Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-04-1991 PC MinutesPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Orange February 4, 1991 Orange, California Monday - 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy ABSENT: Commissioner Scott STAFF PRESENT: Joan Wolff, Sr. Planner and Commission Secretary; John Godlewski, Administrator of Current Planning; Jack McGee, Director of Community Development; Bob Herrick, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF JANUARY 7 AND JANUARY 21, 1991 Moved by Commissioner Cathcart, seconded by Commissioner Murphy to approve the Minutes of January 7 and January 21, 1990 as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy NOES: None ABSTAINED:Commissioner Master ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Master abstained because he was not present at the meetings; he thanked the Commission for allowing him to stay in Taiwan for an extra few days. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1890-91 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1367-91 - WADE AND JOUNG: A request for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 3-story, 12, 580 square foot group home for women and children. Property is zoned R-4 (Residential Maximum Multiple Family District). Subject property is located on the east side of Lemon Street, approximately 100 feet north of Culver Avenue. The property is located in the Old Towne District and is addressed 357-371 South Lemon Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1367-91 has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts of this project. There was audience opposition on this project. Ms. Wolff presented the staff report. There were two separate issues to be addressed by the Planning Commission as part of the Conditional Use Permit consideration. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 2 whether or not it is appropriate to establish a transitional group home in the R-4 zone. Secondly, it is regarding the three-story structure which is in excess of the two-story, 30 foot height limitation of the R-4 zone. The R-4 zone does permit multiple family residential development in accordance with the General Plan designation of Medium Density Residential (15-24 units per acre). The project site is approximately 1/2 acre in size and it is located within the Old Towne Historic District. The use itself is described by the applicant as a program to provide transitional housing for 20 women and their children children being under the age of 12). A couple will be present on site and have an apartment unit. A maximum of 47 residents will occupy the facility. The prospective residents of the facility will be screened at the Orange County Rescue Mission main office, located in Santa Ana. There won't be any intake occurring at this property. The proposed building is approxima tely 13,000 square feet in size with a portion of the building reaching 3 stories in height. The building has been designed to place the common areas on the first floor with private bedrooms on the second and third floors. The resident rooms consist only of a bedroom and bathroom. There is no private cooking facilities to be provided within those rooms. Therefore, it is considered more of a boarding house than that of an apartment complex. Parking is provided at a ratio of two spaces for the residents' manager unit and one space per guest room. The building is situated on the property in accordance with the City's setback requirements and there is outdoor recreation provided, which is in excess of that required by the code. The building design is basically the same as that of the Ronald McDonald House, which is located at 383 South Batavia Street, also in Old Towne. It is the only three-story building currently existing in Old Towne and is right on the edge (on Batavia) . The building height of the proposed structure is an issue of concern in relationship to its location within the core of the Southwest Residential Quadrant of the Old Towne neighborhood, and also with respect to the historical context of the Old Towne area as a whole. The public hearing was opened. Applicant Les Card, 1733 La Colina Lane, Santa Ana, is the Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Orange County Rescue Mission. He introduced members of their Board of Directors. The Orange County Rescue Mission is a completely Planning Commission Minutes Febru ary 4, 1991 - Page 3 privately funded non-profit organization operating in the County and run by a nine member Board of Directors. They have had a vision for a women's ministry program for many years. John Lands, 1901 West Walnut, Santa Ana, President of the Orange County Rescue Mission. He gave a little background on the Mission. It was founded in 1963. The Mission has grown to become one of the largest shelters for the homeless in Orange County. Currently they serve 21,000 people annually and assisted over 500,000 people since 1963. They presently operate three facilities -- a women's facility in Huntington Beach; a men's halfway house in Irvine; and the main facility in Santa Ana. They currently have over 30,000 active financial supporters (1,400 are residents of Orange). Their budget for 1991 is $800,000. They receive no money from the County, State or Federal Government. Their support comes from individual companies, churches and individual people. They have received enough funds to operate the proposed facility on an on-going basis and they are also a debt-free organization. Sherene Reams, resides at the Hannah Beach. On behalf of that facility she being provided a home with food and sh her the opportunity to go to school guidance on how to be a responsible Hope" is needed in the community. House in Huntington has felt blessed in elter. It has given and has given her adult. A "House of Mr. Card said the issue of this project is the three-story structure. A handout was given to the Commission for their review. He felt there were several points in support of their project and he outlined them during the presentation: A question of precedent; the use is categorically different. A question of impact to the Southwest Quadrant of the Old Towne area; approval of the project will not compromise the historic context of the District. A slide show accompanied the presentation, showing the surrounding area. They will be meeting a community need. Another issue is the overall height of the structure; they do not feel it is damaging to the adjacent properties. There is substantial open space on the project. By purchasing the second lot nearby, it is to create a 38 foot wide, 132 foot deep open space yard area; the open space is more than double that required by City code. The Design Review Board, in their approval of the project, recommended they return with a detailed landscaping plan to further mitigate the mass of the project. He showed houses with a third story dormer area in the surrounding neighborhood; the same concept they wish to incorporate. The issue of establishing a sense of home and family are very critical and they feel the open areas and appearance are important to that. He read a letter from Ann Cotton, a Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 4 registered counselor for the Orange County Rescue Mission, in strong support of the project and the design of it to facilitate interaction among the residents, something like the Ronald McDonald House. They feel there is a safety benefit in the design because of the children. The architectural plans are from the Ronald McDonald House; they were a partial gift and they have worked around them. Chairman Bosch noted for the record several letters have been received in support of the project, as well as a letter from Anne Siebert in opposition to it. Those speaking in favor Elmer Holthus, 192 North Cambridge, owns an apartment at 341 South Lemon. He felt when there was a well managed organization with a good track record you have significantly less problems with the people who inhabit that sort of place than you do with an average apartment. It would be highly appropriate to place this facility at this location. We need to ask ourselves, "What's the value of this?" Isn't the value greater than some minor controversial aesthetic point? David Disbrow, Orange Free Methodist Church, 305 West Almond, is the Director of a Christian Men's Home and supports this project 100 percent. Dee Mullin, 1449 North Blake Street, favors the project and thinks it is a very pleasing looking building. She supports the motives and intentions of the use of the home. Evelyn Wilson, Director of the Women's Home in Huntington Beach, She has seen many lives changed and the women need an opportunity and place to turn to. They live in a controlled environment. There is a 9 o'clock curfew and they are not allowed to loiter in the front yard. They are very low key in the neighborhood. People do not realize there is a shelter on the street. Elsie Bergstrom, 371 North Cleveland, supports the project and has a strong feeling for these women. Those speaking in opposition Robert Grow, six-unit, two line. He s supports Mr. proposed use objectives of 13692 Prospect Avenue, Santa Ana, owns a story apartment building close to the property poke on behalf of the building's residents and Holthus' opinion; he has no objection to the of the property. They support the goals and the Orange County Rescue Mission, but they Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 5 feel the construction of the three-story building would be detrimental to the character of the neighborhood and also to the quality of life for the residents. He requested the project be limited to two stories and design changes be made. Should it be approved, a sound barrier wall needs to be constructed along the northern boundary to insulate their property from the recreational area of the proposed project. Anne Siebert, 340 South Olive, spoke on behalf of Old Towne Preservation Association and also as a concerned neighbor. O.T.P.A. is not opposed to the projected use; it's commendable to have a home for homeless women and children. The use of the facility is not a key issue. However, the project is completely out of context with the surrounding neighborhood. The height of the building is not in compliance with the Old Towne Guidelines, which has a limit of 30 feet. The rest of Lemon Street is two story apartment buildings and a few single family homes. Approval of this project could set a precedent for future development in the Southwest Quadrant of Old Towne -- one that could further deplete their historic resources. The style of the proposed project is not defined; the Guidelines state one style should be chosen. This building overpowers the area -- too much mass, height, scale. If anything, it's more gorgeous than the neighborhood. The project should adhere to the Old Towne Design Guidelines. One of the goals of Old Towne is to keep pre-1940's style homes; to keep that historic resource together. The proposal proposes to demolish yet another resource -- a 1924 bungalow. The Design Review Board, in December, approved the project despite concerns over height, architectural style and overall scale/mass. The Old Towne Design Guidelines were not followed. O.T.P.A. met with the applicant several times and asked them to consider building a two-story project, bu t they were unwilling to compromise because they felt it was economically infeasible. Brian Mickelson, 335 West Palmyra, favors the House of Hope and welcomes responsible neighbors to Old Towne. He wanted to lend support to the people who lived behind the proposed project. There are many apartments not historically significant on Lemon, but the slide show did not show the homes behind the property. There are historically significant homes and the height of the project will have a very large impact on those homes. The slides showed homes which appeared to be three stories. Two homes, specifically, do not impact the surrounding yards because of the large setbacks. The reason the homes appear to be three stories is because of the high roofs over the two stories. The Ronald McDonald House also has a high roof over three stories; it will appear to be four stories. He felt the City would be setting a precedent for "special use" buildings and he doesn't want that to happen. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 6 Steve Nelson, 357 South Olive, feels the quality of life has deteriorated steadily in the Southwest Quadrant of Old Towne. Every builder has reasons why they should be exempt from what rules are in place. There is a serious overcrowding problem and the sky line is disappearing. This proposed structure will overwhelm his view to the west. The three story project will create additional problems. He requested the Commission offer no exceptions. Ratherine King, 222 West Palmyra, voiced the audience's concern with this project. She was impressed with the concept and the organization of the Rescue Mission. The Southwest Quadrant currently ranks third out of 54 districts for crime and crime-related problems. This is a direct result of the overcrowding and density in the existing area. She requested the project be redesigned to comply with the Old Towne Guidelines to be two stories. Connie McKay, 356 South Olive, has seen many changes in Orange; both bad and good. Her rental unit was built three years ago. What kind of privacy will she have because she has a two story apartment on the south side, a two story house on the north side and a three story proposed building on the west (behind her). It will be the great wall of Orange County around her house. She requested the plan be flip-flopped with the parking area behind her house instead of the structure. She would also like proper drainage and a uniformed wall (the same color). Randy Gates, 850 North Waverly, owns property next to the project at 385 South Lemon (it's a vacant lot). He is building a four unit apartment complex shortly. He spent 15 months working on the plans and spent a lot of money in order to comply with the Old Towne Guidelines. They are very concerned about the negative impact issues of this project. It's four times bigger than his project and he had City Council members tell him his project was way too massive. He's not opposed to the Mission's use, but concerned about his project and tenants and what they will live next door to. The applicant should also have to comply with Old Towne's Guidelines. Bob Meyers, 320 South Olive, said he resided in a 1904 Queen Ann Victorian 2-bedroom house. His main objection was the mass of the structure. The Ronald McDonald House gives an appearance of four stories; it's very similar to the pictures shown as three stories. He questioned the property in escrow; what is it for and can they build on that? Tita Smith, 169 North Shaffer, is a member of Old Towne Preservation Association. At the time the Ronald McDonald House was proposed O.T.P.A. had just come out of a two year Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 7 battle with Chapman College, who was also building a structure whose use was categorically different from residential use. Through negotiations, the size of the building was reduced to four stories. Eventually the plans lapsed and the structure was not built. About two weeks after that, the Ronald McDonald House was proposed. O.T.P.A. decided not to oppose that House because of the use, although it was clearly not fitting in with the design standards of the neighborhood. Another reason it was not opposed was because it was on the edge of Old Towne. Across the street from the Ronald McDonald House, is not Old Towne. That structure was not impacting Old Towne because it was on the outside edge. It's a similar situation this time; they do not oppose the use of the House of Hope, but this building is in the heart of Old Towne; it is in the middle of a residential neighborhood;and she believes it is only there because the Ronald McDonald House was built. Perhaps it was a mistake in not opposing that project. Her fear is to see this replicated two or three more times if it goes through this time. Bit by bit, Old Towne is being eaten away, especially in the Southwest Quadrant, which is zoned for multi-family. This project consolidates three lots to make one huge building. This is not a common feature in Old Towne. This is a compromise to what Old Towne looks like and stands for. There are not many historic homes on that block, bu t there is a historic home on the corner of the block and there are several behind it, as well as on the neighboring streets. The value of the Southwest Quadrant has been compromised repeatedly. She feels this project will be the final blow to that neighborhood; it will be the green light to just do away with the rest of the single family homes. She spoke about the proposed height of the building as opposed to the existing homes. The Ronald McDonald House plans were a gift to the House of Hope, but this project needs to be a gift to the whole community. She was somewhat confused as to the actual land use of the project. It was listed in the staff report as a group home. To her knowledge, any group home must be licensed by the State of California. However, they were assured a license was not needed from the State of California for this facility because it is a church. What happens if the use of the building is outgrown? She feared that it would be divided into apartments if for some reason the Rescue Mission were to leave. The large building would remain in the neighborhood as a misfit if it is not addressed now. Jim Thompson, 225 South Olive, thought the design was somewhat in question in relation to the fire structure. There is a massive open center and all the bedrooms are on the second and third floors. The surrounding houses are built of old wood. The existing fire codes of the State of California do not address an old town or the old wooden Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 8 structures. They address modern construction. The Neigh t of the building is a serious issue. If the applicant were willing to sink the first floor, then they would have three floors and keep it two stories tall. Rebuttal Mr. Card responded to the question of the additional lot in escrow. He explained it was just one proposal. Additional construction projects were not being proposed. He pointed out the location of Ms. McKay's house on the site plan. Directly behind the House of Hope is a single story garage structure, then an alley, and a two story apartment building. (The speaker provided the Commission with an exhibit showing her property behind the building.) Many cards were submitted. They thought names were going to be called. Many supporters did not speak, but he wanted the Commission to know there was a broad base of support for the project. The average height of the structure is 34 and the height to the ridgeline is 37 inches. They are consistent with all the issues relating to use for zoning (i.e., setbacks, parking, required licenses). They do not need a State license because of the way the organization is formed. They feel 27 years of experience in operating their programs is testimony to the stability of the organization. Numerous conditions must be met for fire safety as required by the Fire Department, which they are fully prepared to meet. They feel the Design Review Board adequately considered the issue and with their unanimous recommendation in support of the design, it speaks to the further support of the recommendation. Chairman Bosch refocused on the Design Review Board and the height and bulk issues. Those are critical concerns in the Old Towne Guidelines (ordinance). He would like to hear the applicant's approach to what steps have been taken to reduce the concerns of the height and bulk issues. Mr. Card said they have taken the minor modifications staff has recommended with respect to the treatment of the roof line; they have not requested their architect to develop plans that would completely eliminate the third story. Chairman Bosch asked if they have looked at other site to configurations utilizing the existing building or other minor modifications to the building that would reduce the bulk at the third floor? William O'Keefe, 18002 Sky Park Circle, Irvine, was the architect on the original project for Ronald McDonald and is now part of this project. They did address those issues. They cut back the front of the building. They don't want Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 9 this project to stand out like the Ronald McDonald House. They want it to blend in a little more. They took the gable away and created more of a hip; cut back the elevation of the house to the street. It was very critical in the way they set the building. There are walls on all three sides of the project. The whole purpose of the atrium space that looks down into the living room and common areas, is the fact it makes people interact with one another, creating a family unit. If you look at the footprints of the building, and reduce the building to two stozies, you must take out 20 feet of 38 feet of open area, which is landscaping. The building will take up more area on the site and provide less open space to the neighbors. The Planning Commission did receive the elevations of the proposed building for review. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cathcart thought the House of Hope and the projected use is something that the community would benefit from; he didn't have a problem with it. However, there are two separate issues -- the 21 unit transitional group home and the architectural plans as submitted. After reviewing the staff comments, there seems to be a lack of compromise on the applicant's behalf. It bothered him because Orange has put together architectural guidelines to keep avoiding the exceptions from becoming the rule. Ms. Wolff responded the two requests are tied together because a Conditional Use Permit is based on a particular site plan. If the use were to be approved, it would be subject to the plan before the Commission. If modifications were to be made by the Commission, perhaps a continuance to look at alternative designs would be an option. Commissioner Cathcart wished the applicant would request a continuance in order to re-evaluate staff's concerns as well as the community's concerns on the height limitation. Commissioner Master thought it was rather obvious the community at large supports this type of use. The issue is one of compatibility with the guidelines and existing development. Perhaps with the applicant hearing these comments, he might want to consider an alternative of a continuance. Commissioner Murphy said they were pleased that the City of Orange and Old Towne was chosen for this project, but he echoed the concerns of his fellow Commissioners from the stand point of seemingly a real lack of compromise or communication in working on this project. He would also like to see a continuance. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 10 Chairman Bosch said this project would have a lasting and broadening impact on the neighborhood and they must be concerned about that as well. The use is not only admirable, but extraordinary. It would be an addition to the "menu" of uses and opportunities available in Old Towne. In not following the Old Towne Guidelines would cause severe problems. He asked the applicant to reconsider the specific height impacts because it will cause a hardship throughout the Old Towne structure and they really don't want to lose either one. Mr. Card thought by having D.R.B. vote favorably, it appeared they were on the right track. They will not ignore the input they've heard and will accept a continuance to discuss options with staff. Time is of the essence because they are in escrow on both properties. He thought a 30 day continuance would give them enough time to look at alternative plans. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, that with due consideration by the applicant and his concurrence, that Conditional Use Permit 1890-91 and Negative Declaration 1367-91 be continued to March 4, 1991. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Master said questions arose about the use of this facility hereafter. He would like staff to report on this issue at the March 4 meeting. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1868-90 - THOMAS JONES A request for a conditional use permit to allow a commercial recreational (remote control car racing) use with shared parking in the M-1 (Light Manufacturing) District. Subject property is located at the northeast corner of Glassell Street and Meats Avenue, addressed 121 East Meats Avenue. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303. A staff report was not presented and the public hearing was opened. Applicant Thomas Jones, 1663 Chernus Lane, Chino Hills, has leased an Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 11 industrial building and is intending to put a remote control race car facility in it. It entails a track area with a wall around it consisting of dirt and an area with benches for customers to work on their cars. The only problem they have is the parking situation. They furnished the Traffic Division with a survey. Other similar uses are operating on a parking basis of about 3 per 1,000 square feet. Planning is requiring more than that and they seek relief from that. Chairman Bosch asked if Mr. Jones had read the staff report and conditions? Mr. Jones had a copy of the staff report and the only condition he was questioning was that relating to parking. Commissioner Master asked if there was a problem with the removal of the gates and storage that needs to be removed. Mr. Jones said they were informed by the Fire Department that as long as the gates had knox locks on them, they could remain. The gates would be open during business hours; the only time they would be closed is when the facility is closed. Chairman Bosch read Condition 4, requiring the existing gates at both driveways to be removed. Mr. Jones thought there was confusion as to the hours of operation. It is his intent to open the facility around 12 noon and continue until closing. Racing does not begin until 5 or 6 p.m., but he wants to open at noon for retail and office operation. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cathcart commented on Condition 4. Was this a staff recommendation? Ms. Wolff said the recommendation was based on assurance that the in and out flow of traffic through the site is not restricted. It was an E.R.B. concern; not specifically related to the Fire Department. Commissioner Cathcart wondered if there was a conflict with the owner of the air conditioning company and the storing of his property? Staff responded there appears to be a conflict; they did not know for a fact if he was aware of that condition. The owner of the air conditioning company had submitted a letter as part of the application that he agrees his parking can be used by the raceway operation. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 12 Commissioner Murphy voiced his concern about the loss of storage area and the securing of said property. Chairman Bosch said they could add an addendum to Condition 4 to require that the concurrence of the owner of the adjacent property, which would have the shared access and parking use, file a written concurrence to Community Development prior to the allowance of any issuance of a building/occupancy permit for said use. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to approve Conditional Use Permit 1868-90 with Conditions 1-3, modifying Condition 4, (noted above) and continuing with Conditions 5-17. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1-91 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1365-91 - REORGANIZED CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS: A proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, changing the designation from the existing Residential Low Medium Density (6 to 15 dwelling units per acre) to Residential Medium Density (15 to 24 dwelling units per acre). Subject property is located on the east side of Tustin Street between Palmyra Avenue and La Veta Avenue, addressed 393-395 South Tustin Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1365-91 has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts of this project. A staff report was not presented as there was no opposition and the public hearing was opened. Applicant Steve Prothero, 741 East Briardale, architect with Shimozono Associates, represented the R.L.D.S. Stake. They are requesting that the property be re-designated as a Medium to High Density Dwelling Units per acre on the General Plan as opposed to the Low Medium Density designation that has been placed on it limiting it to 15 dwelling units per acre. Prior to 1989, the General Plan designation was 15 to 25 dwelling units per acre. They feel the property is well suited for a higher density use. On the north it is bounded by properties that are at 25 dwelling units per acre. On the west side, across the street, there is commercial Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 13 property. The south side is bounded by the Care Unit Hospital. On the east side, bounded by the Santiago River Channel. There is no conflict to the higher density use. It is consistent with the use that is between Tustin and the 55 Freeway. Although the approval is for the whole site, it is the intent of the Church to maintain approximately two acres of the facility in church use and develop the balance of the two acres into apartment units generating income for the Church. The apartments would yield approximately 48 dwelling units per acre f or the entire site. Regarding environmental issues, there were none found on the project. They request approval of this project due to its proximity to the street and the fact it is not encroaching on any incompatible uses. Commissioner Cathcart explained the Commission must make an environmental determination for this request. He asked if the applicant knew about any wildlife that existed and if it would impact the project? Mr. Prothero said it was only one portion of the corner of the site that encroaches onto the channel. The balance of the site is level above and out of the channel. It is not part of the channel. The site is fully developed to that corner with some buildings that the Church uses as a day care facility. They would be removing that building and trading building for building in future development. The site has been graded and is being utilized as a parking lot or as an undeveloped site. He understands the Corps. of Engineers has no plans for the channel usage. Commissioner Cathcart asked how many spaces of the Church would be occupied by the congregation on a Sunday? Mr. Prothero said they would meet the parking requirement for the Church (as a joint use project -- Church and Social Hall) and as shown, they meet code requirements. They're not asking for joint use parking, which is incompatible with apartments. Mr. Johnson said the Corps. of Engineers did not have any plans for the area. He understands the buildings were built some time ago and there was a buffer left between the buildings and the channel such that if there was a lateral erosion problem, equipment could gain access. If the buildings are to be moved closer to the channel, then the channel would need to be improved. Chairman Bosch asked what assurance they would have that the Church and Social Hall use would be restricted to different hours of operation. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 14 Mr. Prothero responded a recorded document could be submitted. Chairman Bosch commented they were indicating a desire to develop two acres, but the General Plan Amendment is being asked to apply to the entire site. Thus, the impact they must consider for the potential of the future is that the Church may move and the structures demolished at some time. Automatically then, the higher density would occur over the overall site. Were there traffic generation figures or potential design impacts relative to police, fire safety that would occur if such was the case, including the need for adequate access to the site? Mr. Prothero stated access to the site was from Tustin Avenue. They must provide Fire Department access satisfactory to the relative Departments that review the project. That would be handled at the time of site plan review. Chairman Bosch asked the question because the conceptual site plan illustrates something that could become a private or public street with a cul de sac in the future, leaving a remnant parcel readily developed for multi-family. Mr. Prothero said the Church has not had them look at that possibility at this time. In the future, there is a potential for the full site being developed to the maximum density. Commissioner Cathcart said even though Tustin is developed to carry the load larger than exists now, including the trips generated by this project at maximum build out, he thought they were looking at about 688 trips per day. The issue is ingress/egress at that point. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Master senses an inconsistency in actions as consideration by the Commission. Not too long ago the extension of La Veta was turned down and it was recommended that other means be sought to reduce the impact by looking at less aggressive development in other areas. He finds this to be just the opposite -- an application to increase the density. He has severe reservations and concerns about this project. He cannot consider increasing the density. The total circulation plan was based on the build out of the zoning as it stood. That plan identified the problems as well as the alternatives. Chairman Bosch added the City wrestled greatly with densities in this particular area not too long ago regarding Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 15 not only traffic but the existing density and quality of life. Changing this back to a higher density in the General Plan Amendment would set a precedent for other applications to come back to ruin what the City has gained for the area. The Commission must consider the potential total development of the overall site once it has a General Plan application to i t. Commissioner Master had problems with the findings in the Negative Declaration. He would want to alter the statement that the E.R.B. has found the proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant adverse environmental impact to the surrounding properties. He finds the situation of traffic in opposition to that. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, to not accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board regarding Negative Declaration 1365-91. The findings are inadequate because of the factors regarding deletion of surrounding circulation elements and the adverse impact of the traffic generation by an increase in density. The statistics relative to traffic in the staff report are appropriate based upon the number of units staff analyzed, but it must be considered for the potential total development of the site and the accumulative impact it would make. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to recommend the City Council deny General Plan Amendme nt 1-91 for reasons so stated regarding the impact and long-term effects on the traffic circulation, quality of life and known impacts of existing adjacent density which led to the previous change in the General Plan, and particularly in light of previous action by the Commission and City Council. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED Ms. Wolff stated this action was a recommendation to the City Council and it will be scheduled for City Council hearing in approximately three to five weeks. Planning Commission Minutes Febru ary 4, 1991 - Page 16 IN RE: NEW HEARINGS ZONE CHANGE 1132-91 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1368-91 - BECERRA AND GARCIA: A request for a zone change for two residential lots from R-1-7 (Residential, single f amily, minimum lot size 7,000 square feet) to R-1-20 (Residential, single family, minimum lot size 20,000 square feet). Subject property is located on the north side of Walnut Avenue approximately 300 feet east of Hewes Street, addressed 4605 and 4625 East Walnut Avenue. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1368-91 has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts of this project. Chris Carnes, Associate Planner, presented a full staff report. The applicants are requesting a Zone Change for two residential parcels from R-1-7 to R-1-20. The two parcels are both 20,187 square feet in size. Both parcels are developed as single family residential structures with two car garages. The parcel addressed as 4625 East Walnut also has three existing horses that are non-conforming to the R-1-7 zoning district. The major impacts of the proposal are the keeping of livestock, particularly farm animals. The property addressed as 4605 East Walnut, which does not have livestock animals or f arm animals, such as ducks and chickens, would be allowed to keep them. The house at 4625 East Walnut would be able to add to the three existing horses, additional chickens and ducks. The other impacts of the proposal is that since the minimum lot size would be increased from 7,000 to 20,000, the two existing parcels could not be further subdivided. They would have the right to submit for a conditional use permit for a secondary dwelling unit. Other than that, additional dwelling units could not be added to the properties. The proposal is only for a zone change and no other development is proposed at this time. Another impact of the zone change is that if it is approved, it would create two non-conforming lots in terms of lot width. Both parcels have 87 feet in width. Commissioner Murphy questioned Page 5 of the staff report. It noted that if the applicant did make a request for a second dwelling unit, that it be a requirement to dedicate 10 feet of additional street right-of-way. At that point, the lot sizes would be under 20,000 square feet. Is that an issue or problem based on R-1-20 zoning? Mr. Carnes stated the major impact of that would be reducing the ability to keep one livestock. In terms of approving the zone change, it would not have an impact. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 17 The public hearing was opened. Applicant Sandra Garcia, 4625 East Walnut, has lived in the area for over 36 years. They try to maintain the property and keep it the same. She has submitted pictures and petitions in support of the Zone Change to staff. Having the R-1-7 changed to R-1-20 would allow them to keep from subdividing their property. They are trying to keep their same original use; they're not changing any structures. The proposed new trails at Salem Park is one mile away from her home; it will be moved to less than a mile soon. They have tried to comply with all the rules. Commissioner Cathcart asked if they don't plan on changing anything, why the reason for a zone change? Ms. Garcia does not want to worry about subdivision. She has been approached by developers. She would like to keep her property as one family owned property. Her property has a historical background. Chairman Bosch said as long as they own those properties, they can't be subdivided without permission. The only result of preventing them from being subdivided through a zone change would be if the applicant intended to sell the property. The Commission did not understand what was to be gained by doing this. Ms. Garcia said their property would have a greater value with the zone change. Commissioner Murphy asked if the keeping of livestock were an issue for going to the R-1-20 designation? Ms. Garcia could not say yes or no. She presently has fought for the right to keep her animals. The Court has allowed her to do that. Chairman Bosch understood that the westerly property, 4605 East Walnut, does not have livestock. (Correct.) He was concerned because he had a copy of an aerial photograph showing pygmy goats and it appeared to be in the general location of said properties. They are currently not allowed in the City. Ms. Garcia said those animals were on a lot (in the tract area) behind her property. Nancy Becerra, 4605 East Walnut, has not had any livestock at her address. It's country style living in her section; Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 18 they are isolated from the surrounding tract homes. The City would not allow her to build because of the ditch in front of her house unless she subdivided her property. She wants to keep her property as one piece; the way it is. Those speaking in opposition George Eden, 468 North Hamlin, is opposed to the request. Livestock will cause odor. A drainage ditch runs along the front of the properties. The street is very narrow and it is not safe for r iding horses. Property values range in price close to $300,000. They want to change three lots and the surrounding neighbors must put up with the horses, chickens and other livestock. It's not the proper place for these animals. Joe Oborny, 457 North Hamlin, was opposed because 27 years ago there were 27,000 chickens on a chicken ranch. These animals should not be allowed in the residential neighborhoods. Leonard Brazitis, 4638 Orange Grove Avenue, had a copy of a petition for the removal of the horses. The horses have not been there in excess of 2 1/2 years. The past two summers they have not been able to use their patio because of the smell and fly situation. Vector Control has had problems in cleaning the place up because of the horses. In 1982 when he purchased his home, there were no horses. Bob Hutchison, 4616 East Orangegrove Avenue, has looked down onto the property in question for 21 years. There was a horse there when he moved in, but for 15 or 16 years there were no horses. It was only the last few years horses have appeared there. They have put up a shed with hay in it, two stables -- they can't use their backyard or patio because of flies, smell and dust. Mr. Herrick realizes people still disagree with the findings that the Court may have made, but the Court has made a finding of fact with respect to the existence or non-existence of that use. The City is bound by that finding. If there were to be an appeal, it could not over turn the finding of fact based on the evidence. The Commission should not consider the request to have the horses removed as part of the proceedings. Gena Hutchison, 4616 East Orangegrove Avenue, said they were already bothered by horse flies most of the summer. They are not able to do any thing at the moment; however, they have not given up. They hope the Commission would not allow them to have chickens, geese and ducks. They can't use their property because of the way she's allowed to use hers. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 19 Ed Hill, 571 North Espanita Street, said the issue is livestock. He didn't think anyone wanted to control how the people use their property. Trails are paths where you ride horses and it is quite a ways to the trails from this property. The horse arena is located at the Salem Church in Orange Park Acres, considerably more than one mile away. There are no trails for walking your horse down there. They moved into the tract in 1975. It has only been recently that livestock has become an issue. He doesn't mind waking up to a chicken crowing. But the smell of horses is getting bad. Dust is quite heavy in summer months. The aroma and flies are a definite issue. He understands the concern of wanting to be able to maintain the old days, but the old days have been lost. Regarding the issue of the pygmy goats, one of his neighbors had a child in high school going through the agriculture program. They had a couple of pygmy goats, but they are no longer there. They took them to the agriculture farm because it became an issue. Ed Mounds, 1311 East Chalyn, use to live next door to Ms. Garcia at 4647 East Walnut. His father sold her father their property. Unfortunately things change and it's not horse property any more. If the zoning is changed, will it affect his property? Ms. Wolff explained the application is for the two properties at 4605 and 4625 East Walnut. A zone change would not affect any other properties. Rebuttal Ms. Garcia has checked the mileage of where the trails begin from her property. They begin 1/2 block from them on the corner of Rancho Santiago and Walnut. She is not the only one in the area with animals. She doesn't have chickens -- only horses and dogs -- nor does she desire to have them. The Hutchison's have five dogs. She compared the attraction of flies between the horses and dogs. She tries to get along with her neighbors and keeps to herself. Chairman Bosch stated the Commission had received 22 form letters in support as well as a petition. He questioned the petition because Mr. Eden's signature is in support of the request, but he spoke against it. There was also confusion about the dates of the petition. The issue before the Commission is re-zoning which can allow other things to occur besides the keeping of horses as an existing non-conforming use. The public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 20 Commissioner Cathcart did not believe the question was answered clearly on why the zone change unless the applicants are wishing to increase the livestock. Mr. Herrick said the Commission would be considering the possibility of making what is now a legal non-conforming use a conforming use. Commissioner Cathcart was in favor of keeping the present zoning. Chairman Bosch stated the one lot was not allowed to keep animals; they would have to conform to the current zoning requirements for the R-1-7 lot. All Commissioners concurred with keeping the present zoning. There would be nothing to gain except expanding a non-conforming use and create a spot zoning island in the midst of an entire district that is zoned R-1-7. It would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Master, to not accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board. Negative Declaration 1368-91 is found to be inadequate because the proposed project would increase the concentration of animals on the project with environmental degradation to the parcels and the surrounding neighborhood. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Master, to recommend the City Council deny Zone Change 1132-91 because the proposed zoning is inconsistent with the zoning immediately adjacent and in the overall area of the project, and would allow an increase in use of the property that would be detrimental to the zone and existing uses. AYES: Commissioners NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy Scott IN RE: OTHER BUSINESS MOTION CARRIED 1. Relative to Conditional Use Permit 1878-90 - IDM project - the Commission scheduled a special meeting for February 11, 1991 contingent upon the Commission receiving in their hands the information promised by the applicant by February 1. Said information has not been received; therefore, the meeting is cancelled. Re-advertising costs need to be borne by the applicant. Planning Commission Minutes February 4, 1991 - Page 21 Mr. Godlewski said they received correspondence from the IDM Corporation stating they wished to put on hold until an indefinite time when they could bring back the project for review. No specific date was mentioned. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Cathcart to continue Conditional Use Permit 1878-90 to an indefinite date with re-advertising costs to be borne by the applicant. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED 2. Chairman Bosch received a letter from Mr. Martini at 638 East Walnut, dated February 4, 1991 requesting consideration of an appeal of a decision made by the Director of Community Development regarding the Chapman College Specific Plan on gateways. He requested staff to address this item and advise the Commission about disposition. Mr. McGee said there has been a great deal of activity in the community of Chapman College lately regarding the dormitory building which has recently begun. There is a big whole in the ground at Walnut and Grand and footings have been poured. As part of the Chapman College Specific Plan, there are procedures for how items are to be approved. This particular item did follow the procedures to the best of the ability of the Community Development Department. They received a proposal early last year from Chapman College to construct the three-story dormitory building with under ground parking on that corner. Planning reviewed the proposal on a staff level with the Council Committee of Mayor Smith and Mayor Protem Beyer to obtain their concurrence. Now that construction has begun, there are some neighbors who are very concerned with the amount of access of driveways which appear on the Grand Street frontage. There is a procedure within the Specific Plan that allows anyone to appeal any decision by the Community Development Director to the Planning Commission. Apparently that is the request of Mr. Martini. The issue he is appealing is one of how much access is secondary access and how literal an interpretation is given of an exhibit within the Specific Plan. There is a circulation exhibit that shows graphically symbols that seem to indicate the secondary access points. Staff has taken a somewhat looser view of what those symbols mean than what the neighbors would like those symbols to mean. They are counting squares on the map and assuming there will be Planning Commission Minutes Febru ary 4, 1991 - Page 22 no more driveways. Unfortunately, there are less squares on the map than there were driveways when the Specific Plan was started. It's a very difficult thing to administer in a literal context. A meeting is scheduled for Wednesday evening with the College, neighbors, Community Development Department and Councilman Steiner. Hopefully, a solution can be found to this problem. He has not seen a written request from Mr. Martini to appeal that decision, but assumes it is coming very shortly. IN RE: "ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to adjourn to a regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting on February 20, 1991, followed the next day, February 21, for a study session with City Council to discuss the Zoning Ordinance revision. Said study session to be at 8:30 a.m. in the Weimer Room. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. sld