Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-20-1992 PC MinutesMINUTES Planning Commission July 20,1992 City of Orange Monday - 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Alvarez, Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy, Smith ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John Godlewski, Administrator of Current Planning; Bob VonSchimmelmann, Assistant City Engineer; Bob Herrick, Assistant City Attorney; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF JULY 6. 1992 Moved by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, to continue the Minutes of July 6, 1992 to the next regular meeting. AYES: Commissioners Alvarez, Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ITEM TO BE WITHDRAWN VARIANCE 1931-92 -GOLDEN WEST FRAME, INC. The waiver and/or reduction of limitations on minimal parking requirements, and outdoor use that are contained within the Zoning Ordinance (Orange Municipal Code Chapters 17.48 and 17.76). Property is located at 145 West Meats Avenue. NOTE: This item was withdrawn by the applicant subsequent to mailing of notices. 1 Planning Commission Minutes IN RE: ITEM TO BE CONTINUED July 20, 1992 ZONE CHANGE 1 151-92 -CITY OF ORANGE ON BEHALF OF 19 PROPERTY OWNERS A request to change the zoning classification from R-2-6 Residential Duplex District to the R-4 Residential Maximum Multiple Family district for the property. Subject property consists of 19 parcels located north of Palm Avenue on both sides of the 300 North Olive Block and the east side of the 300 North Lemon Street block, exclusive of the Orange Unified School District Headquarters property. N TE• Negative Declaration 1408-92 has been prepared to address the environmental impacts of this report. This item was continued from the May 4 and July 6, 1992 meetings.) Jere Murphy, Manager of Advanced Planning, presented an updated staff report. This item was continued from the July 6 meeting for two reasons. One was to allow the staff to investigate alternative methods of preparing economic information that was discussed at the July 6 meeting, as well as a request from Mr. Clark who was not able to be at that meeting. Staff has discussed the matter of the economic analysis with three economists in the area. In order to keep the costs down, staff proposes to prepare the study as discussed under the direction of AI Gobar, Gobar and Associates. Staff would consult with Mr. Gobar in terms of the study methodology and assumptions prior to doing the work. The results of the study would be reviewed by Mr. Gobar. City staff would work as the staff for Mr. Gobar and, thereby, save having to pay the costs of staff time. The cost is projected to be approximately 750.00. The Department can find those funds in a variety of standard accounts in the Planning and Building divisions without adversely affecting the activities within the Department, with the assumption this is a one time cost. Staff believes the work can be accomplished in 6 to 8 weeks before being brought back to .the Commission. It is their recommendation to continue this item and direct the staff to re- advertise apublic hearing when the economic study is completed. Staff would also like to discuss other alternative zoning that might be appropriate for the property other than the R-2 and R-4 zoning that has already been discussed in the staff report. They indicated there is one other possibility - R-3 RCD - as an alternative zoning. 2 Planning Commission Minutes July 20, 1992 Chairman Cathcart publicly apologized to Mr. Clark for the length of time it is taking in order to get a resolution on this matter. However, he feels confident the Commission is in agreement that they want to make sure they have good information. They don't want to make any decisions that are based on misinformation. It's in everyone's best interest to have staff accumulate the information. T. J. Clark, 811 East Chapman Avenue, felt this request has drug on. He can't see wasting so much money when things are tight. At the May 4 meeting it was stated that if an agreement could not be reached, zoning would go back to R-4. He requested the City Council reinstate R-4 zoning as it was. They are a little island because everyone else has a different zoning. He felt this was spot zoning. What is going to happen to the Orange Unified School District? No one has come up with a solution. The Commission agreed with staff at this point. They felt it was important to have the study. It was unfortunate a mistake was made at least once in terms of a poor notification process, lack of communication and perhaps even an incorrect decision. They want to be very careful a mistake is not made again. They stressed the need to be patient awhile longer with the hope of getting additional information so that everyone can understand clearly of what is going on. Mr. Murphy explained staff will bring this item back to the Commission in six or eight weeks. That would be the completion of the study. When they are two-thirds through the process, staff would have a good feel of when to re-advertise the hearing. The worst case would be the first meeting in October; best case, last meeting in September. Commissioner Alvarez was concerned about the expense of $750.00 and he thought staff was more than capable of doing the study. Mr. Murphy thought staff's suggestion of using Mr. Gobar was an efficient use of the dollars to identify up front the appropriate methodology and assumptions which are critical to the analysis. Although staff might be able to perform the study, by having someone with the experience in the industry and both working for public and private clients, that it would be a benefit for the limited funds to have the input of such a firm as Mr. Gobar's. It will also provide a balance in the report; that the report is actually coming through both the staff and 3 Planning Commission Minutes July 20, 1992 an outside consultant who has no particular relationship with the City of Orange. That will give additional weight to the study that would not be provided by strictly a staff study. Commissioner Bosch, as well as other Commissioners, agreed with Mr. Murphy's explanation. Mr. Gobar's breath of experience is critically important for this study. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Murphy to continue Zone Change 1 151-92 until such time as staff has completed the requested economic study, at which time it shall be re-advertised for public hearing at the Planning Commission; and encourage all efforts to speedily reach a conclusion of a satisfactory report for that purpose. Staff is directed to report back to the Commission in 30 days as to their progress and for a better expectation of when the final report will be available. AYES: Commissioners Alvarez, Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARING VARIANCE 9133-92 - NADEL PARTNERSHIP FOR ALBERTSON'S The applicant has requested a waiver of parking and setback requirements, to include the following: 1. Increase the size of an existing grocery store (Albertson's within a retail strip center, without providing the total amount of parking required for the entire center. 2. Provide front and street side yard setbacks which are less than required by City Ordinance. The property is located at 3325 East Chapman Avenue. N TE: In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Negative Declaration 1410-92 has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of this project. There was no opposition and the public hearing was opened. 4 Planning Commission Minutes July 20, 1992 Jeff Derrick, 1021 West Oregon Trail, works for Albertson's stores and said the ambiance of the Chapman/Prospect store leaves a little to be desired. They're trying to change that by expanding the store by 6,000 square feet to the rear, adding a bakery and a deli, new floor tile, new fixtures and equipment, a new interior decor package, and adding a new dock to the exterior, as well as new parking lot lighting and additional landscaping. They will be enhancing the exterior of the store to match the rest of the center. They will be adding an additional 49 stalls and enhancing a truck safety problem in the rear of the store. Currently the trucks have to pull onto Prospect and back in. They will be flipping the docks so the trucks will pull into the center and back into the dock and pull around behind the shops to come back out onto the street. He feels they will have a far superior facility when the improvements are completed. Commissioner Alvarez reviewed the site plan and asked if there was sufficient room for the trucks to turn around and leave from the back of the store? Mr. Derrick said they have had a truck out there doing a maneuver behind the shop space. Yes it will work. There are two ballards behind the shop space with a chain link that runs between them. They have to move one of those ballards and there will be no problems for the trucks. Commissioner Alvarez asked if the expansion would be part of the actual sales base? Mr. Derrick said they were expanding to the rear with a lot of the expansion in the back room. It will enhance the front portion because of expanding into that back area. Those speaking in favor Ada Pulin, works for Mac Davis, the shopping center owner of the center adjacent to the Albertson's. Her office address is 17000 Ventura Blvd., Suite 300, Encino. She brought five tenants and everyone is in favor of this expansion. It is needed desperately. There is a need to bring back an interest in the center and to attract customers. The expansion will do well for their tenants. 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 20, 1992 Jim Murphy, 155 North Batavia, felt Albertson's was very nice people. The store needs work and the remodeling will make all the tenants happy. They're asking for a new look for their shopping center. The public hearing was closed. Chairman Cathcart said it would be nice if the Commission could use one particular project as a precedent to go around and make all those decisions, but each piece of property has a different set of problems, circumstances and issues surrounding it. Each project needs to be reviewed on its individual merit to come up with a consolidated decision that is beneficial for everyone. Commissioner Bosch asked staff about the limitations on an administrative adjustment relative to a percentage regarding setback requirements and parking? Mr. Godlewski said there was a 10% adjustment that relates to parking, but because this was associated with another variance, staff packaged the whole thing together and brought it before the Commission. It's not an administrative adjustment; it's a variance before the Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator still needs to make the same findings that the Commission does on variances. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 1410-92, including the initial study and any comments received during the public review process as having it prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and that with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment or wildlife resources. AYES: Commissioners Alvarez, Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to approve Variance 1933-92 with conditions 1-5 as indicated in the staff report, finding that the approval does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations on other properties in the vicinity and zone of the subject property because 1) with regard to 6 Planning Commission Minutes July 20, 1992 setbacks, the proposed expansion is in conformance with the street side setback to Prospect Street for the expansion itself; and that the remaining building setbacks are pre-existing condition not being caused by the application; and 2) with regard to the reduction in parking, it is found because of the identification on the City's Master Plan of Arterial Highways that the intersection of Chapman Avenue and Prospect Street is an enhanced intersection causing an adjustment to the lot line on the property or the eventual provision of that enhanced intersection. Such adjustment causing a potential reduction of parking not caused by the applicant's proposal, and that since the evidence of parking utilization on the site first demonstrates that there has, except on rare instances, been more than satisfactory parking for the uses contained therein and second, that the specific proposal actually increases the number of parking spaces in excess of that basically required for the addition, that there are special circumstances which apply. AYES: Commissioners Alvarez, Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS SITE PLAN REVIEW - ALBERTSON'S Plans have been modified to revise internal site configuration at pad G to improve circulation. NOTE: This item was acted upon by the Planning Commission at the July 6, 1992 meeting. Mr. Godlewski stated a condition was placed on the Albertson's site plan that they come back to the Commission with a plan indicating the fast food restaurant with proper turning radii and truck access to the driveway. The plan that was submitted is specifically just that addition on the plan. There were a number of other conditions that were required of the applicant, including the deletion of the driveway to White Oak. That is not indicated on the plan and the only thing they are representing is the re-configured fast food restaurant and drive- thru portion, as well as the turning radius onto the main driveway. It has been reviewed by Planning and Traffic Engineering and both staffs feel the proposal is adequate for turning purposes. 7 Planning Commission Minutes li n July 20, 1992 Scott Thayer, Real Estate Manager for Albertson's, 1180 West Lambert Road, Brea, would be happy to answer any questions the Commission might have. Chairman Cathcart said one of the concerns he had was that he appreciated they made the effort to change the internal circulation problems, but some of the other conditions were not revised or included on the plan (i.e. the deletion of White Oak Ridge). Commissioner Alvarez asked if the Commission will be seeing more piece meal work? It was Mr. Thayer's understanding the Commission approved the project based upon conditions being met. Part of those conditions were to bring back the re-design of this pad, the circulation and parking directly around it. They tried to only focus on that portion. Commissioner Bosch looks forward to either evidence when they come forward for their permits that the rest have been satisfied and staff knows what the Commission wants. This was the most ambiguous and appreciated the applicant coming back with something that appears to work fairly well. It looks like the trucks will work and it takes care of the problem of dumping the cars that come out of the drive-thru directly into the major traffic line, and still preserves full circulation in both directions. He felt they only needed to make a determination on this relative to the specific area around pad G. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to approve the revised site plan only in regards to the change in circulation pattern and orientation in the immediate vicinity of pad G, with a reminder that all other conditions of approval remain in place. AYES: Commissioners Alvarez, Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS Commissioner Alvarez clarified his position concerning the mayoral race in Orange. He had been privileged to have developed a special 8 Planning Commission Minutes July 20, 1992 relationship with two members of the City Council -- Mayor Beyer and Councilwoman Coontz -- both of whom are now opposing each other for the mayoral seat. He'd like it to be known that he has always maintained the highest respect and confidence in their continued leadership for the community. In signing Councilwoman Coontz' nomination papers, he did so because of his long term relationship with her that spans over seven years of community service. He'd like it to be known at this time that this signature does not alter his high respect for the mayor and his many contributions to the community. That he is in an unenvious position of having to choose between two friends. Because of this and his position on the Planning Commission, he wished at this time just to concentrate his efforts on doing a good job on the Commission. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Smith, to adjourn to a public work shop for the study of Section D on July 27, 1992 at 7:00 p. m. in the Weimer Room. It is also noted there is an additional study session on Planning Commission procedures and CEQA, as well as a joint meeting for a trail study at 4:30 and 5:30 respectively on July 29, 1992 in the Weimer Room. AYES: Commissioners Alvarez, Bosch, Cathcart, Murphy, Smith NOES: None MOTION CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. sld 9