Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-06-1995 PC MinutesMINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Romero, Smith ABSENT: Commissioner Cathcart November 6, 1995 Monday - 7:00p.m.STAFF PRESENT: Vem Jones, Manager of Current Planning -Commission Secretary;Stan Soo-lioo, Assistant City Attorney, Gary Johnson, Cfty Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF OCTOBER 16. 1995 Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to approve the Minutes of October 16, 1995 as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cathcart MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2127-95, VARIANCE 2002-95 - ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR Request for a conditional use permit to allow the establishment of a used- car sales facility. The variance request is to allow waiver of code requirements for front setback dimension, indoor showroom area and service facility. The site is located at 1925 North Tustin Street.NOTE: Negative Declaration 1483-95 has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of this project.The staff report was presented by Vern Jones as there were several people in the audience who were opposed to this item. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow them to sell their used rental cars at the site, which is currently vacant. They project the volume of sales to be approximately 40 to 50 cars per month. Their business hours of operation would be9: 00a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and closed on Sunday. The property is proposed to be constructed with a 3,500 square foot sales office building, with the rest of the site used for parking and display area,along with landscaping. The variance portion of the application is a request to vary from the zoning code which requires a minimum of 2,000 square foot showroom, a minimum repair and serwce facility of 1600 square feet, and a minimum 15 foot landscape setback requirement. The applicant is proposing no indoor service repair facility since it is not needed. The applicant is requesting the 15 foot front landscape dimension be reduced to six feet. In September, the City Council authorized the execution of a participation agreement between the Orange Redevelopment Agency and the applicant, subject to approval of this permit, to provide financial assistance for the project on the basis that the project would generate significant local sales tax revenue. The Staff Review Committee evaluated this protect at two different meetings. One in September, and again in October in which specific concerns were identified in three areas: They were on-site circulation, land use compatibility and landscaping. The main concern regarding on-site circulation relates to the use of gates or chains to secure the site after hours, and the potential safety issue associated with temporarily stopping or parking on Tustin Avenue in order to release or unlock the gates in the morning as they arrive there. Staff added condition 7, which would require that whoever has that responsibility does not stop on Tustin Avenue, but uses the access drive.Regarding land use compatibility, while the site is surrounded Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 adjoin a condominium project immediately to the east. There are several factors, however, that do mitigate some of the potential impacts to the condominium site. Frst, there is an approximately 14 foot high carport wall which separates the two sites and Provides a butter between the two uses. Second)y,since there are no proposed service and repair facilities, potential impacts from those kind of uses would be minimized. Thirdly, the conditions have been added to the conditional use permit request to direct any exterior lighting away from the adjoining property and to require that any public address system, if any, not be audible from the adjoining property. Staff is also asking that another condition be added which would require a landscape planter at the rear of the site which would protect the aforementioned 14 foot high carport wall from any parking that might occur adjacent to it. Regarding landscaping, the DesignReviewBoardreviewedthisprojectproposalandhasrequestedapprovalofcondition4whichwould increase the front landscape planter to approximately 6 feet; the interior previous dimensions of 4 Teet, would include palm trees in the planter areas, and would create a continuous 3 foot planter along the south property line, which separates the Great Western Bank facility from the site. Commissioner Smith asked with the addition of the 3 foot planter to the rear of the property, would there be sufficient space for the parking spaces? Mr. Jones believed they were 20 foot parking spaces and the requirement is for an 18 foot space which would include a 2 foot overhang. It appears there would be adequate space in order to accommodate that. If the project were approved, the applicant would need to come back with a site plan to demonstrate the Changes could occur. If not, there is the potential they could lose a few spaces or the building might have to be adjusted accordingly. The public hearing was opened. Aoolicant Pete Wisner, 1325 West Redondo Beach Blvd., Gardena, said Enterprise Car Sales is a division of a Enterprise Rent-a-Car. They are unlike the typical used car facility in many ways. The vehicles that will be displayed on the lot are late model, one and two year old vehicles. They're very clean and have been restored and reconditioned off the premises. They do not do any servicing on the site. They call their branches referral branches -- they bring a lot of business to the City of Orange. Enterprise has over 200 rental branches in So. California. There are about 15 car sales locations at this point in time. Most of their customers have been referred to Enterprise, either by a rental branch, by a credit union, or by a previous customer. Traffic is at a minimum -- 80 to 90% of their business has been done by appointments, before the sale. They don't have the banners and balloons and that type of presentation. They have a small office facility, with a small staff (5 to 10 people) who are business professionals and who dress accordingly. They have made sure the landscaping will be consistent with the neighboring businesses and have agreed with the Design Review Board's recommendations to try and add even more green space to the parking lot, including palm trees and green space along the south side of the property. The landscaping is something that will make the site even more attractive than the neighboring sites. He understands the easement is a concern of many people. The reason they have added the driveways to the easement were twofold. Number 1, if any customers did pull into the driveway that services the condominium complex, they wanted to make sure they had a turn around space. The other issue was fire and safety. They wanted to make sure fire and safety personnel had the ability to pull in or out in case of an emergency. Their hours will be from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Quite often, they are out of the office well before 9:00 p.m. They are closed on Sundays. They are a quiet, peaceful facility. The traffic impacts will be minimal. Regarding condition 10, the proposed planter box at the east side of the facility, they see no problem with that. They could go with either a curb situation or planter boxes. It is intended to be used as employee parking. Commissioner Pruett asked about the existing alley to the north of the property (the easement). It's not shown as a public alley. Mr. Wisner said it was an easement to their property. It was considered as part of the square footagetheyarepayingfor. Enterprise will be paying taxes on that easement. Commissioner Romero spoke specifically to the service/repair of cars. He understood there would be no service or repair and asked if they would be willing to adhere to condition 11 specifically stating no service, maintenance or repair of vehicles allowed on the lot? Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 Mr. Wisner believed there was languagge in the application about some minor repairs. That is strictly the repair of a flat fire or a dead battery. Or, they may have to change a light bulb -- something very minor.Commissioner Romero was referring to something more with regard to a lengthy type of repair;something in excess of two hours, with two or three cars with their hoods up and parts lying on the ground. He was concerned with that type of repair and the mess associated with them.Mr. Wisner explained they use local mechanics, dealerships, and shops for the servicing of their vehicles,whichisottsite. They wouldn't have a problem with a condition stating no lengthy repairs allowed at the faalRy. Commissioner Smith asked where their nearest Enterprise neighbor was located?Mr. Wisner said the nearest car sales facility was located in Huntington Beach on Beach Blvd. Their rental facility is located by the Orange Mall.Chairman Bosch asked how they intended to locate customer/visitor parking to the site?Mr. Wisner said most of their employees actually drive sales inventory cars to test drive the vehicles to and from work. Customer parking would be at the front of the building.Chairman Bosch asked if he has investigated where it may cost them some spaces and how much of an impact there would be to the operation regarding the Design Review Board's landscape suggestions?Mr. Wisner said the landscaping will border the entire site and will cost them a number of parking spaces they realize that. That is one reason why they did not put landscaping at the back of the site. The setback was very important to them. The lot is narrow and deep in shape. The average traffic speed is in excess of 40 m.p.h. It's important to display their vehicles up front. That's why they asked for the 6 foot setback instead of the 15 feet that is required. The landscaping along the sides is important to separate the properties. They have added the additional aisles with palm trees on the interior lot.Those speakinc in opposition Rick Collins, 1941 North Tustin #4, was the vice-president of their homeowners association for the Orange GlenVillas. He was presenting some issues voiced by the homeowners association: 1) An agreement byEnterprisetoOrangeGlennottoreducethedrivewaysizeontheexistingsite. Previously, their association has been responsible for making the repairs to the landscape, maintenance and asphalt. 2)Theyarealsoconcernedabouttheequalsharingofmaintenancecosts, mcluding but not limited to asphalt repay, curbing and stripping oT the driveway. 3) Reimbursement of Orange Glen by Enterprise for the costs of trees and foliage alon the driveway, as well as the driveway improvements, damaged or removed during construction. 4~ An agreement by Enterprise not to block the driveway, using but not limited to vehicles of any kind at any time, thus allowing owners and emergency vehicles to pass. 5) An agreement by Enterprise to provide a certificate of insurance to hold harmless and indemnify Orange GlenVillasHomeownersAssociationforanyactsbytheiremployees, operations, or invitees due to accidents or incidents arising out of their operations in the amount of $2 million per incident by an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of California. 6) Enterprise consider an agreement to pay for the costs of erecting an electric gate, similar to the one at the rear of their property,whichfrontsonGroveStreet. The gate should be electronically controlled in such a manner for the exclusive use of the Orange Glen occupants and invitees, or various emergency services. The gate shouldbeerectedatthestartoftheOrangeGlenpropertyline, at the east end of the driveway. 7)Enterpriseerectandmaintainnoparkingsignsalongthesideofthedrive, abutting against the Enterprise siteandagreetoenforcetheagreement. 8) They would like to see a fire proof block wall along the perimeter of the rear of the property protecting Orange Glen's garages and common areas against fire and accidents. 9) They hope to see Enterprise erect said block wall, not less than 2'S" higher than the roof structure of the garages, but also adjoining wing walls of the same height and extending a minimum of 101inear feet away from the rear wall. Further items between the City of Orange and Orange Glen Villas •- they would like to see no variances allowed on the 15 foot setback. The also want considered a complete environmental impact report be done and submitted by the applicant due to continuing questions ofnoise, lighting, crime, fire department turn around of vehicles on the site, and the safety aspects offuelingvehiclesonsiteandstoragethereof, as well as increased traffic and pedestrian safety.There areseveralsmallchildreninthecomplexanditisgoingtocreatemoretraffic. An agreement, or stipulation that Enterprise may not load or unload any vehicles except on the site itself. This stipulation to Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 include the driveway be off limits, and furthermore, the use of the center lane of Tustin Avenue should be prohibited. They would like the City to consider a warning device of some kind such as a flashing yellow light and sign located near the Great Western Bank, to alert on coming traffic the heavy use of the North Tustin driveway entrance by Enterprise and its customers. The corner of the applicant's lot abutting against their driveway to be lest free of any fencing, foliage, or barrier to allow vehicles exiting the Orange Glen Villa's driveway to see on-coming traffic. The corner of the site should not be less than five feet long on both sides. A stipulation that lighting be limited to tree standing, lowwa~~age fixtures of not more than 7 to 9 feet in height and any lighting attached to the exterior of the building be limited to low wattage and attached only to the eaves and sides of the building -- no root attachment of any type. Also, lighting along the proposed rear wall and wing walls should not exceed the height of the wall and be of similar low wattage. They requested that any P.A. systems of any kind not be allowed and perhaps employees should be issued and required to carry a beeper similar to mansgers and employees in restaurants or retail establishments. They also asked any alarm systems installed must be central station controlled and the silent type with no audible capacity from where they sit directly to the east. Any vehicles on site, to have their audible alarms disabled while on the site and connected only for demonstration purposes and promptly disconnected afterwards. Commissioner Romero asked if these items have been discussed with Enterprise? Mr. Collins responded their Association hasn't had the time to schedule a meeting and gather together as a group to discuss these issues with Enterprise. Commissioner Romero asked why they were requesting an electric gate now? Why has there not been one installed previous to this? Mr. Collins said previous to this there was a landscape business on the site. There wasn't much traffic and there was an existing chain link fence, as well as existing foliage. Their feeling and inclination is that traffic on their easement is going to increase a great deal. They're worried about the small children in the complex and the lack of a greenbelt. There will be two driveways opening into the easement from the car lot and that did not exist previously. Commissioner Romero thought the number of cars and customers at a retail nursery would exceed the number of patrons at this used car lot. Commissioner Smith asked if Mr. Collins lived in the condominium complex? (Yes.) How long had he lived there? (Seven months.) Was the nursery functioning while he has lived there? (No.) She wanted to know if these were anticipated concerns of his? (Many of them are anticipated; however, a lot come from people who have been on site for over 10 years.) Nancy Pierce, 1941 North Tustin #10, said according to the impact report, the no impact column is marked numerous times. She finds that an error. What about the impact on their property values? They are surrounded by an area that is a powder keg, and consequently have seen their property values decline. Now, a used car lot is being considered to operate and utilize their prvate driveway. Not only will this overburden their driveway, but numerous safety issues come to light. What about fire truck access? How are they to get out it a semi-truck is unloading in their driveway? They have many children in the complex who play in the private driveway. Their safety will be in great feopardy. Another impact is aesthetics.Instead of driving down their tree lined driveway, they will be treated to the site of used cars and chain link fence. Imagine hying to sell your home when the potential buyer has to wade through a used car lot to see the property? More than revenue is at stake here.Commissioner Smith asked Ms. Pierce what she would rather see on the site?Ms. Pierce said when the nursery was there, it was great. They didn't cut through their property and they didn't compete with traffic.Tim Devantier, 1941 North Tustin #9, was not opposed to the Enterprise car sales lot as it generally relates to their use of the property to sell automobiles. However, he objected to the proposed use of their private driveway (easement). By allowing a trash bin to be placed adjacent to their existing homes and by allowing the destruction of the six foot greenbelt of trees and bushes, dividing the driveway and property would be detrimental to the privacy, security and overall monetary value of owning an Orange Villa Townhome. The easement was created in 1949. It's existence has been there a long time. It' s pertinent to the Orange Glen property. In 1982 there were someCCBR's set up on the use of it. Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 Article 2, Section 2, it states the description and characteristics of the driveway easement. Orange Glen constructed, improved and maintained the easement at its cost to the standards in which the easement was intended. Now Enterprise wishes to compromise the existence of the easement and itscharacteristics. Their easement will be overburdened by possible semi-tractor trailers dropping off their loads of cars. The proposed Enterprise site fronts Tustin Avenue; it's not a landlocked parcel. Additional driveway entrances and improvements can be made to the Enterprise's site without the need of the private driveway. There should be an overall plan of the Mag property, including the bank parceltoimprovethesituation. He had a map of the site which he shared with the Commission.Commissioner Pruett asked if there was access to the driveway (alley)? ( No.)Kymm Lester, 1941 North Tustin #3, has lived in her condo for the past six years. That has been theonlydrivewayaccesstheyhavetogetintotheirproperty. There have been a lot of security risks; people wandering on the property, cutting through to the other street. The Enterprise business will add tothesecurityproblemstheyalreadyhave. The easement is not very wide; only one car can go in and out atatime. Many times, they must stop and back up to let an on-coming car in or out. When thenurserywasthere, the access has been locked shut and not opened. People will use them iT they are opened, as proposed by Enterprise. Between the lack of security and the definite detriment to theaestheticsoftheirhomes, are the major issues.Bruce Jung, 1941 North Tustin #2, had proof to show the easement belonged to theOrangeGlenHomeowners. He passed it on to the Commission. The fee owner of the property is them. He was concerned about traffic and crime. By putting in a car lot, is inviting people through theircomplex. He wants to feel safe and secure in his home.Jane Kessinger, 1941 North Tustin #7, reiterated her feelings. She has lived there eightyears. She pushed for a full environmental impact report because of the safety issues. Will there begasolinestoredonthelottofuelthesecars? She felt they could do a lot of repair work in two hours. There shouldn' t be any type of repairs allowed.Rebuttal Mr. Wisner has not met with the association. It seemed to him the driveway/easement wasthemajorproblemandconcernofthehomeowners. The main entrance to their facility is a wide drivewayatthecenterofthesite. The reason why they wanted to add the two entrances to the easementwastoprovideabettercirculationoftrafficandmostlyforfireandsafetyvehicles. If someone did turnintothedriveway, they would be able to turn around using thedriveways. They're not paramount totheproject;they can close ott the two driveways. Quite frankly, he could park more cars on the lot iTtheywereclosed. As far as the concerns mentioned by the first speaker, they understand the driveway is an easement; they have no intentions to reduce its size. As tar as the landscaping of thedriveway, they would be happy to meet with the association to discuss the current landscaping betweentheeasementandtheirproperty. They use driving services to deliver vehicles to their site; they don't use thebig18wheelertrucksandhavenointentiontotransportvehiclesontothedriveway, parking it in themiddleofthestreet -- there is no parking at the front of the site. They use a driving service that drives thecarsindividually. They estimate only 4 to 5 cars a day being delivered to their site. He believed thenoparkingsignswereafireandsafetyissueandwouldbehappytoworkwiththeCitytoaccomplishthat.The noise and crime will be less so (not more) than any other type of retail establishment. Theirtrafficcountisprobablylessthanthenurserythatwasthere. They do not do any servicing on the site. Theydonothaveservicebays. As tar as theP.A.'s; that's not a problem. They have smaller sales locations and a small staff. As far as landscaping, there was mention of knocking down existing landscape. Thatwon't be a concern if the Commission decides to close the driveways. Fueling of vehicles does not takeplaceonthesite. They contract with a local gas station in the area and all fueling is done oft site. Regarding the insurance, by all means Enterprise would make sure any driving concerns of their statt...theywouldtakeresponsibilityforthem. They have always been considerate and careful oT neighbors. They willworkwithintheparametersoftheCity's requirements to provide lighting and shields will be put in placetoprotecttheadjacentpropertiesfromanyfloodingof lights.Commissioner Smith asked Mr. Wisner to address the issue of car alarms.Mr. Wisner said the majority of these cars come from their rental fleet. Being they are rental cars, very few of them come standard with any kind of alarm system in place. There might be a vehicle that has Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 alarm on it and they may demonstrate that for a short period of time. They've not had a problem in the past with the neighbors or anyone complaining about alarms. Commissioner Smith asked what the theft rate was on the car lots? Do people steal the cars? Mr. Wisner said it has happened, but is very rare. Cars are usually stolen Buring business hours in a test drive situation, where the customer goes and never returns. They have worked to make their lots much more secure. Commissioner Smith asked about the electric gate request? Mr. Wisner said in designing this project they thought by having the two driveways accessing the easement would eliminate people from continwng by the site and give them a turn around chance so they could pull into their lot. Ii they were to close oft those areas and not use that easement, that would then be the responsibility of the association. If the driveways were to remain open, Enterprise would be willing to work with the association in providing landscaping controlling the traffic, and maintenance/repairs they were waiting to hear the Commission's decision. They would like to take down the chain link fence that is there now and put in landscaping around the perimeter of the site. Commissioner Pruett asked how tar the chain link fence extended? (It completely surrounds the site, except for the wall at the back of the garage area.) Chairman Bosch understands Mr. Wisner is willing to work with the homeowners assocation with regard to landscaping and the driveway maintenance. The Commission needs to wnsider the best land use for the site and how to mitigate any impacts upon the surrounding neighbors. He needed a more direct response to that question in terms of what he would be willing to do to assist in that regard if, in fact, the two driveways were to be left open, specifically again with regard to the request for a vehicular access gate. It benefits both parties to do that. Does working with the homeowners association mean a willingness to participate in the cost of improvements? Mr. Wisner was willing to discuss sharing the expense of the gate, but he didn't think it was fair for them to be burdened with the entire expense. Chairman Bosch spoke about the front landscaping, which was a variance. The Commission was required by law and ordinance to look for hardships that are not caused by the applicant themselves in utilization of the property. Hardships occur iT there is extraordinary topography problems, an unusually shaped piece of land, very restrictive access, street wideningg on the part of the City that takes land, and the like. He wanted him to address that a little bit more. He understood their desire to display cars, but that's not a reason for a variance. It's not apre-existing condition.Mr. Wisner explained the parcel was sheltered on both sides -- on the south side by Great Western Bank and on the north side by Wherehouse Records and there is a wall that runs the majority of that length on the north side of the easement. It is a short, narrow, deep lot as opposed to the other dealerships in the area. With the average speed being that it is on Tustin, if you blink your eyes, you could pass them by. They are limited on the display area they have. They don't have the typical dealership presence with a large showroom, big windows and huge signage. They don't have the budget or room to do any kind of leveled or raised display areas up front. It doesn't seem the easement has been imposed on them. The other dealerships appear to have a competitive advantage in that they are large and lengthy and their easement is not within that 15 foot parameter. It's important they have visibility and they tell their competition is not conforming within that easement. The neighboring businesses are not set back at that 15 foot distance. By having them set back 15 feet, it will diminish their visibility and will limit their inventory substantially. Chairman Bosch noted for the record there were two letters received, both dated October 16, 1995. One on behalf of T8T Investments; the other on Tustin Square Shopping Center -- both signed by Pete Valenti, owner of Tustin Square Shopping Center and Tustin Plaza -- in opposition to the item.The public hearing was closed.Commissioner Pruett would like the City Attorney to explain the easement issue. Does the easement limit the use of that property by the property to the south? Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 Mr. Soo-Hoo said by its very nature an easement and tee ownership are mutually exclusive. Fee ownership connotates basically what one would normally associate with ownership of land; whereas, an easement is merely permission to use land. By having an easement through this property, the association merely has the use of the land for access. What other rights or obligations are involved, he didn't have the documentation to advise. The association does not have fee ownership of the driveway;it's an easement. The agreement between the association and property owner would dictate the use of the easement, but the City did not have that information.Commissioner Romero suggested adding condition 11 regarding the regular maintenance and service of vehicles be limited not to exceed a 2 hour time period.Commissioner Smith wanted to know what the legal rights of Enterprise were on that easement. That would eliminate several of the requests by the homeowners association because the City would have no control over that. She felt the two driveways should be opened. One entrance into the site is not enough in terms of emergency vehicle use. She does not want to see this as a land locked parcel with only one entrance/exit onto Tustin. How would the City allow an easement onto a site with 14 homes that is only wide enough for one car?Mr. Jones said the driveway appears to be paved in the 24 foot range, which would allow 2- way vehicles and emergency equipment to enter. As you get back closer to the residential area, it appears there have been some stepped parking stalls added along the left side, which if there is a vehicle parked there,could inhibit an emergency vehicle from getting back there.Commissioner Smith did not think a full EIR should be required on this property. With discussion between the City and the two neighbors, adverse impacts could be mitigated. However, those issues of light, noise, crime, fire turn around, traffic and safety should be addressed by the Commission' s action or by agreement between the neighbors. The lighting has been addressed in the existing conditions. In terms of the variance Tor landscaping, she felt Enterprise makes a point that they would be at a competitive disadvantage since other dealerships of the same type do not have a 15 foot setback for landscaping. She thinks they have made sufficient findings to grant a variance. She would be in favor of the six foot planter instead of the Tour -- reduced from 15 feet to six feet. Is it customary to ask a neighbor to hold a certificate of insurance for employee accidents that might occur while interfaang with the neighbors? She hasn't heard of that before.Mr. Soo-Hoo understood Enterprise will have insurance if they wmmit any kind of tort against the association. The association can then seek legal remedy against Enterprise and their insurance company.He didn't think it added anything to have the association as an additional insured. If there is liability, the insurance would be available to address that liability.Commissioner Pruett thought the driveways that open onto the alley -- one of them needs to be closed off; the second one to be limited to ingress and egress for the person that opens and closes. And, at all other times it remains closed so that you don't have the customer utilizing the access. That way, you' re not obstructing Tustin from the standpoint of opening and closing, butyou're not making use of the alley from the standpoint of normal business hours. The alley at Tustin ought to be posted as a private driveway and that would maybe deter people from utilizing that driveway or making a wrong turn and entering that driveway. He thought the planter m the back along the property line, one of the things that concerned him was the 3 foot overhang. A 3 foot overhang over a planter area means the planter is basically going to be on the ground. What's the use of the planter ifyou're not going to be able to have plants that grow up above six inches off the ground -- they would be under the car. He didn't think there should be an overhang over the planter. There ought to be a car stop or something to allow trees to grow up there to buffer the noise. High shrubs may not be good for security purposes. The alley should be marked and posted as a fire lane. There was some comment about no parking being painted on that right-of-way at one end. His concern was the right of way is for ingresslegress and the width is limited. If People are parking there, it does provide some limitation from the standpoint of the fire department s ingress/egress in the event of an emergency. In terms of some of the concerns raised by the homeowners association, if ingress/egress were limited to the one driveway as being the one limited to the opening and closing of the facility, in terms of maintenance of the driveway, the use would be limited; therefore, the responsibility and maintenance should be limited. However, there might be some sharing and negotiation in terms of improvement of that alley. For one thing, it looks like a good project.The variance in terms of the 15 foot setback -- he had no problem with that. He thought that based on the configuration of the lot, its position in terms of it being in the middle of the block, and also the impact it would have on the operation from the standpoint of loss of business by limiting the amount of Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 does deprive the property of its full use. It does not impact the privileges enjoyed by other properties in the area. He didn't think the noise, traffic, etc. was a problem. The noise and traffic problems that will be generated by this project will be significantly less than other uses that could be imposed on the site without coming to a public hearing. Some of those activities would really create a burden on the adjoining property owners. If Enterprise and the homeowners establish a good working relationship, a partnership could be developed. The flashing warning light at the alley, the chain link fence and vegetation -- the hazards that are there now are greater than the hazards that are proposed with this particular project. He didn' t see that as a major issue. He agrees there should be a clear wew and hopes the landscape plans will show that. There are P.A. system requirements in the conditions of approval and shall not be audible from any exterior boundaries of the developed site.Chairman Bosch was not ready to gut the landscape ordinance because there are properties that were built under previous editions of the ordinance prior to the City, through a process of educating itself on the benetii to businesses of greater landscaping, have dropped that out of the ordinance. Perhaps the key concern ought to be addressed -- is this the appropriate site for a car sales lot if the site is too narrow for exposure; if it is bounded in too closely on either side for exposure. It it's toosmall to compete with someone who has a block and a halt of frontage along the street, and on, and on. That's thekey issue here. He didn't see in the landscape issue a hardship caused by this piece of property.It's byhow the applicant's use would best be served on this piece of property and that is not an appropriate finding of hardship. He was willing to look at reductions in the requved landscaping, based upon the overall development and amount of landscaping on the site, and the impacts on the street and on the adjacent properties with that amount of landscaping. That might be a case for reduction of the 15 feet, but he strongly cautioned against any grounding of the idea that they're at an economic or competitive disadvantage because the City wants them to meet the ordinance. They have selected the site. He agreed, on the other hand, the use would have a lower impact than many of the other uses that could be placed on the site with just pulling a building permit. A fast food restaurant would be much more of an impact with noise, trash, people dnving in the back, etc. He agreed the private driveway was part of the proposal and should be painted with red curbs and marked fire lane with no parking and a private drive sign placed at the entrance to it. If there have been parking spaces placed in the required access width of that driveway by any party, unfortunately, even though there is limited parking for the condominium association, those shouldn't be there. Thai's a major detriment to life/safety in terms of fire vehicles trying to access back onto the site. He liked Commissioner Pruett's concept of "how about a driveway access off of that, that is limited to the employee who locks and unlocks only." He wasn't surehow that could be policed. He would like to see that enhanced by the idea of providing, per the references and city ordinances, to non climbable fences. The chain link must come down; it's uglyand inappropriate. Anon climbable fence should be installed to a six foot height in the landscaped area,along the southerly side of that easement. From a corner vision cut off in back of Tustin -- the vision cut off being that triangular area so people can see coming out the driveway to avoid hitting pedestrians and then from the back end of that point, which is typically back to the 15 foot setback, go back from there to the east property line with that fence with a gate in it that can be locked. That wtll lower theft and vandalism in the lot for Enterprise; it keeps the walk through traffic from moving to the back. It keeps any misunderstanding of future property owners. A conditional use permit runs with the property. The City must be careful to approve something that works for the applicant as best as possible, meets the conditions of tha specific plan for the area the property is in, doesn't damage the adjacent properties,and in five years down the line no one regrets the approval because of new owners. He proposed adding the non climbable (wrought iron) fence as another condition of approval, between the easement and the north side of the Enterprise sales parking area, from the 15 foot setback line to the east property line. P.A. systems arehard to enforce, especially on small sites. He suggested adding a condition saying no outdoor P.A. system shallbe allowed on the site; and a condition stating no vehicle refueling shall occur on the site either by means of pumps or by fueling truck. He concurred with Commissioner Pruett's concern about the landscaping along the east side. Tire stops and bumpers there at the least --perhaps anarrow but reasonable landscape buffer along the east side of the property. It would have to be 3 feet, not including the vehicle overhang for the recommendation on the landscape at the eastside.Also include in the landscape requirements the corner vision cutoff at the easement access way. It was really important for someone to help with the wording on the gate to make sure its enforceable ii the Commission desires to go along with that. It's best to stayout of the easement altogether, if possible.Placing an electric gate at the main property line into the condominium area is an enticing idea, but that leaves a long dead end with no means of turn around within a reasonable proximity. The police and fire are very concerned about that. Other types of conditions could be looked at, but would be hard to enforce. He was willing to go with the six foot landscape setback because it's more in keepingwith the rights currently enjoyed by adjacent property owners, but striking any wording with regard to economic or competitive advantage. Because that is not a hardship; that's a choice on the part of the applicant. The 8 Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 showroom requirement in the zone -because of the nature of the use with used car sales he recommended a finding of hardship because it is not a necessary or pertinent use to vehicle sales and should be waived in that regard. Again, with the banning of repairs on the site, a repair facility of any size is not needed. He struggled with the land use itself. It is a very small site; it's obviously deemed to be adequate by the applicant for his potential use. It's such a secondary use. What better use could be put on the site? The only reason to consider this use on the site would be with all the conditions to assure it would not be a detriment to the neighbors. He would much rather see a small retail establishment or a small scale restaurant (not fast food). Commissioner Pruett would like to add a condition of posting the alley as a fire lane and no parking. Commissioner Smith said one thing that appealed to her about the project was that it was not putting up a huge building on the site. If the use were to change in the future, there would not be something big standing on the property. She wasnR crazy about the use, but it does leave an open site for future use. Chairman Bosch remembered Mr. Wisner said there would be no banners, balloons or flags. He wanted to add another condition stating there shall be no banners, balloons or flags utilized with regards to sales on the site. That will help reduce the visual impact, clutter, and potential danger. Given all that, he stated in advance of a motion he would vote against the project because although the conditions, if the project were approved, will substantially mitigate the impacts of the use involved, he didn't believe the site was an appropriate site that would be beneficial for the neighborhood or for the long term use of the property. Given all the restrictions on the site that make these conditions necessary, it is not an appropriate land use. It's too small and has too little frontage. It's very difficult to access and lacks the visibility necessary for successful integration into the other retail and automotive-related uses on the street.Moved by Chairman Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to approve Negative Declaration 1483-95 as it meets the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment or wildlife resources.AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Smith NOES: Commissioner Romero ABSENT: Commissioner Cathcart MOTION CARRIED Moved by Chairman Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Smith, to deny Conditional Use Permit 2127-95 and Variance 2002-95, but include in the motion the added conditions mentioned in the previous discussion for the benefit of education of the applicant, the public, and if the motion is approved, the City Council if they are faced with an appeal on the project. In terms of findings, since a conditional use permit should be granted that should not cause deterioration of bordering land uses and must be considered in relation to its effect on the community or neighborhood plans in the area in which it is to be located, that even though additional conditions will help to mitigate those impacts and help to reduce deterioration, the proposed use at this location would, in fact, cause said deterioration and have a negative effect on the community plan. And also, with regard to the findings on the variance, the Commission is required to find any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. It also speaks to special circumstances applicable to subject property, with the mitigation measures and the increase in the front landscape, as mentioned -not to the full setback, but a little less than that, had the Commission approved the conditional use permit, the findings for hardship or waiver because of the inappropriateness of the application and portions of the ordinance to the facility on the site may be acceptable. However, the conditional use permit rules in this regard.AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cathcart MOTION CARRIED Mr. Jones explained the appeal Planning Commission Minutes November 6, 1995 2. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1481-95 -CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Environmental assessment of a storm drain construction project on Glassell Street, including 600linearfeetof45" reinforced concrete pipe from Adams Avenue to Hoover Avenue and 400 linear feet of54"reinforced concrete pipe Trom Hoover Avenue to Katella Avenue. The construction of junctionstructures,catch basins and the reconstruction of street pavement are also included with the project.The public hearing was opened and closed.Moved by Commissioner Pruett, seconded by Commissioner Smith, to approve Negative Declaration 1481-95.AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cathcart MOTION CARRIED 3. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1482-95 -CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Environmental assessment of a storm drain construction project on Batavia Street, extending from the ATBSF crossing to Angus Avenue, including construction of two catch basins, and minor removal and replacement of asphalt concrete pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk.The public hearing was opened and closed.Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Romero, toapprove Negative Declaration 1482-95.AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cathcart MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Pruett, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to adjourntothenextregularlyscheduledmeeting on November 20, 1995.AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Pruett, Romero, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cathcart Themeeting adjourned at 8: 45 p. m.