Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-20-1992 PC MinutesMINUTES Planning Commission January 20, 1992 City of Orange Monday - 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Joan Wolff, Sr. Planner and Commission Secretary; John Godlewski, Administrator of Current Planning; Bob Herrick, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF .TANUARY 6, 1992 Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, to approve the Minutes of January 6, 1992 as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: CONTINUED HEARING MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12458, MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1441 - SALKIN ENGINEERING CORPORATION: A request to modify conditions of approval of Tentative Tract Map 12458 and Conditional Use Permit 1441 to allow reconfiguration of, and additional access to the private drive located approximately 150 feet east of the intersection of Cerro Villa Drive and El Rito Drive. Subject property is located on the north side of Cerro Villa Drive, immediately east of El Rito Drive, and consists of Lots 28, 29, and 30 of Tract 12458, known as Prado Woods. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. Planning Commission Minutes January 20, 1992 A staff report was not presented and the public hearing was opened. Annlicant Tom Nicholson, Nicholson Land Company, 4071 East La Palma, Suite B, Anaheim, asked for the C.U.P. because the condition on the existing tract map does not allow all the lots that are accessed off the street to be built on. There are five lots that access off the existing street as it is. Lot 28, which is in the left hand, lower corner of the site plan currently has a driveway access off of Cerro Villa Drive. The three homes, which are on the right hand side of the plan, (located in Villa Park) are already built. If the existing condition remains between Lot 29 and Lot 30, one of those lots will not be able to be developed. They're requesting to modify that and take access off of the private street (all six lots). They feel this will improve the traffic condition because Lot 2 8 will no longer have a driveway off of Cerro Villa Drive. It will be taking access off of the private drive, which they will construct and also a gate. Their goal is to create a community of well designed, well built, custom homes and to make this more unique from the homes that are on the left hand side (Prado Woods). They have almost completed their negotiations with the Prado Woods Homeowners Association to release Lots 28, 29 and 30 and assume maintenance by a new association, which has been formed. They have recorded the association documents on the existing lots in Villa Park and they have a supplemental declaration drawn up and ready to record as soon as they get the release from Prado Woods. In order to address the maintenance of the street, gate and the hillside area, they have formed a separate association to accomplish that. Commissioner Murphy asked if Mr. Nicholson had reviewed the rest of the conditions in the staff report? Mr. Nicholson said he was comfortable with the conditions; there was only one condition they may want to make a small exception to. It regards widening the street. It's feasible and easily done to widen the street where it is marked in black to the 2 8 foot width. That will provide 12 additional parking spaces. It's very difficult because of some drainage devices and other reasons to widen it in front of Lot 29. Mr. Kerns will address those concerns. 2 Planning Commission Minutes January 20, 1992 Commissioner Murphy understood the applicant is requesting to modify Condition 1 -- Drive B shall be widened to a width of 28 feet as measured from faces of curbs prior to occupancy. Mr. Nicholson said they were willing to widen Drive B, but would like an exception of the area in front of the access to Lot 28. Those speaking, in favor George Kerns, Salkin Engineering, 1215 East Chapman Avenue, briefly went over the engineering considerations. He prepared a sketch of their proposal and submitted it to the Commission. The difficulty in widening the street the entire length is because of some of the existing facilities. There is an existing drive approach in front of the house they are planning to use. There is also a catch basin which is lower than the grade. It picks up water off the slope and off the street. It's about 7 feet back from the existing curb and 3 1/2 feet lower. It's built in such a way that he doesn't see an easy way to resolve the issue. Their proposal is to widen the street from the catch basin to the cul de sac. It would provide an additional 12 parking spaces, which is two spaces per unit. The configuration of the cul de sac is the standard cul de sac at the end of the street. The entry way is designed to satisfy both fire and traffic considerations. They will close one driveway and have everyone come out of the other. There are two parking spaces which meets the new City standards, although its in a slightly different configuration than the way the plan is shown. There is one space by each gate. There are two gates -- one for Lot 28 and the other gate for the other five lots. The location of the driveway will not cause any sight distance problems. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Scott asked the City Engineer about the relocation of the catch basin. Would it prevent the widening the street all the way through? Mr. Johnson could not answer the question. He hadn't looked at the situation that closely to determine whether there is an engineering construction problem or not. It looks like it has a reverse flow situation. The intent is to provide additional parking on the street and that's one of staff's concerns. Twelve spaces to accommodate the 4 homes -- three spaces per lot; they will probably use street parking on Cerro Villa and El 3 Planning Commission Minutes January 20, 1992 Rito for guests. That's about what you'd expect for a standard local street parking situation depending on the frontage involved. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Cathcart, to recommend to the City Council to accept the proposed Modification to Condition 11 of Tentative Tract Map 12458 and proposed Modification to Condition 11 of Conditional Use Permit 1441 subject to Conditions 1-4 of the staff report, but with Condition 1 modified to limit the widening of Drive B to a length of approximately 240 feet of widening on the west side of Drive B, between the cul de sac and the northerly edge of the pad of Lot 29. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Prior to voting, the Commission discussed the motion. They asked if Cerro Villa would be posted for "no parking" due to increased circulation in the area? Mr. Johnson did not believe there was any proposal to do that at this time. However, there may be sight distance problems at the major intersections that may have to be restricted. The staff report stated parking was prohibited on Cerro Villa Drive, was that true? No one had seen signs to that effect. Twelve cars of guest parking in addition to on- site parking is fairly substantial. IN RE: NEW HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1946-91 -JOHN OTTEMAN: A request for a conditional use permit to allow a billiard entertainment facility with an associated restaurant serving beer and wine in the C-TR Commercial-Tustin Redevelopment) district. Subject property is located on the west side of Santiago Boulevard between Lincoln Avenue and Robinhood Place, addressed 2688 Santiago Boulevard. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. Ms. Wolff presented the staff report because of project opposition. The C.U.P. request is twofold. It includes a request to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages as part of a restaurant operation, and a request to allow billiard 4 Planning Commission Minutes January 20, 1992 entertainment in the C-TR district. The property itself is just over a half acre. It contains a commercial building with two lease spaces, both of which are currently vacant. The project applicant is proposing to occupy the larger of the two tenant spaces, which is nearly 8,000 square feet in size. The applicant proposes to improve the space by adding a kitchen and bar area, a dining area with tables and 31 billiard tables. Proposed hours of operation are 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., seven days a week. There are 61 parking spaces on the property, which complies with the Code requirement for the entire building. The issues before the Commission include the land use compatibility issues -- the property is adjacent to other commercial businesses to the north and south, the S 5 Freeway on the west, and a single family neighborhood across Santiago Boulevard to the east. After reviewing the staff report and recommended conditions, the applicant met with Police Department representatives, and requested some relief from Condition 4 and 6. Condition 4 requires a physical separation between the drinking and dining areas, and the billiard area. Condition 6 requires the presence of a security guard in the evenings when occupancy exceeds 25 persons. Since meeting with the applicant, the Crime Prevention staff has had further discussion with the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control regarding the separation of the drinking and billiard areas. A.B.C. investigators have stated that they will be licensing the entire premises for alcoholic beverage sales, and do not require installation of physical barriers as recommended by the Police Department. Therefore, Crime Prevention staff is willing to delete the separation requirement listed in Condition 4. Regarding Condition 6, Crime Prevention staff is again willing to modify the condition by allowing some flexibility regarding provision of a security guard, and recommend that the wording unless otherwise approved in writing by the Crime Prevention Bureau" be added at the end of the first sentence. The list of conditions has been revised to reflect the changes agreed to by the Police Department. In Condition 1 S there was one word deleted. It should read, "The Fire Department connection shall not be affixed to the building." The public hearing was opened. Applicant John Otteman, 9842 Windsor, Westminster, said pool was currently experiencing a large demand when the location is kept clean and it is upscaled. Customers are more demanding than ever and require a clean, 5 Planning Commission Minutes January 20, 1992 trouble-free atmosphere. The only way to maximize profit is to give the customer what they want. Commissioner Bosch said the Commission's findings must be based upon compatibility of a proposed use to the neighborhood, the existing configuration, adjacent uses, etc. How do you feel this would be compatible to the specific location? Mr. Otteman pointed out the different uses surrounding the proposed project. The noise would probably not be heard. Any music played would be at a moderate level. It should have no impact upon the surrounding community. Those speakin in opposition Jack Bixby, 2668 North Vista Glen Road, was violently opposed to the project. By opening a billiard hall that is open to 2:00 a.m., 7 days a week is not going to help the neighborhood. They have a problem now with the noise level (not serious). The restaurant attracts a family situation. There are quite a few traffic accidents at the intersection. He hears the noise at the gas station and Circle K. He has recorded his opposition with the A.B.C. Rhonda Winfield, 2656 North Vista Glen Road, shared the exact sentiments of her neighbor. Noise carries. Young people play their music loudly at Circle K late at night, which interferes with sleeping. The neighbors do not need added noise. They're working people; they need their sleep. The business hours will draw a clientele that are there to party (2:00 a.m., 7 days a week). She doesn't believe a security guard can control delinquent behavior. Gary Greely, 2694 North Vista Glen Road, said there were plenty of places on the other side of Tustin that are for rent. There's no reason for this kind of establishment in their neighborhood. Rebuttal Mr. Otteman appreciated the owners' concerns; however, he didn't think anyone had seen the upscaled pool halls and how well they are run. People don't hang out at their business. People are respectable and are not trouble makers. The parking lots will be patrolled for loitering and they will enforce a dress code to keep gang members from being present. He 6 Planning Commission Minutes January 20, 1992 runs a successful business; profanity and arguments are not allowed. He wants to provide a good source of entertainment for the people of Orange and at the same time fit in with the community. Danny Kikendahl, 1418 East Evergreen, Fullerton, has been associated with pool for approximately 20 years as an instructor and billiard retailer. The trend in the last 10 years has taken a dramatic change from being a lower class type of atmosphere to more of an upper class type of atmosphere. The face of pool has dramatically changed. People feel more comfortable in places like this. Probably 1% of all the people who play pool, play it for money; it use to be 2 S %. Leonard Pressler, 6831 Via Angelina Drive, Huntington Beach, said this establishment would attract good people who will spend money. They will spend money at the adjacent businesses as well. It will generate a lot of business for the City. He's the owner of the property; it's been vacant for 14 months. He wondered why the City approved a furniture store seven years ago; he didn't feel it was a viable business for that location. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bosch said they heard concerns about effects upon a viable neighborhood and appropriateness of particular uses for the site. He sympathized with Mr. Pressler for the vacancy and desire to create revenues. Perhaps the reason the furniture store was built was because everyone believed at the time, based on the owner's representations and the representation of the furniture store coming in that this was a good use for the site and it was approved. It turned out to be inappropriate. He thought for the same reason, the project was an inappropriate use for the site. He had no doubts about the integrity of Mr. Otteman and the upscaled billiard palor, but the key thing the Commission had to face are the findings under State law relative to a Conditional Use Permit. That is relative to sound principals of land use, services required by the community, deterioration of bordering land uses, relationship and it's effect on the community of neighborhood plans in the area. The area was intended on the boundary of the Tustin Avenue c o m m e r c i a l redevelopment district to be originally developed as neighborhood support and freeway accessible commercial. The City can't guarantee the success of any particular commercial venture on a single site. He felt there must be an appropriate location for this kind of use. This wasn't an entertainment center; it's not adjacent to an employment center, or adjacent to existing 7 Planning Commission Minutes January 20, 1992 entertainment locations within the Tustin Redevelopment District; it's not adjacent to the major retail centers. What it is, is the interface between the single family residential neighborhood and their access to jobs, freeway, transportation and eventually to that retail center. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to deny Conditional Use Permit 1946-91 based upon the findings that the proposed utilization as an entertainment center on the site is inappropriate with the sound principals of land use and response to the services required by the community to wit it would cause bordering land uses to deteriorate or create special problems for the area in which it is located because of the need to provide accessible retail, commercial and support of that residential neighborhood and freeway commuters rather than providing a destination entertainment center. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Ms. Wolff explained the appeal process to the applicant. The decision was final unless appealed within 15 days. Forms are available through the Planning Office for a fee of $109.00. IN RE: AD.TOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to adjourn to a study session at 5:30 p.m., Monday, January 27, 1992 to discuss CEQA and high rise issues. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. sld 8