Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-06-1994 PC MinutesMINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John Godlewski, Manager of Current Planning; Stan Soo-Hoo, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF MAY 16. 1994 June 6, 1994 Monday - 7:00 p.m. Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to approve the Minutes of May 16, 1994 as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Smith NOES: None ABSTAINED: Commissioners Cathcart, Walters MOTION CARRIED The abstentions were because of the absences of those Commissioners. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2066-94 -ORANGE VILLA BIBLE CHURCH A request to add a 3,600 square foot multi-purpose building onto an existing church school facility. The conditional use permit request is to allow the expansion of a church school within a residential district. Subject property is addressed 1820 East Meats Avenue. NOTE: This item is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. There was no opposition to this request; therefore, the full reading of the staff report was waived. The public hearing was opened. Applicant Bruce Bender, 395 North Fern, said they were trying to put together a building to offer more to the youth; a place to keep them off the streets. The building will be open mostly in the afternoons and occasional evenings for the kids to come and do their homework and congregate under a supervised capacity rather than being out on the streets. They're in a neighborhood that's given more towards gangs and they're hoping to have a positive impact in the commurnty. They have read the staff report and questioned the need for restrooms in the new building. An existing building, which is close, is set up with restrooms and handicap facilities. They were riot planning to add a bathroom. Planning Commission Minutes June 6, 1994 Chairman Bosch said regardless of the existing bathrooms, they will have to conform to the requirements for bathroom facilities under the Uniform Plumbing Code, which may cause them to have a different count of water closets, lavatories, etc. -- it may affect them. Commissioner Cathcart pointed out condition 3 in that the multipurpose room shall not be used concurrently with the sanctuary, unless one of the facilities is used for youth or similar activities that do not require parking. Staff's major concern was parking and he shared that concern. Mr. Bender responded the only time the two buildings would be used concurrently would be during the Sunday morning service for Sunday School. And it would only be for the youth. Commissioner Smith asked how old the children were that encompassed the youth? Mr. Bender said the youth consisted of 7th graders through high school. He didn't know if a specific age limit would be placed upon the youth. The public hearing was closed. Chairman Bosch noted the project was categorically exempt from CEQA. Moved by Commissioner Cathcart, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to approve Conditional Use Permit 2066-94 with all the conditions as stipulated. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters NOES: None MOTION CARRIED MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1906-91 -BRUCE JORDAN, JORDAN-VALLI ARCHITECTS, INC. A request to modify approved Conditional Use Permit 1906-91, which permitted the construction and operation of aself-storage facility. The proposal is to revise the site plan by adjusting the property boundaries, shifting the project's public entryway to the south and adding building area. Subject property is located north of Chapman Avenue and west of McPherson Road. NOTE: Previously certified Negative Declaration 1381-91 evaluated the environmental impacts of this project. A staff report was not presented because there was no opposition to this project. The public hearing was opened. Applicant Bruce Jordan, 34700 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 200, Capistrano Beach, represented Hunt Enterprises. They request to modify the existing conditional use permit. Their request is a problem solving adventure. When the original project was designed, they found the office building (that is on the corner of Chapman and McPherson) encroached onto their property. They set out to resolve a way for both properties to go forward without any impacts to either property. It was. through the transaction of swapping of land that will ultimately be consummated by a lot line adjustment, that will allow the office building to remain code legal, and the property will be utilized better. It will allow them to move the manager's unit and the main entry closer towards Chapman, which will shorten the distances for cars to come in and there will be better visibility. Also, part of the transaction would be the purchase of a small piece of City property that ultimately will go to the City Council. Their offer is presently in the works. The critical areas (i.e., relationships with the single family residences) are largely unchanged. They're not proposing any changes in those areas. The landscape berms, the architectural treatments to the building all remain the same. There is no greater impact to those particular areas. The Commission required them to secure the approval of the adjacent land owners prior to construction of the new wall that is contemplated with the new development. In that area, they have contacted all of the residents back there and have agreements with all of them except one or two. Everyone has looked at this as a benefit. Recently there was dumping on the property, which they have cleaned up. The completion of the 2 Planning Commission Minutes June 6, 1994 development will afford the residents much greater site security than they've had and will give them landscape treatments that they didn't have before. Commissioner Pruett asked about the pipelines on the right-of-way; where were they situated in relationship to the buildings? Mr. Jordan explained the drive aisles mimic the easement. The curve to the two large buildings follow the line of the easement. The two pipelines are centered in that easement. Essentially, the two pipelines go right down the middle of the drive aisle. Santa Fe Pipeline has approved their site plan and engineering for that and they will be hired to monitor it during construction. Written approval was supplied to the Commission and Council at the original hearing. The public hearing was closed. Chairman Bosch wanted to discuss the frontage along Chapman Avenue. He was interested in exposure along the street, the open wrought iron fence vs. the concept of making a more solid closure from visibility back from the street. From a security point of view, he supposed it was good to have the visibility. From an impact on the street, he wondered if it wouldn't be better to make a solid statement there. Commissioner Cathcart thought one of the issues discussed last time was that security was a major concern. At that time, the resource center was not open. Wasn't the last plan access from Chapman? Emergency access only.) It puts the onus on the management of the project to keep it clean. It there is going to be security, then it also needs to look presentable. That's not under the Commission's purview, but is something to be noted. Site maintenance will be very important. Chairman Bosch noted there is a revised Negative Declaration and the modification to the conditional use permit before the Commission for consideration. Moved by Commissioner Cathcart, seconded by Commissioner Smith, to approve the revised Negative Declaration 1381-91 and find there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant impact on the environment or wildlife resources. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Cathcart thought this project will be the best use for the site. The site is an eye sore and is a dumping ground. It's in need of some help and even though there are some shortcomings to the project, the overall value outweighs that. Moved by Commissioner Cathcart, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to recommend to the City Council to approve the modification to Conditional Use Permit 1906-91 with the conditions listed in the staff report. AYES: Commissioners Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters NOES: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED Chairman Bosch stated he voted against the project the first time because he felt it was an incredible impact to build such a long, solid barrier through this part of town. He still feels it is a major impact, but there is a modification to the original approval. This is a better plan, with the location of the access, the office, etc. being forward of the Resource Center rather than to the rear of it. He applauds what has been done in solving the problems that were anticipated by the developer. He thought the architect had done a remarkable job given the horrendous site restraints. But he still feels, unfortunately, that the original use, even if it were the best one available, is tantamount to putting a 1300 foot long wall through this part of the community. Yet, he struggles with no better choice. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2067-94 - MEHDI RAFATY (SUEDE) A request to allow live music entertainment and dancing at an existing billiard facility. Subject property is addressed 1988 North Tustin Street. 3 Planning Commission Minutes June 6, 1994 NOTE: This item is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. Staff received a letter and petition in opposition to the application. It is dated May 31, 1994 and signed by 7 residents of the nearby area on Shattuck Place. It was forwarded to the Commissioners. There was no opposition; the public hearing was opened. A~olicant Mehdi Rafaty, 3400 Avenue of the Arts, Costa Mesa, came before the Commission a year ago to ask for a conditional use permit to open the facility. They have not had any problems since opening. Their customers are asking for live entertainment. They will not be increasing the number of people. They have between 200 and 300 people on the weekends. Parking and noise will not be an issue. Sound will not be louder with the live music; they have recorded music now. They have a very good record with the Police Department -- no complaints. They want to provide a service to their patrons. Commissioner Cathcart asked if they had read the staff report and conditions of approval? Mr. Rafaty has read the staff report. The rear doors are used as emergency exits only. They are not used as an entrance. There is only one entrance. Referring to condition 5, a licensed, uniformed security guard -- they have a staff of five security employees (bouncers). They have been able to handle the crowds and do not feel a licensed security guard is necessary. Four security employees work inside and one security employee is outside at all times during the evening hours. They have more than 100 people on the weekends and to have to notify the Police Department on a weekly basis would not be warranted and he didn't see the point of it. Commissioner Walters has visited their facility many times and offered his observations. The place is never full. He has not seen all of the tables being used. The club suffers from not having enough people. He suspected the reason for the live entertainment is to pack more people into the facility. He didn't see how 200 people and ten pool tables could fit in the facility. There is no parking available; there is no valet parking. The original permit did not specify valet parking; however, the applicant added it and it was approved as such. It's an act of bad faith from what had been in the application without bringing it to the City's attention. Because of the restaurant, the parking spaces are completely filled until 10:00 p.m. or later. The only place left to park is down along the dark alley side (north side) and occasionally in the back. What good faith does he see that valet parking will happen with this request? Mr. Rafaty said they had valet parking for 1 1/2 months, but there wasn't enough people to continue the service. They want to have a variety of live music entertainment -- blues, jazz, rock, etc. Commissioner Walters asked what the ratio of men to women was on a typical night? (60/40 average ratio.) Commissioner Smith talked about the petition the Commission received regarding noise. She asked if they have received any complaints from the neighbors? (No.) Commissioner Pruett reviewed the floor plan. He asked where the dance floor was going to be created? He was concerned that by changing the configuration of the room and creating a dance floor, the occupancy would change. The occupancy of the building would be a concern under the Fire Code. Mr. Rafaty said it wasn't so much the dancing as it was the live music for people to listen to. The tables and chairs could be moved for dancing. The occupancy will not change. They were approved for an occupancy of 299 people. Commissioner Pruett asked how they managed the valet parking previously? Where were the cars parked? Parking is a problem. Mr. Rafaty said the cars were parked around the side and in the back (70 to 80 spaces). Chairman Bosch remembered the applicant had volunteered that valet parking would occur. Even though the demand was not there, they should have come to the City and asked for relief. His concern was they were exceeding the parking load without using the parking in the rear and requiring valet parking. He 4 Planning Commission Minutes June 6, 1994 does not see the space available safely inside the building for allowing live entertainment with the number of tables and pool tables already in place. They need to maintain the required cleared aisle ways for fire exiting from the building, nor does the plumbing fixture count allow for that many more occupants. The Commission has to assure there is no negative impact on the neighbors. Valet parking has to happen because the Center is packed. More information was needed before a decision could be made. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cathcart offered some recommendations. He would like to revise condition 2 - "All dancing and live entertainment activities shall be on weekends only and prohibited prior to 8:00 p.m. Condition 5 be amended that in lieu of one licensed, uniformed security guard that "four security guards (visually identified as Suede employees) shall be provided on weekends." One hundred people is an unique happening to the site and he would like to keep condition 6 as it is stated in the staff report. He added condition 10 - "Valet parking shall be required at all times." He and his son have gone to this establishment several times (after 11:00 p.m.) and there is no problem finding parking. Commissioner Smith commented her older children frequent Suede and her daughter feels safe going there in the late evening. She hoped the owners would put into effect the policies that are in effect now with the added conditions to ensure the establishment remains the same. Commissioner Pruett will not support the project as it is now. He's not sure the questions have been answered from the standpoint of how the facility is going to be layed out, what is going to happen in terms of the dance floor, an accurate count on seating and their location, crowd control, parking, a lighting report, etc. Not too long ago there was a project before the Commission and the plans weren t complete. They had to come back with more information and revised plans. He felt the same thing applied to this request. Commissioner Cathcart saw Commissioner Pruett's concern. Perhaps it would be wise to seek the applicant's concurrence for a continuance in order for him to show the Commission how the crowds would be handled given the worst case scenario with the bands, dancing and fire access/safety. Mr. Rafaty was willing to come back with added information if it doesn't take three months. Mr. Godlewski could schedule the continued hearing for June 20 if the information is received from Mr. Rafaty by June 15. Chairman Bosch was interested in looking at condition 6. This is the one where the Police Department requests notification for an event where an audience of more than 100 people is anticipated. There needs to be a better definition or wording; otherwise, the Police Department would be called every day. Moved by Commissioner Pruett, seconded by Commissioner Walters, to continue Conditional Use Permit 2067-94, with the applicant's concurrence, until the hearing of June 20, 1994. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS Consideration of the City's Proposed Capital Improvement Program for consistency with the adopted General Plan. There was a study session with the City Council on May 31, 1994 where discussion on the 7 year Capital Improvement Program took place. The Commission is requested to take action reviewing the proposed Capital Improvement Program for consistency with the General Plan document, and note exceptions or corrections if the Commission sees fit. If there are questions, Scott Morgan from the City Manager's Office was present to address them. 5 Planning Commission Minutes June 6, 1994 Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Walters, to recommend to the City Council to find that the 1994-95 to 2000-01 Capital Improvements Program is consistent with the City of Orange General Plan except for the three projects listed in the May 19, 1994 staff memo. The General Plan will be amended before funds are expended on any of said projects. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ORAL PRESENTATIONS Bob Bennyhoff, 10642 Morada Drive, Orange Park Acres, requested once again for the Commission to ask speakers to use the side microphone because people in the audience cannot hear them when they speak from the center podium. Chairman Bosch asked Mr. Godlewski to bring this matter to the attention of powers that be. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Walters, to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 p.m. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters NOES: None sld MOTION CARRIED 6