Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-15-1996 PC MinutesMINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange July 15, 1996 Monday - 7:00 p.m,PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero ABSENT: Commissioner Sm~h STAFF PRESENT: Joan Woltf, Sr. Project Planner - Commission Secretary;Stan Soo- Hoo, Assistant City Attorney,Bob VonSchimmelman, Assistant City Engineer, and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary IN RE: CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF 7/1/96 Moved by Commissioner Carlton, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to approve the Minutes of 7/1/96 with one correction to Page 11, second paragraph: the word "illuminated" be replaced with the word eliminated" . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero None Commissioner Sm~h Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 2, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2157-96 - KATELLA GRILL The applicant is requesting approval of the on-sale of beer and wine in conjunction with an existing restaurant The site is located at 1325 West Katella Avenue, NOTE:This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, The full reading of the staff report was waived and the public hearing was opened, Aoolicant Martin Jacony, architect for the applicant, 16421 Martin Lane, Huntington Beach, was available to answer any questions, Katella Grill has been in the community for a long time. They're not asking for anything out of the ordinary, They are not installing a bar or a lounge, They're asking for permission to serve a glass wine out of a bottle, or a glass of beer out of a singular container with meals, It is not the intention to create a cocktail lounge. They have reviewed the staff report and concur with the conditions of approval. The public hearing was dosed, Chairman Bosch noted there were two #11's in the conditions; the second #11 should be renumbered 12, Also, the project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA, 1 Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 1996 Moved by Commissioner Pruett, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to approve Conditional UsePermit2157-96, with the conditions listed in the staff report, finding that the conditional use permit is granted upon sound land use principles and in response to services required by the community in that people will enjoy that beverage with their meals. It will not cause deterioration of bordering land usesorcreateanyspecialproblemsforthearea, And, there is no negative impact on the community ortheneighborhood plans, AYES: NOES: ABSENT:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero None Commissioner Smtlh MOTION CARRIED 3, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2158-96 - J. R. GUERIN BREWING CO" LLC Approval of a request to operate a "brew pub," or a restaurant equipped to manufacture beer for sale and consumption on the premises, Live entertainment is also proposed as an accessory use, The siteISlocatedat186AtchisonStreet (within the historic Santa Fe Depot building),NOTE:Negative Declaration 1435-95 previously addressed environmental impacts related to implementation of the Santa Fe Depot Area Specific Plan, which authorized landusechangesassociatedwith this application,Jim Donovan, Planning staff, presented the full staff report, The request before the Commissionistoallownotonlytheproductionofbeer, but also the sale of beer and wine with live entertainment as an accessory use, The use of the facility has already been established through the Santa Fe DepotPlan, as that of a restaurant, with an adjacent parking facility, In the last two years the parkin~ facilityhasservedtheMetrolinkstationfortheonlyareainthevicinity, There will be a new parking lot that will be constructed in the near future on the west side of the tracks that would contain approximately 238 parking spaces for long-term commuter parking, The restaurant will include a beverage bar andwillsellpre-baked or ready made products at 5:30 a,m" weekdays and 7:00 a,m. on weekends. The restaurant and bar will be open from 11 :00 a,m, to 10:00 p,m, on Sunday and Monday; untilmidnight, Tuesday through Saturday, There are several conditions suggested in the staff report, One is that the termforparkingintheexistingparkingfacilitybelimitedtotwohours; therefore, long-term parking would be provided in the new facility on the west side of the tracks, Staff is also requesting a revision tocondition #4, The wording now indicates the applicant should post the parking restrictions; however, the normalprocedureisfortheapplicanttopaytheCityafeetoinstallthesignsandthecostwouldbeassumed by the property owner.Chairman Bosch noted the Commission received a letter dated July 15, 1996 from Metrolink with inquiry or policy relative to relationship to the regional rail authority lines and staff's response letter of July 15,Mr. Donovan stated Metrolink has expressed some concern related to the operation of their commuter service -- that passengers could possibly buy alcoholic beverages and carry them on boardthetrain, Or,if beverages are served outdoors, which is proposed with this application n in anenclosedpatioarea __that patrons may become intoxicated and trespass on the tracks or cause otherproblemswithpassengerservice. According to ABC regulations the patio would have to be enclosed in some fashion where patrons would have to walk through the restaurant to be seated at the tables and wouldhavetoleavethroughtherestaurant. Alcoholic beverages can only be consumed on the premises andcannotbe taken off site,Commissioner Pruett asked if the applicant was aware of the fence requirements? Theplansthatweresubmitteddidnotshowanyfencing -- just an outdoor eating area.Mr. Donovan replied this was a standard requirement and all restaurants with patioswherealcoholicbeveragesaresoldhasaminimumheightlimitforfencingof36inchesthatABCrequires, Theonlygatespermittedarefor emergency Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 1996 Chairman Bosch explained typically they would expect the project to be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to the Planning Commission's hearing, He understood that because of the ownership and the nature of the proposal, ~ was a slightly different process, Mr. Donovan said the building improvements that are related to the actual preferences of the restaurant are going to be done by the applicant's architect. The responsibilities of the architect will be limited to the space plan and provisions included on a normal floor plan of a building (tenant improvements), The building will remain under the ownership of the Orange Redevelopment Agency and the Agency will have to advertise for a Request for Proposal and obtain different proposals from architects on the shell. It was his understanding the Redevelopment Agency would assume the costs of construction for the building shell. That's under a different process; as soon as the plans are prepared, they will be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Board. The public hearing was opened. Aoolicant James Guerin, 28951 Via Hacienda, San Juan Capistrano, stated their intended use of the site is as a restaurant. The brewing equipment would be an attractive draw into the restaurant. They will be regulated by ABC on the sale of beverages and also by the Orange Police Department. The equipment will be of the latest technology available, It also presents a nice visual as well. It's copper clad equipment combined with stainless steel. Their brewer is from Orange, They have a first-rate chef and they brought in consultants to help coordinate the menu and formulate the recipes, The theme of the restaurant is that of early California, focusing on the railroad and produce industries, They understand their responsibility for the historic preservation of the site, Their architect has local roots, They intend for management and staff to bond as a team to set policy, to insure quality food and beverage service, to provide equal employment opportunities, and to have a good time doing that. He has read the staff report and agrees with the conditions of approval. He is also aware of the height requirements for the patio fencing and that has been discussed with the architect.Commissioner Carlton said the outside eating area looks like it will be between the restaurant and train tracks. How much space is there between the outer wall of the enclosure and the actual train tracks?Cecil Carney, architect for the project, 130 South Prospect, Tustin, responded there was 26 feet between the patio enclosure and the tracks, The railroad requires 26 feet minimum from the tracks to the fence. He was not positive of the exact dimension as far as the outside dining area, but it was not a great amount maybe 10 feet).Commissioner Carlton asked if they were planning to install a glass enclosure on top of the solid enclosure so when the trains go by, food doesn't fly off the tables? Those trains are powerful.Mr. Camey said that was something they have stayed away from at the moment. That might be something Redevelopment's architect might address, or it could be coordinated between them,Chairman Bosch said the design of the building will work through the other architect and then go before the Design Review Board, He appreciated their understanding of and care for the historic nature of the Depot and the immediate area, The concern he had (it doesn't impact on the type of application, but just for interest and instruction to the DRB) is relative to the placement of the proposed exterior stainless steel tank and the effect it may have on the design of the building, The process requires a certain arrangement of equipment for service, deliveries, access and process itself. He wanted to be sure that be undertaken in a way that will not damage or diminish the value of the primary portion of the structure. He's sure the Design Review Board will focus on that as well.Mr, Guerin said the container was not in any way attached to the building, It's a free- standing Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 1996 Commissioner Pruett said it appears the breezeway to the south of the building is going to be enclosed. Mr. Guerin replied yes it would be, They're intending to use French doors and windows to enclose that area, It will give it a real nice Mediterranean architectural theme, There is a narrow walkway between the redeveloped park the City has recently completed and the French doors on opposite sides of the building both east and west) would be open during normal business hours, Public comments Barbara DeNiro, 1118 East Adams, asked n this was a Redevelopment funded project? Ms. Wolff explained Redevelopment will fund the exterior improvements.. seismic retrofitting and all the exterior improvements to the building, All the interior improvements are being funded by the applicant She did not know the cost of the improvements, Chairman Bosch said the City of Orange is the owner of the building at this time, purchased with Redevelopment funds, It has been standing vacant Ms, DeNiro was glad to hear that Metrolink was concerned about the brewery and the alcohol. She was concerned that all the eating facilities seem to want beer and wine served with meals where there are people under the age of 21 in attendance, She wondered how that would be supervised. She asked for a definition of live entertainment at this location, Chairman Bosch replied there were certain restrictions placed upon the service of alcoholic beverages by the ABC and by City ordinance. Specific restrictions on that include that those who serve must be clothed and that there be no unclothed entertainment The Police Department is responsible for maintaining a safe condition as well. Sgt Barry Weinstein, Orange Police Department, said it was important to note the club they removed from the City did not have alcohol, nor did they have an ABC license. Obviously, that was a problem in the parking lot They have reviewed the request from the brewery company for entertainment It should be noted their hours are from 8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m" which is the least hours of any such facility in the City, They are limited to a 3-piece band -- it's mostly background music, There are no rock bands allowed. The Police Department feels very comfortable in working with the applicants and with the conditions of approval. Rebuttal Mr. Guerin again stated this proposed use was for a restaurant It will have an on-site brewery operation,They don't intend to have sexual, explicit type of entertainment or loud, obnoxious entertainment that will disturb residents and businesses. They will adhere to all the conditions listed in the staff report,The public hearing was closed.Commissioner Carlton thought this was an exciting project and it would be a definite asset to the City, She has seen other areas in California where breweries have been incorporated with restaurants, The menu sounds wonderful and she can't wait for them to open,Commissioner Pruett thought this was the kind of project that was needed at the Depot He's surprised it hasn't happened earlier, It's a good use and will be beneficial to the community. He noted that Negative Declaration 1435-93 has previously been Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 1996 Moved by Commissioner Pruett, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, to approve Conditional Use Permit 2158-96 with conditions 1-10, revising condition 4 to read, "Except for side-loading van-accessible parking spaces, the applicant will reimburse the City's cost to post the adjacent public parking facility w~h a two-hour parking limit" The remainder of the condition will stay the same, The conditional use permit is granted upon sound principles of land use and in response to services that will benefit the community. It will not cause a deterioration of bordering land uses or create any special problems for the area. It will be a benefit to the community and provide a service the community needs in that area. The proposed use will not have a detrimental effect on nearby residentially zoned properties and the substantial lack of proxim~y or a great distance) to residential, churches, schools, hospitals, public playgrounds and other similar uses, Also, given the hours of operation, the controls set by the conditions, make it a wonderful project This will be a key landmark for the continued redevelopment of the downtown area,AYES:NOES:ABSENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero None Commissioner Sm~h MOTION CARRIED 4, VARIANCE 2019-96 - HARRY SAUBERMAN The applicant is requesting waiver of the City's parking requirements to allow the expansion of the Camitas Los Reyes Restaurant, which is located at 251-273 South Tustin Street NOTE:This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.There was no opposition; therefore, the full reading of the staff report was waived,Chairman Bosch noted the Commission received a letter dated June 27,1996 from Dale Basinger who was concerned about the parking, The public hearing was opened,Aoolicant Harry Sauberman, 19 Bridgewood, Irvine, felt the variance would be an asset to the area, It will not create a parking problem, Out of the 12 units, he has five long- term vacancies, This establishment is looking for more elbow room. They are seeking to move from 273 and move next door to a double unit that is currently vacant He agreed with staff's recommendations for the employees to park in the back. Many of the employees walk to work from the surrounding neighborhood, There seems to be plenty of parking spaces at this time in both the front and back lots, As owner of the shopping center, he's there quite often, Everyone parks in the parking lots; he didn't see anyone parking outside the shopping center.Chairman Bosch explained a variance is a very special ~ em. It relates to necessary findings the Commission must make under law. Essentially, it boils down to the fact that the conditions which cause the impacts that you believe make a variance desirable can't be self-imposed. They have to relate to unusual conditions, He was concerned about how they could look at this move, which sounds beneficial to an existing business and center, maybe even beneficial to the parking, but he needed to know more about the operation, He understood the new location will allow perhaps 100 seats and there are approximately 40 seats now in the restaurant What is the internal development of the proposal and why does the applicant believe the City's parking requirement is not strictly applicable to this specific restaurant?Mr. Sauberman didn't know if there was going to be 100 seats, The restaurant is looking for more room and the kitchen needs to be larger. The shopping center's parking is not being fully utilized, Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 1996 Chairman Bosch appreciated that, but one of the things that happens when a conditional use permit is granted, it goes with the property. Although it was desirable to keep the tenants that are there now forever, it is possible over time for those tenants to be replaced. There is no control that goes with the proposal or application that regulates the use or parking. He wondered if the owner would be willing to accept the review of potential tenants to assure there was no greater impact on the parking for the center, Currently, there are available spaces, "a current tenant has a low impact on parking and would be replaced with a new tenant or changes the nature of the business substantially, he would be interested in being sure there was a review to assure that suddenly a condilion was not created that would be damaging to the neighborhood because it would over load the parking. If that could be worked out, he was looking for another condition that would cause that review with staff to make sure the center doesn't get into a greater deficit over time. Mr. Sauberman asked what that condilion might be? Chairman Bosch didn't have the wording worked out. He thought they needed to identify the number of employees that exist within the other uses, or the degree of vehicular parking which takes place on the average in the Center, And, for those spaces that are currently occupied, see if a formula could be used whereby if those uses are proposed to increase by change of occupant, a review by staff would take place, The owner is asking for something that has no relationship to a hardship relative to the physical condition of the building, the impacts of the street or adjacent uses, Mr. Sauberman assumed the building in December and iI was in bankruptcy. Chairman Bosch explained they were concerned about land use issues; not economic issues. The economic issues were extremely important, but there must be findings that relate to the land use issues; otherwise, the City's ordinances are worthless, He was having a hard time seeing the hardship in this case, Mr, Soo-Hoo thought he knew where the Chairman was going, but frankly, in order to get there, it would be advisable to allow the staff some time to talk to the applicant to work out in more detail a mechanism to make that take place. The applicant needs to understand at this point is that however it is worked out, it will result in limitations to the use of his property. There will be limitations on the flexibility of tenant selection,by the nature of the use, by the number of employees, But, if the applicant were willing to entertain that kind of concept, Planning staff and the City Attorney's office would be happy to sit down and work out the details with the applicant.Chairman Bosch suggested the applicant contact Chris Carnes or Joan Wolff from Planning,Commissioner Pruett looked at the area to the south .. drive aisle going into the service station. He asked if that could be realigned?Mr. Sauberman replied that was not part of his property so he didn't know how he could realign that.Commissioner Pruett said if the drive aisle could be moved up, with an agreement with the adjacent property owner, and the island be shortened next to the handicap space, five parking spaces could be obtained in that area, That would help solve the parking problem. It might be something to look at.Commissioner Carlton asked how soon did the tenant want to move into the expanded space?Mr. Sauberman assumed they wanted to move in as soon as they could get approval for the parking, He didn't know what they would do if they didn't get approval. Because the center is older, he's having a problem with vacancies,Chairman Bosch was hopeful to reach a favorable agreement and thought it could be worked out before the next Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 1996 Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to continue Variance 2019-96 to the meeting 01 August 5, 1996 to allow review 01 potential conditions that would assure that no special privilege be granted that would be inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone, and that luture potential lor causing a parking problem on site as tenants inti II the remainder 01 the center are mitigated or prevented, AYES: NOES: ABSENT:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero None Commissioner Sm~h MOTION CARRIED IN RE:ORAL PRESENTATIONS Gary Borosky, 5722 East Stillwater Avenue, discussed Wal-Mart wanting to move to the Orange Mall. He understood one person on the Commission voted in lavor; the remaining lour voted against it He didn't know il it were due to the planning 01 the store or due to comments that were made. He expressed his opinion 01 the store, Wal-Mart has put together some labulous plazas and very nice stores throughout the country, He was oHended by Wal-Mart not being approved. He personally lelt it would be a blessing if Wal-Mart were approved,Chairman Bosch thanked him lor expressing his opinion, The action 01 the Planning Commission has been appealed to the City Council. A date will be set and public notice given lor that hearing.Commissioner Pruett suggested Mr, Borosky pick up a copy 01 the Minutes. He didn't think the Register really reflected what took place in the meeting. There were comments recorded and it was unlortunate the media locused on that Barbara DeNiro, 1118 East Adams, had a letter and a thank you note lor the three Commissioners who attended the previous meeting, She ollered to give Mr. Borosky a copy 01 her letter in response to the newspaper article,IN RE:ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Romero, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to adjourn at 8: 00 p,m,AYES:NOES:ABSENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Pruett, Romero None Commissioner Sm~