primarily to the grading plan. The main access driveway is not designed according to current City standards for a private street. Staff advised the applicant that the street should include a sidewalk and that the minimum street width should be 28 feet, measured from curb to curb rather than 25 feet that is proposed by the applicant. The applicant asked that staff point out there are other locations in the City where private tracts are served by streets that don't have a driveway. However, Mr. Donovan's response was that the City approved those developments some time ago before the current City standards came into effect. The access driveway is also designed to a 20% grade. For a public street, the City would not normally approve a grade exceeding 10 %. The turn around area has been provided at the end of the driveway, but staff would prefer that the area be deeper and wider. The applicant has revised the plan to include some turf block, additions on either side of the driveway to provide a little more room. Staff has raised a concern that vehicles, which currently have access to the Anaheim drainage facilities and the Questar Pipeline Easement, would not have access anymore if the property is developed according to the grading plan that wassubmitted for review at this meeting. Staff requested that an alternate access be provided through the development or that the applicant obtain written acknowledgment from either the City of Anaheim or Questar Southern Trails that access for maintenance vehicles may be abandoned. Chairman Bosch noted the Commission received a letter from Questar Southern Trails Pipeline dated December 29, 1999 expounding further on the concerns about rights -of -way over easements and proposed conditions from their viewpoint, in addition to their previous communication. The public hearing was opened. Applicant Isam Hanna 2664 Vista Valley Road said his current home was sliding down the hill and they had to relocate. So they purchased this property and elected to move across the street. The original parcel map has a condition that says they need to work with the City of Anaheim on improving the channel. They have worked with the City of Anaheim since buying the property and have also worked with Questar regarding the easements. He wants to create a small family neighborhood and use one common driveway. He did not see the need for sidewalks. There will be a homeowner's association for the five lots and open space. They met with the Design Review Committee a couple of times. The slopes on the individual driveways are only 4 %; not 20 %. Their two proposals regarding the closed pipeline or open channel are acceptable to the City of Anaheim. The trash trucks will pick up trash at each individual house. Planning Commission Minutes January 3, 2000 due south, into a pipe which is actually part of the City of Orange storm drain system. There is also a drainage facility directly to the west, continuing along the same line of the existing creek. That's an overflow channel and that is primarily for controlled discharges from the reservoir. The plan, as submitted, is an open channel. It provides no access to that channel. The City of Orange would not accept it as currently proposed. A pipeline is a concept that the City would consider. The City is very concerned about the hydrology of the area, the natural springs, the Fish and Game requirements, the adjacency to the existing Questar pipeline, the ability for the City to come in and maintain if a facility were put there -- all of these questions remain unanswered. Orange would like to reserve the opportunity to review plans prior to agreeing to taking the channel over. Currently, the City of Orange has no obligation to maintain that channel. This has been discussed with Mr. Hanna and with the City of Anaheim, but they have not reached a conclusion. There are two problems with the retaining wall as proposed. Hydraulically, it would be sufficient. That wall would have to be protected and staff has not seen a method for the protection of the footings. If it were undermined, it would then endanger the houses that are being proposed. It also encroaches into the easement. The City of Anaheim currently can access the site of the channel by driving up along side of it. There is no physical blocking of the channel. The design, as proposed, does not accommodate access. Commissioner Pruett questioned the design of the channel. Does the design need to meet the City of Orange's standards or Anaheim's standards? Mr. Hohnbaum assured the Commission that both standards are the same when it comes to hydraulic control protection. The actual facilities would be up to Anaheim because they are the facility owner, even though this is an easement. The City of Orange would like to see that the surrounding properties are protected hydraulically. Studies would be required to support that. Chairman Bosch raised the issue of land use and the living environment. The only enhancement he sees is that the clustering has allowed a single drive access to Nohl Ranch Road rather than a series of driveways, which might cause backing out onto a very dangerous street. He didn't think the square footage of the development is the only definition of what the impacts are in relationship to the impacts on the neighbors. The number of people and how they use the land is important too. This creates such a tiny outdoor space, which is impacted by the slopes, easements, retaining walls and by Nohl Ranch Road itself. He doesn't see much outdoor living space at all. The tot lot area is quite small and he doesn't find that to be an enhancement of recreation space. The properties to the south are affected by the density of structures proposed to be built. The design of the houses is very attractive, but they are small compared to the adjacent houses. And, the land they sit on has been compacted so much that he didn't see the amenities that need to go with it to provide a sustainable community. It's too much on the land and it doesn't respond to the findings that are necessary relative to the CUP. Additionally, he had concerns about the drainage. How to get there remains a problem that needs to be solved, because it could radically affect what land is available. Commissioner Smith had concerns over the unresolved issues, especially with the channel. This property seems to have a lot of features to it that require some real detailed expertise. She's not comfortable in moving forward at this point in time. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Bosch and seconded by Commissioner Smith to approve Mitigated Negative Declaration 1620 -99, in that there would not be a substantial impact on the environment or wildlife resources. However, the conditions of approval in the staff report, found necessary to satisfactorily mitigate the potential impacts to a level of insignificance have not been demonstrated by the applicant's proposal and tentative tract map. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Minutes January 3, 2000 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2310 -99- DARIUSZ SWIATKOWSKI (POLKA DELI) A request to allow a Type "20" off -sale beer and wine license for an existing grocery market /delicatessen and for a Planning Commission Finding of Public Necessity or Convenience. The site is located at 1710 North Tustin Street. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to continue Conditional Use Permit 2310 -99 to the next meeting in order to have the applicant present at the hearing. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Romero and seconded by Commissioner Smith to adjourn at 8:35 p.m. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED /Sid