Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 - August 21~rC~~~SI ~'- Planning Commission City of Orange MINUTES August 21, 2000 Monday - 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John Godlewski, Principal Planner, Mary Binning, Assistant City Attorney, Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer, and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary IN RE: ITEM TO BE CONTINUED 3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2-00 AND PRE-ZONE CHANGE AND ZONE CHANGE 1204-00 - THEIRVINE COMPANY (SANTIAGO HILLS PLAN II) A request to change the East Orange General Plan from Mixed Use, Employment, Low-Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential and Open Space to Low Density Residential, Low-Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Open Space; to change the Orange General Plan from Public Facility to General Commercial; to make various modifications to the Circulation Element; to modify portions of the text of the EOGP; to pre-zone the unincorporated portion of the area to PC (Planned Community) and to change the zone of the portion in the City of Orange from PI (Public Institution) to PC. The project is generally located east of Jamboree Road and the existing Santiago Hills development, west of the Eastern Transportation Corridor (ETC), and south of Irvine Regional Park. The southerly boundary of the project is south of the Handy Creek Road under crossing of the ETC. However, there are two areas that extend beyond this general boundary; a 25-acre parcel proposed for commercial development located west of Jamboree Road and north of Chapman Avenue and a proposed 24-acre community park east of the ETC. NOTE: Supplemental EIR 1278 was prepared for this project and supplements Fnal Program EIR 1278 that was previously certified by the City of Orange. Staff requests that this item be continued to a special meeting on Thursday, September 7, 2000. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Smith to continue General Plan Amendment 2-00 and Pre-Zone Change and Zone Change 1204-00 to the meeting of Thursday, September 7, 2000. AYES: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSTAINED: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED Chairman Bosch abstained from voting due to a potential conflict of interest. IN RE: CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of the Minutes from the Meeting of August 7, 2000 Planning Commission Minutes August 21, 2000 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2249-98 -INVESTOR REALTY COMPANY A request for a one (1) year extension of a conditional use permit allowing off-site alcohol sales and three (3) drive-through uses within a 41,250 sq. ft. commercial center. The site is located on the west side of South Main Street, between Culver and La Veta Avenues. RECOMMENDATION: Grant a one (1) year extension for Conditional Use Permit 2249-98. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Carlton and seconded by Commissioner Romero to approve the Consent Calendar. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 4. ZONE CHANGE 1205-00, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 3-00, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2339-00 AND VARIANCE 2089-00 - BARRY A. COTTLE (YORBA AT SANTIAGO CREED A request to change the site's land use designation to General Commercial from Low Density Residential and Low-Medium Density Residential; to change the site's zoning classification to C-1 (Limited Commercial) from Recreational-Open Space. The site is located north of Chapman Avenue and Chapman General Hospital, east of Santiago Creek. NOTE: Mitigated Negative Declaration 1642-00 was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of this project. Chairman Bosch excused himself from the meeting due to a potential conflict of interest. Vice Chairman Pruett chaired the remainder of the meeting. Chris Carnes, Senior Planner, presented a proposal for the development of approximately 8.5 acres located on both sides of Santiago Creek, about 500 feet north of Chapman Avenue. The General Plan Amendment is to change the low density residential development, south of the creek, to commercial. There is a half acre parcel that is located north of the creek that is already designated in the General Plan as low density residential. And the zone change application is to change the site north to R-1-6, which is compatible with the existing land use designation, and is similar to the zoning classifications for the existing residential property to the north and west of that. The second component of the zone change is to change the southerly part, which is included in the General Plan Amendment, to C-1. The purpose for these two applications is to allow the applicant to develop the subject site south of the channel with amini-storage facility. Site improvements will be minimal. The site will be paved, graded and the drainage will be improved. The storage containers will be installed around the perimeter of the site with the interior used to store recreational vehicles, motor homes, boats, trailers and similar items. There is no development proposed for the property on the north side of the channel at this time. To achieve the mini-storage facility, the applicant has applied for a conditional use permit. The CUP application is accompanied by a variance request to allow construction of a 8 1/2 foot wall along the easterly and southerly property lines that borders a residential tract on Malena Drive. The purpose of the variance application is to construct a wall high enough to screen the 8 1 /2 toot tall storage containers. 2 Planning Commission Minutes August 21, 2000 The project is required to have a negative declaration and that document found that as long as the project did not do any development within the creek channel, it did not affect the existing riparian habitat, which is located on the southwesterly and northern portions of the site, it would not have a significant environmental impact. Additionally, it identified that the site is located in an area of a high ground water table, and that it has the potential for liquefaction. There will need to be some site improvements to prevent that from becoming a problem. There are 24 conditions of approval that apply to the conditional use permit and variance. It must be remembered that the general plan amendment and variance cannot be conditionally approved to be tied into any particular project or land use. If the general plan amendment and zone change are approved, the property could be developed with commercial uses allowed in the C-1 zone. There are also three (3) mitigation measures that tie into the negative declaration. There shall be no development in the 100 year flood plain, and that prior to issuance of grading and building permits, the City Engineer and Director of Community Development will review the landscaping plans, site plan and grading plan to assure that there will be no development within the creek channel. Due to potential site settling because it was a former dump site, and the project does not include rehabilitating the site, an annual report shall be prepared to review site drainage and if any unsafe settling conditions have happened over time, and how they will be alleviated ii they do happen. A study shall also be done on the liquefaction to assure that it will not create a problem at the site. The public hearing was opened. Barry Cottle P.O. Box 311, Tustin, is a partner in this project. They started looking at this property in 1976, 24 years ago. They feel the property is rather unique with an unusual shape. It is fill property and they hired a firm to deal with difficult soils and problems. They bore down 40 feet and took back hoes and went down another 26 feet, where they hit clean dirt. Because of the fill they know they cannot build structures. His two partners built and developed, and now own and manage, the facility on the property next door -the Wells Cargo Storage Facility. At the back corner they have about 120 teat of shared adjacent property line. They propose an extension of Wells Cargo. Because of joint ownership, it will be managed out of the Wells Cargo facility. There is access through that site. They will also be improving Yorba Street. They have met and talked with a majority of the neighbors. They will be picking up all of the water that is on the property now, as well as the water that drains onto those neighbors' property as part of their plan and will take it out in two locations through catch basins that are filtered. There is a new wall proposed along the neighbors' property. They originally proposed a 6 foot block wall, but the DRC asked them to consider a B 1/2 foot wall. They agree to revised condition 16, a setback from the creek, as proposed by City staff. They will accept condition 7 as written in the staff report, but they need to bring this back to the Commission at a later date with a revision. The site will be completely fenced and landscaped; there will be no visual line of sight to the storage containers. There will be approximately 650 spaces for storage and RV's. The Commission and applicant talked about property insurance, the color of the storage containers, control of graffiti, security concerns and the block wall. Public comments Marilyn Moore, 2707 Killingsworth Avenue. Paula Hill, 232 North Wheeler Street. Mike McKenzie, 271 North Malena Street. Bill Vaska, 270 North Malena Street. The new project directly impacts the neighbors' property. There is concern about increased ambient lighting, wall fence height, container storage, hours of operation, landscaping and drainage. Much of the neighbors' property is below grade in both directions so there is water run off from south to north, and east to west when there is heavy rainfall. This also causes water to accumulate in the back yards. It is sad to lose open space to urban development. The neighbors want to be assured of minimal impact to their Planning Commission Minutes August 21, 2000 properties with this project. The neighbors do not object to a higher block wall, with a setback, to obstruct the view of the containers. Outdoor recreational facilities/open space are needed. Applicant's response Mr. Cottle introduced Bart Striker, Civil Engineer, who addressed the drainage issues. They will pick up all of the drainage on their property, as well as the neighbors' property. They propose to put in two catch basins and area drains to all properties that back up to the proposed site. All properties drain to the property line and inlets will be installed at the property line, on the applicant's property. Mr. Cottle responded to the lighting issues. Reflective light will be shining down on the driveways from the containers. The block wall will sit at the property line, on the applicant's property. Commercial use must be reviewed and approved by the City. Neighbors backing up to the Wells Cargo facility do not complain about the hours of operation and he does not anticipate any complaints with this proposal. Special hours only means an appointment with the manager or under a special circumstance. They will use a lease agreement for all customers wanting to store their items in the storage containers. Waste and hazardous materials are not allowed to be stored. A landscaping exhibit was shared with the Commissioners. Three trees will try to be saved and potted that exist on the property now, but other than that, there are only weeds that need to be removed. They want to remove existing fences prior to building the block wall, but if the owners insist on leaving their existing fence up, they will work with them. At the most easterly end of the property there is a RV wash fadlity, consisting of a hose and sewer hook up, but there is no noise associated with it. Commissioner Smith asked that a split face decorative block wall be built. A condition is also needed to maintain the landscaping. She had concerns about the metal containers and the heat coming off of those containers towards the residences. Landscaping will be a mRigating factor, but she wondered how long it would take for the landscaping to absorb some of that heat. Commissioner Carlton asked if a manager will be on site, and will he monitor what is being stored in the containers. Mr. Cottle responded the manager does not actually see what is being stored in the containers, nor will he be making an inspection. Strong language is written into the agreementAease and a customer will be evicted if they are found to be in violation of that lease. The manager for Wells Cargo will also be managing this property. Mr. Cottle talked about the small piece of triangle shaped property on the west side of the creek in response to Commissioner CarNon's question. They want to clean it up through a zone change. It is fenced, with a gate and they will keep it locked. They will also keep the weeds down. They donY have any plans to build on the lot because it will be very expensive to improve the site. And, creek stabilization would have to take place. There is no value to the property at this point in time. Vice Chairman Pruett did not see anything in the conditions that dealt with the issue of drainage on adjacent properties. Condition 14 requires the submittal of a water quality management plan and he assumes that is part of the drainage plan. But, he wants to add another condition to clarify the neighbors' drainage issues. Mr. Hohnbaum did not believe there was a condition about acceptance of off-site drainage. All of the conditions refer to on-site drainage. Mr. Cottle has indicated his willingness to accommodate drainage coming oft of the back of these properties into his drainage plan, but that would need to be added to the conditions of approval. Vice Chairman Pruett, Mr. Hohnbaum and Mr. Cottle discussed condition 14. There will be some kind of separation clarifier to remove the oils and grease. Planning Commission Minutes The public hearing was closed. August 21, 2000 Vice Chairman Pruett asked staff to address future commercial use and the open space/park land questions. Mr. Godlewski said the general plan amendment and zone change are separate from the request for aself- storagefacility. If another wmmercial use came in and wanted to use the property after it has been re- zoned to commercal, they could do so and a different type of commercial use could be considered. Ii the new commercial use proposed a structure, it would need to be reviewed and approved by the City. Permanent structures could not be wnsidered without first addressing the soil problems. Vice Chairman Pruett asked about plans for a future park in the area. Mr. Hohnbaum responded a park is proposed to be developed further to the east at Spring and Prospect. It is separated from the creek itself by another parcel that is owned by the Union Pacific Railroad. The property being talked about at this hearing is just south of Spring Street, adjacent to the creek. It is not under consideration for any recreational use/open space at this time. Commissioner Smith wondered ii an analysis had been made by the City on the resident's problem with drainage possibly from the street. Mr. Hohnbaum said this was the first he heard of the drainage problem. He's not personally aware that staff has been called out to investigate the situation. If the applicant is willing to convey the drainage, that should take care of the problem. If there is water coming off of the street, he doesn't expect the applicant to assume that liability. He asked the resident to talk to him after the meeting or give him a call so that they can resolve the problem. Commissioner Smith pointed out conditions 6, 14 and 15 because she did not understand the incomplete sentences. She also talked about Yorba Street and referenced conditions 11, 12 and 15. Mr. Hohnbaum clarified that conditions 11, 12 and 15 go together. Condition 11 is for dedication and construction of a public roadway to gain access from the termination of the existing Yorba Street, across adjacent property, connecting up to the applicant's property. Today, the property is land locked because there is no public access to it. Conditions 12 and 15 refer to the portion of the future Yorba extension, from the south end of the property to the north end of the property, which is adjacent to the creek itself. And, the City is asking for an irrevocable offer of dedication and a fair share contribution to build the future road right-of-way. It's not the City's intention at this time to take that road as public right-of-way, nor is it the City's intention to build that road until such a time that the properties to the north would develop, or the traffic demand would require Yorba to be put through. The City does not see a problem with the applicant being allowed to use that irrevocable portion of land. Their site design, however, is going to have to accommodate that portion of land. The Commission agreed that this project is a good one and should move forward. It is okay as an interim use, but it is not the highest and best use. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Smith and seconded by Commissioner Romero to recommend to the City Council to approve Mitigated Negative Declaration 1642-00, which was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the project, with the Tinding that proper mitigation has been put into place to facilitate the project, in that it will not have a significant impact on the environment or wildlife resources. AYES: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED 5 Planning Commission Minutes August 21, 2000 MOTION Moved by Commissioner Smith and seconded by Commissioner Pruett to recommend to the City Council to approve General Plan Amendment 3-00, with the finding that the project is in keeping with the intent of the existing General Plan. The Commission considered in making an amendment to the General Plan the long-term land use for the subject site, the potential range of land uses allowed under the requested General Commercial (GC) designation, any conflicts with existing and potential land uses bordering the subject site, the viability of the site to be developed commercially and impacts on other local and regional plans, including the use of the property for open space or a park faality. AYES: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED MOTION Moved by Commissioner Smith and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to recommend to the City Council to approve Zone Change 1205-00, referencing Page 7 of the staff report, which cites that the southerly site is to change the zoning classification to C-1 from R-O. And the zoning for the northerly site is to change the zoning classification to R-1-6 from R-O. AYES: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED MOTION Moved by Commissioner Smith and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to recommend to the City Council to approve Conditional Use Permit 2339-00 with conditions 1 through 24, adding condition 25 - "The applicant shall facilitate off-site drainage of adjacent residential properties in conformance with City codes, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." Add condition 26 - "The applicant shall maintain and prune landscaping along the perimeter of the property so as not to encroach on adjacent residential properties." Add condition 27-'The block wall shall be of a split face or decorative material, to be approved by City staff." Add condition 28 - "Weed abatement shall be maintained on the northerly residentially zoned property, and that the property be kept locked at all times." Modify condition 16 as suggested by staff: "Prior to issuance of building and grading permits, the applicant shall revise the site plan to clearly delineate the minimum setback line for development along the creek channel. The setback line shall be determined by calculating a 2:1 projection from the toe of the existing channel bank. All storage containers, recreational vehicles, and emergency drive aisles shall be located outside the setback area. The setback may be used for perimeter landscaping as along as riparian habitat is not affected. The delineation of the setback line may result in a reduction of area available for storage containers and/or recreational vehicles storage." Modify conditions 6, 14 and 15 by adding the words, 'The project is subject" to the beginning of each statement. The Commission finds that the conditional use permit is granted upon sound principles of land use and in response to services required by the community. It will not cause deterioration of bordering land uses. It has been considered in relationship to its effect on the community and it is made subject to those conditions necessary to preserve the general welfare, not the individual welfare of any particular applicant. AYES: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Minutes August 21, 2000 MOTION Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Smith to recommend to the City Council to approve Variance 2089-00, to allow the perimeter wall to have a maximum height of 8 feet 6 inches, 2 feet 6 inches taller than the 6 toot maximum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location and surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. A variance shall be subject to such conditions which will assure that the authorized adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inwnsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is located. The storage containers are 8 1/2 feet tall and the higher block wall will help to better screen the containers from adjacent residential properties. AYES: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Carlton and seconded by Commissioner Smith to adjourn to the next regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, September 6, 2000. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. AYES: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED /sld