Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-03-1991 PC MinutesPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Orange June 3, 1991 Orange, California 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; 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 MAY 6, 1991 Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to approve the Minutes of May 6, 1991 as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1907-91 - DIANE GLENN: A request to allow for a board and care facility housing developmentally disabled persons within an existing 4-unit apartment building. Subject property is addressed 340 West Fairway Drive. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303. Planning staff received a phone call from the applicant requesting a continuance to July 15, 1991. Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Master to continue Conditional Use Permit 1907-91 to July 15, 1991. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION Planning Commission Minutes June 3, 1991 - Page 2 IN RE: NEW HEARINGS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14510, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1908-91, NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1382-91 - CLOW AND CLOW, INC.: A request for a tentative tract map to subdivide a portion of the 2.15 acre Grace Baptist Church site into four residential parcels, and a conditional use permit to create three lots without direct access to public streets and to modify the church's original conditional use permit. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1382-91 has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts of this project. Ms. Wolff presented the full staff report. The zoning on this parcel is R-1-8 (Single Family Residential, Minimum Lot Size 8,000 square feet). The Church is currently operating under Conditional Use Permit 261 issued in 1962. The Planning Commission, approximately six months ago, heard and approved a subsequent Conditional Use Permit on this property, permitting the operation of a Montessori School within the existing classroom building. The property now contains two buildings -- a sanctuary and a classroom with associated parking. The original C.U.P. was approved for three buildings and a greater build out of the site. The tract map is to subdivide the lot into six parcels. The Church will remain on a parcel just over an acre in size. The other half will be divided into four residential lots, 8,000 or more square feet, and one lot for a private driveway serving these four residences. Project implementation will involve the removal of the existing landscaping and a portion of the paved parking area; a reduction of the existing parking lot from 155 spaces to 78 spaces; and the creation of four residential lots plus the driveway, which will be 32 feet wide. The driveway lot will also contain a block wall separating the Church from the residences, landscaped strips and a six foot wide sidewalk on the east side of the drive. The driveway will provide a circulation link between Taft and the northerly portion of the Church's parking lot. The Church's parking reduction can be achieved in accordance with the p arking code requirements because the site was not built out as originally planned and approved. The public hearing was opened. Applicant John Clow, 210 East Ponderosa Lane, Anaheim, requested the four residential lots because it will be a viable project in the City. The lots are 80 x 100 square feet. Family unit Planning Commission Minutes June 3, 1991 - Page 3 homes will be built with four bedrooms. They are working with the Church as they are a small denomination (36 church members) . The Church does not have the donations to meet their needs. Those speaking in f avor Glenn Schlegel, 3633 West Ball Road #109, Anaheim, is the Chairman of the Board for the Church. They are going through a financial stress and felt it was a good thing for them to sell the property and to have the homes built, which would be an asset to the Church as far as the development of the land. They would rather see homes than apartments. They are using the finances that come from the sale of the property to clear up the existing loans that have been put on to the property years ago. Bal Schlegel, real estate broker, 2122 East Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, addressed some issues in the staff report. On Page 9, Item 20, relates to the maintenance responsibilities for the private drive and landscaping. They are in compliance with the condition. In the sale agreement of the subject project, the Church has agreed to continue the normal maintenance of the private street way that will be going in. The homeowners will only be responsible for any change or damage to the street beyond what would be considered as normal wear and tear. Their attorney will be drafting the maintenance agreement and if the City Attorney would like to review the agreement, they would welcome that. In conjunction with this, Item 12 on Page 4 addresses the establishing of an Association. There is a private agreement being established so they would like the Association to be eliminated as a requirement. On Page 3, Item D, addresses the fence separating the Church and private driveway. They requested the fence be eliminated as a requirement. While the fence would separate the two lots, but the fence would tend to create a "boxed in" feeling. The second issue is the potential security risks of a large block wall fence. They felt with the proper landscaping the same effect could be accomplished and yet keep an open and aesthetically appealing project. Ms. Wolff responded it was not until last Thursday the applicant called staff and told them they did not want a homeowner's association. In talking with the City Attorney, he felt the condition as written, was adequate to address the situation without necessarily forming a homeowner's association. Mr. Herrick said the condition itself refers to the drafting and recording of CC&R's. CC&R's don't necessarily have to Planning Commission Minutes June 3, 1991 - Page 4 create a homeowner's association. They can use other devices to provide for maintenance. The actual condition, as written, does not require them to establish a homeowner's association for that purpose. Their office would be happy to look at the agreement and determine whether or not they think the interest of the City and having the maintenance taken care of are properly provided for in those agreements. Any private agreement would have to be in a recordable form so that buyers, in the future, would take the property with the knowledge of that obligation. It would be of record for the real property. CC&R's would appear to be the most appropriate way to do that. Ms. Wolff said the block wall was requested of the applicant by the Environmental Review Board. In reviewing the project, the Board felt that in order to create a quality living environment and to give those four residences some privacy, a block wall would be appropriate. Those speaking in opposition Enrique Cary, 7025 Sundance Circle, owns the apartment building directly east of the Church. He's not in opposition to the project, bu t has two areas of concern. They have been relatively good neighbors with the previous pastors, as well as the current pastor and tried to work out problems as neighbors should. He questioned the subdivision of a small portion of the entire lot. Is it really in the best interest of everyone involved? Would the Church be better off to maybe sell the entire property, which could then be developed in like kind. Then they could take their assets to another location which could serve their needs. If the project is going to be approved the way it is planned, currently there is an existing concrete block wall on the western portion of his property that borders the eastern portion of the Church property. The wall was built 25 years ago when the original project was put in. He has paid to repair it on three different occasions over the seven years he has owned the property. The construction of the wall is such that it does not have any rebar; it is dry stacked block cemented together. If four single family residences are built adjoining that wall, sooner or later there will be structural failures. He requested a new wall be constructed as part of the development. The elevation of his property is three to four feet higher than the pad. Those owners may be better off if a higher wall is built to afford them some privacy. Larry Bonin, 332 South Olive, wondered if the City has considered buying this property for park use or some kind of community center? Planning Commission Minutes June 3, 1991 - Page 5 Mr. Herrick clarified for the record that any proposals for City acquisition of real property should not be considered by the Commission with respect to any particular development proposal. RPhi~t4-al Mr. Clow's concern with the staff report was the six foot wide sidewalk on the east side of the private drive. He wondered if the Commission would rescind that from six feet to four feet so the homeowners would have two more feet of landscaped area. The Church has been at this location for 30 years and for them to move would be a hardship. They will be grading per the grading plans. Their pad will be higher than the pad next door. If anything, it will reinforce the existing block wall. They will work with the owner next door and if the fence is damaged during construction, they will take care of it. Existing trees are along the fence on the neighbor's side, next to the apartments. In response to the question regarding the six foot sidewalk, Mr. Johnson responded that was their standard width for a sidewalk. Within the six feet, they would be able to accommodate fire hydrants, street signs, lights, and providing minimum handicap clearances under state law. A four foot sidewalk would not provide for those items. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cathcart was concerned with the increased run off of surplus water. As shown on the tract map, the water is going to be funneled north and west through the property at the northwest corner. The present condition is not going to be adequate for the amount of run off. Mr. Johnson said staff looked at that issue. He felt a condition should be added that required the engineer who was creating the tract to look at the hydrology and hydraulics of the site, and to provide the calculations t.o determine if the amount of water has increased; thus provide increased drainage facilities to handle that problem. Commissioner Scott felt the block wall was needed because the Church's activity. He had a concern about the grading of the lots. If it's a garden type wall, they cannot fill against it. A retaining wall would be required. Mr. Johnson thought the applicant's intent was to get by e~ without building retaining walls, even though there may be some existing elevations that are higher in the future. Planning Commission Minutes June 3, 1991 - Page 6 It's his guess they will cut it down to stay within the one foot "magic" dimension and not build a retaining wall. The water drains from east to west, and it would go over the top of the curb on the east side. Nuisance water will continually sheet across the street and that deteriorates the pavement. The new owners could expect to have higher than normal maintenance requirements. Moved by Chairman Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Master, to recommend to the City Council to accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board regarding Negative Declaration 1382-91 in that it is in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and they have found that this project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment or wildlife resources. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Master, to recommend to the City Council to approve Tentative Tract Map 14510 and Conditional Use Permit 1908-91 subject to Conditions 1-26, and with the addition of Condition 27 requesting a hydrology and drainage study be provided with the appropriate mitigation measures. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1400 CONSISTENCY FINDING - TISHMAN EXECUTIVE TOWERS: A request to consider a parking reduction in conjunction with construction of Phase II of this project. A determination is needed as to whether this reduction will result in substantial conformance with Conditional Use Permit 1400. Applicant Behrouze Ehdaie, The Vee Collaborative, 917 Glenneyre Street a, Laguna Beach, architect, said one of the reasons for this reduction request is that in early 1985 when they applied for the C.U.P., at that time 4 cars per 1,000 was the requirement. They built the first phase and provided about 1200 cars. The project is 95$ leased and they are using approximately 950 cars. They have counted cars at different times of the day and cannot count more than 900 Planning Commission Minutes June 3, 1991 - Page 7 cars. If leased at 100, not more than 1,000 cars would be parking at this location. Based on their studies in the area, the market is around 3.3 cars per 1,000. Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Cathcart, that the Planning Commission found the parking reduction proposed is acceptable and that the modified project substantially conforms to the project approval under Conditional Use Permit 1400. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - CITY OF ORANGE: A determination as to consistency between the City's 7 Year Capital Improvement Program and the General Plan. Scott Morgan briefed the Commission by stating in their study session they reviewed the proposed 7 Year Capital Improvement Program (May 20 and June 3, 1991). As indicated by Jere Murphy at the May 20 study session, all proposed projects conformed to the General Plan with the exception of projects highlighted in the document in a gray background. For these projects, amendments to the General Plan will be requested prior to making those specific siting decisions. It was recommended these projects still be included in the Capital Improvement Program, but no funds be expended prior to completing the appropriate General Plan amendments. The gray shaded areas include: the new Main Library; Northeast Branch Library; Fire Station #3; new Fire Department headquarters; Fire Station #6; Fire Station #10 and equipment associated with it; Knoll Hills; and Knoll Hills Park Planning Commission Minutes June 3, 1991 - Page 8 Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Cathcart, to accept the recommendations as per the staff report: (1) The Commission finds that the Capital Improvement Program projects are consistent with the General Plan, with the exception of projects highlighted with a gray background; and (2) The Commission recommends the City Council direct that no funds be expended on the projects highlighted in gray prior to amending the General Plan to ensure consistency. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: OTHER ITEMS Commissioner Cathcart correspondence from Carole forwarded to staff and the care of. received a phone call and Walters regarding D.R.B. It was appropriate actions will be taken IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to adjourn to a study session Wednesday, June 5, 1991 at 5:30 p.m. in the Weimer Room to discuss the mitigation monitoring program and the earthquake fault zone at Newport and Chapman (Negative Declaration 1384-91). AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Master, Murphy, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. sld