Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-16-1996 PC Minutesc Jl C~,cl.~'3 MINUTES Planning Commission City 01 Orange PRESENT: ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: IN RE: September 1.6, 1996 Monday - 7.00 p.m.Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Romero, Smith Commissioner Pruett Vem Jones, Manager 01 Current Planning - Commission Secretary;Stan Soo- Hoo, Assistant City Attorney,Bob VonSchimmelmann, Assistant City Engineer, and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF 9/4/96 CONSENT CALENDAR Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Carlton, to continue the Minutes of 9/4/96 to the next meeting.AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Romero, Smith None Commissioner Pruett MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2160 - VILLAGE NURSERIES A request to expand the use 01 an existing tree and shrub larm with the installation of green houses and shade structures. The site is located on the Edison utility corridor between Katella Avenue and Talt Avenue, running Irom Glassell Street to Tustin Street.NOTE:This project is categorically exempt Irom the provisions 01 the Calilornia Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15304(e).Commissioner Smith excused herself Irom the meeting due to a conflic! 01 interest. Her husband is employed by Southern Calilornia Edison who owns this property.Dan Ryan, Senior Planner, presented the lull staff report as there was opposition to this project. The applicant is Michael Babineau for Village Nurseries. The applicant proposes to upgrade the existing outdoor growing areas with the installation 01 removable clear and shaded struc!ures (green houses) which will permit the growing 01 more shade and Irost sensitive plant material. It is located within the 270 foot wide, Southern California Edison Utility Corridor Irom Glassellto Tustin. The site is just north of and adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad Right-ol-Way. The projec! does not include Village Nurseries Retail Center, which occupies the first 300 feet off 01 Tustin Avenue, or the Edward Holmayer Christmas Tree Farm, which occupies the 750' deep property on the west side 01 Cambridge. The applicant is re{luesting a conditional use permit to allow the expansion 01 an existing tree and shrub farm within the installation of removable clear and shaded structures. Orange Municipal Code Section 17.14.030 allows for tree and shrub larms in a residential district, subjec! to the issuance 01 a conditional use permit. Approximately 286 notices were mailed on August 22, 1996 to all property owners within a 300 loot radius 01 the project site, and the site was posted 20 days prior to the hearing date in lour locations. This item came to the attention 01 the Planning Department in April, through Code Enlorcement action when it was discovered the applicant installed a 15 loot high shaded structure adjacent to the north edge 01 the site 011 01 Glassell. The applicant informed stall they came to the Building Department and were informed they did not need a permit to put the structure up. Based on the number 01 complaints and concerns, Mr. Godlewski determined a conditional use permit would be required. 1 Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 The General Plan designation is Low Density Residential (2-6 Dwelling Units per Acre). The zoning lor the subject property is R 1-7 Single Family Residential District (the retail sales location on Tustin Street is zoned CTR - Commercial Tustin Street Redevelopment). There are two parcels involved in the subject property. The first parcel between Glassell and Cambridge is 9.92 acres; the second parcel between Cambridge and Tustin is 16.23 acres. According to the City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways,Cambridge is a "Secondary Arterial" constructed to its ultimate right-ol-way width 01 80 feet. Tustin is an Augmented Primary Arterial" construc!ed to its ultimate right-ol-way width 01100 leet. Glassell is a Primary Arterial" constructed to its ultimate right-of-way width 01100 leet. Currently, semi-trucks enter the site Irom Tustin and exit on Cambridge or enter and exit off Glassell. Typically trucks drop their trailers in the moming to be loaded and pick them up later in the day. The applicant states that a maximum 01 four semi-trucks currently serve the site each day and that no increase in truck traffic is anticipated.Surrounding land use and zoning is as lollows: On the north, adjacent rear yards 01 single lamily residential development which Ironts on Chestnut. Zoninfl is R1-7 Single Family Residential Distric!. The structures are approximately 80 feet Irom the residenllal areas. To the south, the first 80 feet is the Southern Pacific Railroad Right- ol-Way and drainage area that is not zoned. Adjoining the railroad property are the rear yards 01 single lamily residential development which Ironts on Trenton. Zoning is R1-7 Single Family Residential District. To the east, across Tustin is the Edison Electrical Substation, and it is zoned M-1 Light Industrial District. To the west, across Glassell is the Edison Utility Corridor shrub and tree farm, zoned M-1 Light Industrial District. There are approximately 34 existing electrical transmission towers that are within the subject site. Various commercial nurseries have used the Edison L1tility site since 1969. Village Nurseries have leased the site since 1989. Two existing buildings off 01 Tustin provide services for retail sales and general office lunctions. An existing 360 square foot retail sales building, a 1500 square loot ollice structure and parking lot occupy the 81,000 square foot retail lot which Ironts on Tustin Street.The specific proposal is to install 108 clear 20' x 100' green house structures to grow frost sensitive type 01 plants within the existing open growing areas 01 the Edison corridor. And, to install 169,200 square feet of shade structures lor growing 01 flowering plant material within the existing growing area on the south side 01 the site. These nine shaded structures are 60' wide, range in length Irom 100' to 580' and cover approximately 2820 linear feet 01 the site. Currently, under a separate application, the nursery is proposing to relocate their existing ollice at the Tustin site to new offices on North Main Street. This will allow the existing parking lot to be used by new employees in the adjacent wholesalelcommercial nursery operation. Though not marked on the plans, Village Nursery provides both employee and retail customer parking spaces at the back 01 the retail center. A total of 55 parking spaces are currently provided. The project plans are in conlormance with the R 1-7 Residential District development standards. Parking requirements are related to the retail area in which 25 spaces are required, or 1 space per 1,000 sq. It. of gross retail floor area. The applicant has provided 80 leet between the rear 01 existing residential properties and the green houses. On August 7, 1996, the Stall Review Committee considered the proposal and discussed the type 01 structures, fire resistant materials, employee parking, truck circulation patterns. and the number of deliveries to the site. It was determined since the materials are pre- fabricated and not easily modified, and the structures do not need building permits, the Design Review Board did not need to review the projec!.Current Orange Municipal Code allows tree and shrub larms to install green houses andlor shade structures subject to minor site plan review. Prior code required a conditional use permit to install green houses or shade structures. A review 01 planning records shows that no conditional use permit is on file lor Village Nurseries commercial tree and shrub farm. A conditional use permit is required lor this application as it is a substantial expansion 01 an existing use. Nursery operations have operated continuously at this site since 1969. In 1989 Village Nurseries leased the Edison site for a tree and shrub larrn and established a retail nursery on the same site next to Tustin. The existing site is a relatively flat strip of land 270 feet wide which primarily serves as an Edison Utility Transmission corridor. The secondary use is lor light agriculture uses such as a tree and shrub larm. Plants are grown in open areas,and there are no existing structures in the commercial growing areas under the power lines. No changes to the existing grades or drainage patterns are proposed with the new installations. The applicant states that the shade structures and green houses will provide lor improved growing conditions lor certain new plant species. These new plant species will have the same growing times as the existing nursery stock, thus they Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 requires that Villalle Nurseries adhere to the following conditions: 1) Maintain complete clearance olfilty leet from all electncaltowers; 2) That all shade and green house struc!ures can be easily removed; 3) All shade and plastic material will not be Ilammable, and that samples of both will be submitted for testing prior to installation; and 4) Roads will be 16 and 20 feet in width, with an additional setback of two feet for the green houses. Typical truck trallic consists of approximately lour semi-trucks and trailers entering the site on a daily basis. Trailers are dropped 011 in the mornings and loaded by hand, and deliveries are made in the altemoon.Growing the new type 01 plant species will require additional plant maintenance, and labor needs are expected to increase approximately ten percent. The current number 01 employees in the commercial operation is 25. This is expected to increase to 30 employees in April, 1997 when the new struc!ures will be installed. There are no parking requirements stated lor the specilic use of a Wholesale Tree and Shrub Farm. The applicant states that "a majority of the 25 nursery workers currently carpool andlor take local buses to the work site". The relocation 01 the ollice functions in December, 1996, will open- up an additional 15 employee parking spaces which will accommodate parking for the wholesale operation. The hours of operation for the wholesale nursery are from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday to Saturday. As no retail sales are permitted for the wholesale operation, no additional impac!s are expected. The Tustin Street retail nursery is open Irom 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday to Sunday.The proposed green houses are clear plastic arched structures measuring 20 leet wide by 100 feet deep and 9'-6" in height. The frames are high strength galvanized structural steel pipe arches and stubs, with rOil-up plastic side walls for ventilation. The applicant will provide non-flammable plastic shade and green house material as a condition to both the Fire Depar1ment and Southern California Edison. No electrical or lighting fixtures are to be installed in the green houses. The typical shade structures are galvanized steel pipe Irames covered with #70 web shade cloth. The shade structures are 60 leet wide, and vary in length Irom 100 feet to 580 feet. The frames are set in concrete sleeves and the overall height is 9'-6".The applicant has proposed struc!ure locations which are "out of the line 01 sight" to mitigate view concerns from neighboring residential properties to the north. No changes are anticipated at the cross street frontages. The applicant does not store pestiCides on the site. When such services are required,they are provided by an outside firm on an as-needed basis. An existing liquid lertilizer injection system and tank are currently in use on the site.The proposed new "projec!" is not a different use, other than that there is a change in the types of plant material cultured and a higher level of maintenance for the new plant species. The growing period remains the same so no increase in truck traffic is anticipated. No inlormation was submitted on the life 01 the plastic materials used. Stall would recommend as a .condition of approval that these struc!ures be properly maintained, and that the existing material be replaced with matching new material when it becomes unsightly or damaged. There are 14 conditions of approval listed in the staff report. Stall has received approximately 10 phone inquiries -- two were in lavor 01 the project; eight opposed the prOject. Additional letters were also received and placed in the Commissioners' packets.Chairman Bosch asked if this were an existing non-conlorming use that could continue in its current lorm and operation?Mr. Ryan responded yes, they could continue their business by right at this time. The public hearing was opened.Aoolicant Tom House, President 01 Village Nurseries, 1589 North Main, gave the Commission a little history about their company. Nurseries were the number one agricultural crop in Oran~ e County. Village Nurseries is the second largest nursery in Orange County. They are #25 in the Nation. They are pleased to have relocated their headquarters to the City 01 Orange. Village Nurseries has been in business for the last 20 years and currently are operating on 350 acres in nine different cities. A large portion 01 the land they grow plants on is bordered by residential housing. They comply with all local, state and federal regulations. Their policy is to be a good neighbor to those adjacent to their operations, and to be very responsive to the neighbors' concerns. Over the last few years they have provided free trees to those neighbors who decided they would like to screen their properties Irom the nursery's operations. They grow crops adjacent to the homeowners property that require very little in the way of Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 pesticide spraying. They use soaps or the mildest spray materials to keep down the number of pests. The canning pile is an intense use area, and it has been screened oil so the neighbors do not have to look at it. They have reduced their Saturday activity to not ollend the neighbors. Approximately 20% of their crops require shade material or green house material. Village Nurseries has shaded green houses on all their other properties except Orange. At one time, the Orange site was a tree yard, but has been utilized as a shrub growing area and the structures are needed. Some of the benelits the nursery provides to homeowners vs. bare land on right-ol-ways are increased security, reduc!ion in vandalism, a cleaner environment, and an environmentally aesthetic look. Bare land typically draws weeds, trash,homeless people and unauthorized oil-road vehide use. The green houses and shade struc!ure5 will reduce the intensity 01 use. The crops will take a longer time to grow; thus, less turn over. They attempted to put up a shade structure earlier in the year, but were informed they were not in compliance.They took down the struc!ure and are now going through the conditional use permit process.Randall Berry, 2851 East Standish Avenue, Anaheim, was the Engineer representing Norris-Repke, Inc.,at 600 North Tustin #250, Santa Ana. He prepared a few exhibits for the Commission's viewing. It showed the typical shade structures and clear structures that were proposed. He was certain the residents would not be able to see the structures where they plan to place them. They set back the struc!ures 80 feet from the northerly property line. The City'srequirement was 5 lee!. A 20 loot set back is required Irom the side streets, and they have 115 to 180 leet in set backs. Village Nurseries will adhere to the City's conditions of approval and keep the plastic covers in good shape. Edison must approve everything that goes on at the site as well. They have very stric! set back requirements from towers and they are very concerned about fire issues. The access roads must be in good shape. Edison will also be testing the fire retardant materials that will be used. Their structures are not considered buildings because they are removable.Commissioner Carlton had a concern about extra liability insurance being required lor these struc!ures.Because of the strong winds, will the plastic blow 011 the structures into an owner' s yard? Have the covers blown 011 at other sites?Mr. House explained that Edison requires them to carry one million dollars in liability insurance. There is no additional requirement for insurance. The materials that are used in the structures are extremely light.They have not had any problems at their other sites of the material blowing into a neighbor's yard.Commissioner Romero asked where the other nurseries are located ( who have the screens)?Mr. House stated there were screens at Huntington Beach, Brea, and Buena Park.Commissioner Romero asked ilthe nursery had any meetings with the residents?Mr. House personally has not met with the residents. They supplied letters to the residents telling them they would be complying with Orange's requirements in the luture. This is the lirst time he has had to obtain a conditional use permit to put in green houses and shade structures.Chairman Bosch noted there was no storage of pesticides on site, but there is a liquid fertilizer injection system and tank in current use. What ellec!, if any, upon that system would this change in materials and types 01 growth patterns cause on the site? Soaps and mild solutions 01 pesticides were mentioned.He wanted more inlormation on the application methods that occur on the site and how they may change with a dillerent crop.Mr. House replied there would be no change in that regard. The lertilization process they currently use would continue to be used so there would be no more or no less required. Their plant product is more oriented towards the retail type sales. Because 01 that, there is less turn over. It's grown for a particular season and then sold.Mike Babineau, 932 West 18th Street, Santa Ana, addressed the question about the application methods. It is either by drench -- mixing the chemical in a tank and actually water the plants with it, or spray, which uses the mild chemical or soaps. They have tried not to put plants along the northern border 01 the property next to the houses because 01 the complaints they do ljet. They' re trying to minimize that. They've had at least one inspection by the Department of Agriculture due to some complaints to make sure they were in compliance as far as the method and type 01 application 01 4 Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 chemicals being used. Their record is clean. He does not foresee a change. Spraying within the structures would reduce the drill that could occur n there is a breeze. Chairman Bosch noted a lew letters have been received and entered into the public record. One is from Ursula Brown and Belly Marks in favor 01 the nursery. A letter Irom Mr. and Mrs. Arthur Jamison in opposition to the nursery. They were concerned about the operations and also a flyer from Jerry Dierking in regard to concerns about the proposal. Those sD6akino in favor Ursula Brown, 710 East Chestnut, spoke in lavor 01 the nursery operation. She felt the more things going on back there, the less problems there will be. Rre danger is very low with the green shrubbery. She didn't understand the complaints. Jose Ulloa, Southem Calilornia Edison Company, 14803 Chestnut Street, Westminister, clarilied some of the issues. They see the nursery as a positive type 01 use. He has been in property management for about eight years and has handled all the complaints on that corridor. The complaints are about pesticide spraying. Edison does not control those things because they don't want it to be construed as collusion. The governmental agencies answers those complaints. Village Nurseries are complying with the City's requirements of set backs. Only one gentleman has contacted Edison with a complaint about this site that he knows 01. Those soeakino in oooosition Jerry Dierking, 324 East Chestnut, has been the spokesman lor his neighbors. There were about 10 people who could not come to the meeting, but they wanted to express their leelings 01 opposition. There use to be orange trees behind their homes, which was satisfac!ory. They tore down the orange trees and put in plants and trees. About 10 years ago problems started occurring. There are problems of vandalism, there are no roads back there for the police to access, trailers are being parked along the lences, homeless people are sleeping in the field at night and there is a real problem with pesticides in the water. Pesticide residue gathers in the residents' pools. There has been increased truck traffic. They come in belore 6:00 a.m. That's a contradic!ion to what their hours are. One neighbor's husband is so sick from the pesticides, she may take legal action against the nursery. They have placed a big pile of manure in the center 01 their easement. The issue of moving the pile has not been addressed. The odor from the manure is unbearable. There are also generators being run along the residential lences near Tustin on the Chestnut side. Neighbors have complained about the noise Irom the generators, but the nursery has not responded. Crime has also increased. His house has been robbed three times over the last 10 years. He has sent numerous letters to Southern Calilornia Edison, the Public Utilities Commission, and public ollicials. However, he hasn't had a response Irom the City Council or City Manager. They are concerned about the City giving Village Nurseries a $300,000 interest free loan. What ellect does that have on the Planning Commission's decision? Village Nurseries have proved to be a poor neighbor and they can't be trusted. Chris Caines, 1410 East Chestnut, said the assumption is that the lences are 6 feet in height. He is only 5'9" and his eye sight is above five leet. His fence is 4'8". Village Nurseries is breaking their policy 01 being a good neighbor. He cannot be in his backyard at 7:30 p.m. every night because the overspray Irom the water is unbearable. The neighbors smell the pesticides and taste them in their mouths. It's not conducive to the neighborhood. A good use for that property, without the nursery, would be a park or greenbelt area such as the park at the corner 01 Garfield and Newland in Huntington Beach. The nursery needs to be more responsible and responsive to the needs 01 the residents. They have a lot 01 trouble with people throwing "parties" alter hours. It is assumed the people are employees and they party until 7,8.9 or even 10 o'clock at night. It's unlortunate this kind 01 noise and sight pollution will affec! the value of their homes. He played a tape recording 01 disturbing, irritating noise coming Irom his back yard. It lasted 6 hours on Friday and another 6 hours on Monday. The noise was from trees being chopped up. Trac!ors are constantly going back and lorth and are very loud. It is extremely windy in their area. He felt the green houses will blow away in strong windy conditions. Sam Miller, 1444 East Chestnut, didn't mind the orange trees or tree nursery behind his house. Now it is a shrub nursery and all he sees is the dirt pile. It's approximately 20 leet high. He can lean over his fence so it's not 6 leet high. He personally has not been the victim 01 any crime, but when the nursery first moved in, he had two bikes stolen 011 his patio. There has been an increase in traffic. Besides the 5 I I r Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 big trucks, there are tractors moving back and forth. He never received any letters other than the one asking for assistance. The nursery was having some vandalism problems. The police had to go the neil!hbor's lence to get to the nursery site. The pesticides are the biggest issue. They are never nOlllied 01 when the nursery is 1I0ing to spray. He has two large show dogs in his yard that are covered with the fog-like spray 01 pesticides. Last year his block wall fence blew down from the high winds. He does not want to look at other struc!ures from his back yard.Louis Voida, 411 East Trenton, saw the nursery move in and slowly build up. They were suppose to put in a line of trees to block the residents' view. Last year the nursery cut all the trees out. All the homes on Trenton are tri-level homes. They are not one story homes. He can see the tops of the dumpsters that are parked behind his house. He cannot leave his grandchildren's bikes in the back yard because they are stolen. His property values have dropped, but his taxes have gone up. He suggested putting in a clover field rather than a shanty town in his back yard.Bill Gallardo, 1579 North Glassell, spoke for his mother who was in poor health because 01 the pesticides. He grew up in Orange and wanted to raise his lamily here. But they moved away because of the many changes he saw. It appears big business is becoming more important to Orange than the people who live in Orange. The parking issue is going to become worse. Dust and vandalism are problems. His parents cannot use their pool because of the dust from the nursery.Erin Walstead, 1508 East Chestnut, loves her house and the power poles. She thanked Mike for taking the beep-beep things off the trucks or tractors that back up. She felt the nursery has made an ellort, but still complained 01 the dirt, noise, pesticides. It' s really bad.Orlen Ray, 1524 East Chestnut, stated the dirt, noise and pollution issues are bad.Bob Hengsterbeck, 2215 East Chestnut, was opposed to the projec!, but did not comment further.Bruce Peterson, 510 East Chestnut, opposed the structures being built behind his house.Stacey Thergeson, 1420 East Chestnut, said there were trees in the field when they lirst purchased their house. This last year they took the trees down and put in the low ground cover (bushes and plants). The Santa Ana winds blew down two sections of their 5 loot high blOCK walllence last January. If her block wall can come down, then she was sure these struc!ures will blow down. There is constant watering at all hours of the day. The mistlrom the water leaves water spots on her windows. The pesticides are the biggest issue in this matter. She doesn't want her children or animals to breathe these pesticides. There is noise all day long, 7 days a week, up until midnight or 2:00 a.m. They have called the police, but the police cannot get back there. The police helicopters are then called out, which adds to the noise. She has complained, but has not gotten a response. She suggested the nursery install higher block wall fences to help with the vandalism, crime, dirt, pesticide and water spraying and noise.AI Doan, 312 East Chestnut, asked what will prevent the nursery Irom deviating from the height 01 the structures and going higher?Chairman Bosch explained the nursery proposed a height of 9'-6". That can be made a condition of approval and they could not install one higher than that.Rebuttal Mr. House wasn't sure what the noise was on the tape -. it sounded like a tree chipper, which they typically don't use. The shade structures will lessen some 01 the problems by being a less intense use.They are dealing with the other issues as they go along. The gates are locked every night. The police also have keys to those gates to access the roads. They were willing to meet with the neighbors and explain what they use lor chemicals. They will try to address the watering hours. It has nothing to do with the shade structures. All the watering will be inside the shade structures so it will cut down on the overspray.Commissioner Romero asked if Village Nurseries were willing to comply with the neighbors' requests 01 providing them trees? A 24" box tree would provide screening and a much nicer view.6 r Planning .Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 Mr. House said one 01 the reasons they discontinued the trees was because 01 Edison's requirements. They were not allowed to put in the type of tree supports needed to keep the trees standing, especially during the Santa Ana winds. Also, the chance of having over spray 01 pesticides in an owner's yard would be worse Irom trees. Commissioner Romero asked il trees required an annual spraying? He had several large trees in his yard and has never sprayed them with pesticides. Mr. House believed all plant materials would gather some type of insec!s. They did not recommend field growing trees because they would create a more intense use. Edison probably wouldn't allow them either on the site. They could line the area with trees il the neighbors wanted them. Commissioner Romero asked if the new parking arrangement would allow all employees to park on the lot? Mr. House thought their employees were parking on the lot. Commissioner Romero asked about the type of screening material that will be used and its durability regarding the strong winds? Mr. House said they have not had a problem with shade cloth. Mr. Babineau said the plastic sheeting tears, but it never breaks loose. They have not had a problem with the plastic blowing off into the neighbors' yards. Commissioner Carlton asked how many homeowners took Village Nurseries up on their oller to provide Iree trees? When was the oller made? What kind 01 trees were offered? When did they remove the large trees from their property? Mr. Babineau said the offer was made when they started moving the big trees 011 the lot. They offered the neighbors live 5 gallon trees to plant in their back yards. Village Nurseries would not plant the trees in their yards because of a liability issue. Quite a lew people took them up on the offer. They started removing the trees about two years ago. People in attendance were not offered trees.) Mr. House addressed the "manure pile". Planting materials include wood shavings, sand and water. He didn1 believe they were using any other materials. Chairman Bosch said the hours of operation stated in the staff report are Irom 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, but he has heard there are operations on Sunday as well. What are the actual hours 01 operation, other than an emergency condition. Mr. House explained their hours of operation are typically Irom 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. He didn1 know of any other activities that were taking place alter hours, but he would check into it. Tractors should not be in there alter 5:00 p.m. The "will call" center is open on Sunday, but it is a commercial piece of property. Chairman Bosch said one 01 the concerns seems to be there is some equipment, whether it be trucks or dumpsters, or other equipment parked adjacent to the property lines Irom time to time. The proposed plan places a service drive about 58 leet minimum away Irom the property lines. Is the intent then there would be no parking 01 equipment or trucks, dumpsters or trailers between that and the property lines? Mr. House thought the neighbors' complaint alluded to a trailer that was parked on the parcel between Glassell and Cambridge, which was used as a storage unit. It was parked between the owners' property lines and the roadway. Since then, it has been removed. Chairman Bosch noted the need for knox boxes on the gates for Police and Rre access. It sounds like Village Nurseries has that so that the Police, il they need to, can drive vehicles onto the property in response to an emergency. Mr. House said that would be his understanding. 7 r-Ul Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 Mr. Ulloa said the Police and Fire Departments have the option to interlock with Edison, but the City of Orange has chosen not to. But, they can have access 24 hours a day. They just need to contact the Southern California Edison Company. Chairman Bosch asked about the height and screening 01 the dirt pile. At one time there were boxed trees placed around the property. It's an industrial view rather than an agricultural view at this time. What are the plans for this area? Mr. Babineau thought they could put the trees back closer together. They were spacing the trees so that they could get fuller and maintain a nice shape. Chairman Bosch thought they could re-institute a program 01 keeping the trees as close as practical for their health to screen the piles. (Yes, they could do that) The nursery, by pre-existing use, has the right to continue the operation and the use as a tree and plant farm is not restric!ed to just trees or just shrubs.They have the right to change those uses. There are some nuisances to the neighbors though and he wanted to address them because they impact the layout of the site. One is the overspraying 01 water.Obviously this is to the north. Other than the Santa Ana winds and storms, this is an area where the prevailing breezes are from the southwest so any spray would be pushed in the direction of the homes to the north. It sounds like it is a major problem there. Without reviewing the irrigation layouts and plans,it might be appropriate to indicate how the nursery might minimize this. An on- shore breeze happens every day lor hall the day at least, il not longer.Mr. House agreed with Chairman Bosch, but he was not aware 01 the complaints until this hearing. He's willing to address this issue.Chairman Bosch said the spraying 01 pesticides of any lorm is causing a major problem, perhaps again primarily due to the prevailing breezes. It should be less of a problem with shrubs and ground cover than the trees. What type 01 method is used to spray -- is it by hand or by machine, and what can be done to put an end to the problem 01 over spraying in this regard? This is a real serious problem.Mr. House said they use materials that are non-toxic. They are sprayed by machine (high pressure spray). They should be spraying away from the houses. They do not spray during windy conditions.They have their own policies and procedures to follow, but they also must live by the County's Agricultural Commissioner's regulations.Chairman Bosch reiterated their lease does not include the 80 feet that is the Southern Pacilic Railway right-ol-way and the storm channel to the south. (Correct, it was not under their control.)Commissioner Carlton said it was stated earlier that Edison does not allow any in-ground trees or plants to be grown at this site. Is that a flat, across- the-board rule or have they made exceptions?Mr. Ulloa replied in the affirmative. Other than, they would only allow a vine to grow on the wall. Village Nurseries is a secondary use on the site; the primary use is the transportation 01 electricity. Edison needs the properly to be Iree and clear. II the nursery were taken out, Edison would then have the responsibility of maintaining or removing the trees and plants. Prior to this, the only trees that were there were orange trees. The reason they took them out is because they were diseased and the County 01 Orange asked Edison to remove them.Chairman Bosch was very lamiliar with Central Park in La Palma and the park that was mentioned in Huntington Beach. Who paid for the landscaping?Mr. Ulloa responded the cities pay for the landscaping and maintenance, as well as a license fee on an annual basis. Liability insurance is required at the expense 01 the city.The public hearing was dosed.Mr. Soo-Hoo said there was a comment regarding some financial arrangements made with the Redevelopment Agency. He didn't know the details of that. It is irrelevant to the Commission's discussion at this hearing. The Commission is only concemed with Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 Chairman Bosch was going to respond to that just to the extent that the pUblic record will show that on a variety of occasions the Planning Commission, regardless of pre-knowledge of Redevelopment loans or grants to property owners, has recommended against approval 01 projec!s. It is not the Commission' s right to discuss those issues. They are technical advisors to the City Council in that regard and those issues are for the City Council to handle.Commissioner Romero felt lor the owners' concems .- pesticides, water, smell, noise, vandalism. He felt though that the covers would allow a large reduction of the water, dust, and pesticides because the existing use can remain as is. All the plantings reduces dust and dirt. The screening will substantially reduce those problems. The major problem is with the view and hours 01 operation. Village Nurseries has the desire to keep their product on their property. He believed there would be more crime il there was Iree access to the neighbors' back yards. As well as, more of a problem with transients. Commissioner Carlton was concerned about the lack 01 homeowners taking up the offer of the nursery to give them five free trees. She would like to see an oller from the nursery to continue their program 01 offering the neighbors free trees, and then maybe a reduced cost for additional plants to try and build a screening area across the whole section. She sees the advantage 01 the enclosures by reducing the spray and the dust. Chairman Bosch said regardless 01 the action the Commission takes, he suggested some additional conditions 01 approval. He wants to inform the public and the applicant and perhaps the City Council, if the request is approved and then appealed, as to how the Commission sees methods of mitigating the issues. He noted there is already a proposed requirement #7 that all mechanical gates shall be provided with a key operated override per the City of Orange ordinance in a manual release in case of electrical failure. Then, add condition #15 that per Mr. House's statement that limits hours of operation of the nursery growing operation, that is everything except the commercial operation within approximately 440 leet bordering Tustin, from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. That includes no truck traffic onto or off the site prior to or alter those hours. Condition #16 - The maximum struc!ural height of any temporary green houses or shade structures shall be 9' - 6" (to the highest point of any construc!ion).Condition #17 - No electrical lights or elec!rical power outlets shall be allowed in or on any shade or green house structure. Condition # 18 - No public address system shall be installed or operated on the property. Condition #19 - A maximum 01 4 semi-trailer trucks may utilize the property on any business day. Condition #20 - No parking 01 trucks, dumpsters, or other equipment shall be allowed north of the designated service drive, which begins 58 feet south 01 the north property line. Condition #21 - Any stock pile 01 planting materials, planting cans, or other non-equipment material shall be screened by locating boxed trees appropriately spaced for their age and health to screen the materials. Condition 22 . As stipulated to by the applicant, to continue the program 01 providing five 5 gallon screening trees to be selected by the property owners from a list 01 species and types distributed by Village Nurseries) and delivered to the yards of neighboring residents who request them. Condition #23 -Institute written policies and procedures to eliminate over spray 01 watering and spraying 01 any type onto or over properly line fences. Said policies and procedures shall include the physical relocation of irrigation deVices and lines (il necessary) to prevent over spraying. Condition #24 - Require staff review of property procedures at 6 month and 12 month intervals with a report back to the Planning Commission in regard to the fulfillment 01 the conditions and recommendations regarding any ac!ion which may be necessary to mitigate non-conlormance or ineffective implementation of the standards in regard to the fulfillment 01 the conditions stated.Chairman Bosch would love to have a park at this site also, but the City ran out 01 the ability to do that years ago. The citizens allowed the money to be spent on other things. The nursery has the right to continue their operation as it is now with its selection 01 plant material to be grown on the site, subjec! to conditions placed by the Edison Company within the constraints of the existing City ordinance. The Planning Commission does not have the power to change the ordinance. Since there is a substantial change in use represented by the proposed struc!ures, it allows the Commission to apply conditions that help mitigate any additional impacts caused by the placement 01 those structures. Thus, there is a connection to a number of the measures to help control existing conditions, as well as any that might be perceived as increasing a negative impac! on the neighbors by the chanlle in operations. He was really concerned about the over watering and over spraying, which represent nUisances that can be controlled to a great extent by the applicant. Dust is a real problem and it needs to be controlled. He appreciates anything that can be done by the applicants to reduce the impacts their operation has. Just as they have a right to continue the operation they have, there is a need for them to be good neighbors and recognize that things change.9 1 r Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 It was noted this project was categorically exempt from the provisions 01 CEQA review. Moved by Commissioner Romero, seconded by Commissioner Carlton, to approve Conditional Use Permit 2160-96, with condnions #1 - #24. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Romero None Commissioners Pruett, Smith MOTION CARRIED Mr. Jones explained the appeal procedure in that the appeal needed to be filed within 15 days alter Planning Commission ac!ion. Commissioner Smith returned to the meeting. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2161-96 - JESSE MARTINEZ A request to allow the construction of a detached 2-story second dwelling unit within Old Towne. The site is addressed 137 South Parker Street.This project is categorically exempt Irom the provisions 01 the Calilomia Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.Mr. Jones presented the lull stall report as there was opposition to this request. The subject property is currently developed with a 1000 sq. ft. single story residence and a detached two car garage. The structures are 01 an eclectic design constructed in 1940, and therefore, are not listed as historically contributing structures in the City's Historic Survey. The proposal is to construct a new detached second dwelling unit over a three-car garage. The unit is to be one bedroom and 623 sq. It. in size. The existing detached garage would be demoflshed. Also proposed is the addition 01 approximately 400 sq. It. at the rear of the existing one story residence. ThiS request is before the Commission because of the new residential construc!ion in the Old Towne District and it is subject to a conditional use permit when it exceeds 1 1/2 stories. The General Plan designation lor the site is Medium Density Residential, allowing 15 to 24 dwelling units per acre. Zoning is consistent - R-3 (Residential - Multiple Family District). The lot size is just over 6,700 square feet. The applicant could build up to three units on this property. NOTE:The Old Towne Design Guidelines requires that the Planning Commission consider the lollowing general criteria in making a project determination: To include things such as compatibility 01 the project with surrounding development and neighborhoods; the development be consistent in size, scale, and context with surrounding development; the development shall retain the historic relationship between buildings,landscape leatures and open space; additions shall be desi~ned and constructed so as to not signilicantly change, obscure, damage or destroy the character defining leatures 01 an historic building or leature; and the cfevelopment shall not erode or adversely affect the historic resource or distric!.On August 7, 1996 the Staff Review Committee reviewed the projec! and noted that the proposed structure conforms to the development standards 01 the R-3 zone. Concerns were raised, however,regarding the location 01 the open parking space in front 01 the new unit as being rather awkward. Also of concern was the location 01 the staircase encroaching into one 01 the garage parking spaces. The applicant subsequently revised the plans to increase the side yard setback (north side) from 5 feet to 9 feet to create an open parking space along side of the building. He also revised the location 01 the staircase, which was moved outside 01 the building to avoid interference with the garage space. On September 4, 1996 the Design Review Board reviewed the revised proposal and recommended approval subjec! to a number 01 modifications as outlined in the staff report. The modilications include adding such things as wood trim around the windows and door frames to make the new addition compatible with the existing structure, requiring wood windows and wood garage door panels.Staff received a phone call from the neighbor adjoining the site to the north. He was concerned about a decrease in privacy to their property. The applicant half attempted to address the privacy concern by creating a setback 01 9 leet from the property to the north. The property to the south has a 10 foot setback. Also, to eliminate window openings along the north building elevations so they would not be 10 Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 able to look down Irom the second story. There is an open space requirement of 250 square feet per unit. The project, as proposed, provides approximately twice that. The public hearing was opened. Aoolicant Jell Salmi, represented Jesse Martinez, 137 South Parker. He designed the project. The Design Review Board said this area was an eclec!ic area and did not have a problem with their proposed addition. The house to the rear is pretty much torn up; to the right is a two-story rental house as shown by pictures on the wall. They will be using wood siding and will comply with the conditions in the stall report.Those soeakino in oooosition Donna Hardy, 194 South Parker, represented the Park Avenue Townhouse Association. They do not objec! to what Mr. Martinez is doing, but they do have questions and concerns about the construc!ion in and on their block. They appreciate the fac! they were notified of this project. Are they suppose to always be notified il there is construc!ion on their block?Mr. Jones explained that all property owners within 300 leet 01 a proposed project are notilied of the hearing belore the Planning Commission. Chairman Bosch stated notilication is only where a variance,zone change or conditional use permit is required to gain approval. Property owners would not be notified if only a building permit were required.Ms. Hardy asked if there was a time limit as to how long construction could take belore it is considered way out of control?Mr. Jones said building permits are issued for an initial period of time. Then, there is a 6 month renewal based upon activity levels 01 consfruc!ion. It's dillicult to say that it could be limited to a specific time frame as long as they are making substantial progress. This is measured by the Building Code.Ms. Hardy said the reason lor their concern is directly across the street from them at 195 South Parker.They started construction on that house 11/2 years ago. They are living in a wooden addition to the house. It has no siding and you can see through it. A plywood board was put across the rool, but it' s not connected. This house is an eyesore and it has been like that lor 18 months. She has called the City three times. The lirst time the City came out they had the owners remove the second story, but they' ve left the other one there. It's just a wood frame and it's still sitting there like that. They don~ want that to happen again with this proposed project.Chairman Bosch thanked Ms. Hardy for bringing her concern to the Commission's attention. Mr. Jones was taking notes and he was sure Mr. Godlewski, Code Compliance, would be notified of this problem.Mr. Jones will check with the Building Depar1ment to check the status 01 the construc!ion ac!lvity and someone will get back to her with some explanations.Ms. Hardy asked il the proposed project would hamper trallic on their street while construction is underway'?Chairman Bosch replied there were regulations with regard to maintaining the trallic. There will be construction activities to deliver materials and remove the garage on the site. However, they must maintain the flow of traffic or get permits to impair trallic on the street lor a short period of time. It' s normal house construc!ion, and he didn't loresee anything that would be a major disruption .. the same as when the townhomes were built.Jim Torok, 188 South Parker, relerred to the same picture and same house as Ms. Hardy. He knows one must get occupancy alter a project is finished. On the other side of the house there is a wall where you can still see insulation through it. It's an eyesore and has been like this for a lonll time. He's sure Mr.Martinez won't let that happen with his project, but they're concerned because it's In their neighborhood.The neighbors do not believe 195 South Parker was ever permitted. 11 r- Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 Jennifer Torok, 188 South Parker, was not opposing the addition of this proposed project, but was concerned that it be completed in a timely manner and not become an eyesore in their neighborhood. The public hearing was dosed. Commissioner Carlton thought the applicant was maintaining the integrity 01 the architec!ure and the design looks good. It is within the purview 01 the code requirements and she could see no objection. Commissioner Smith read in the staff report that the architec!ure is an eclectic style with no particular historic significance. She has never heard 01 an architectural style called "eclectic". The house is almost 60 years old. It does have its place in history. It will always have historic si\!nificance. Maybe in comparison to the pre-194O structures that are also prevalent in the neighborhood, it doesn't fit with those. It begins a new war time architectural style. The place in history has been well represented in the new struc! ure.One of the things she particularly likes about it is the size of the second struc!ure does not over power the size of the first structure in square footage. It has a good balance on the property. She was also impressed with the fact that this could be three units on the parcel and it keeps the density down. The City requires the parking so that requires the big garage. The DRB has already placed a number 01 conditions on the project. She hoped the applicant will follow through and for sure add all the wood they say they're going to, including the wooden garage doors. They are nice features and it's a nice effort to make this house good for taking its place in history in the edec!ic style.Chairman Bosch concurred with the Commissioners. This style of architec!ure is one that from previous examples and from the design 01 this lends itself most suitably to appropriately scaled second units in the rear yard, better than many 01 the pre-World War II or the Vic!orian homes do because the sense of style and space that the building requires to be properly sited. He was very pleased with the extra measures that have been taken with regard to extra setbacks, window locations and the like to minimize the impacts on the neighbors. With the requirements 01 the Design Review Board, which are incorporated in the proposed conditions of approval, he also supports the project.It was noted this project was categorically exempt from CEQA review.Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to approve Conditional Use Permit 2161-96 with all of the conditions listed in the stall report. AYES:NOES:ABSENT:Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Romero, Smith None Commissioner Pruett MOTION CARRIED 4. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1508-96 - CITY OF ORANGE An environmental assessment of a project to establish a precise alignment for Hewes Avenue, between Blue Bird Avenue and Julie Avenue.Bob Mickelson, 121 West Rose, presented the staff report lor this projec!. The strawberry patch is being sold by the County. The developer, before he can design a subdivision map to fit on that property, needs to know what the alignment of the street is going to be. The analysis considered the existing alignment and lour alternatives. The existing one is clearly not the best design from an arterial highway standpoint. Alternative #1, which was the old alignment when it was going to be a park and part of it was going to be part 01 a settling basin for the Water District, bisec!s the property and makes it difficult to design an usable subdivision. Alternates #2, #3 and #4 were so similar it was hard to describe the dillerences. They concur with stall that Alternate #4 is the best compromise on all the issues concerned here. It will create the optimum size lor development of the remaining parcel. Mike Ahlering,with Ahlering Associates and Glen Caber from Rojas and Associates were both present to answer technical questions about the project The public hearing wasopened. 12 Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 1996 Public comments Bob Bennyhofl. 10642 Morada Drive, Orange Park Acres, spoke in favor of the project. Shirley Grindle also asked him to speak favorably 01 the project. This is something that needs to be done out there. The residents are all in agreement on this project. The public hearing was dosed. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Smith to adopt Alternate Alignment #4 -modified 950' radius as the prelerred Precise Alignment lor Hewes Avenue from Blue Bird Avenue to Julie Avenue, and that they recommend adoption of Negative Declaration 1508-96 including the Projec! Report and Environmental Assessment as being in conlormance with the requirements of the Calilornia Environmental Quality Ac!. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bosch, Carlton, Romero, Smith None Commissioner Pruett MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Smith appreciated the five options; it looked like the alignment was thoroughly assessed. It was a lot 01 work, but she appreciated having the options spelled out in detail. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Romero, seconded by Commissioner Carlton, to adjourn the meeting at 9:50 p.m. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bosch, Cartfon. Romero, Smith None Commissioner Pruett MOTION CARRIED Isld 13 r I~r