Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/15/1987 - Minutes PCwr+~ -C PLAPiN I NsJ {JOHN I S.S ION MINUTES City of Orange Orange, California June 15 , 198? Monday - ?: 30 p. m. The regular meeting of the City of Orange Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Greek at 7:30 p. m. PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott ABSENT: Commissioner Master STAFF PRESENT: Jack McGee, Associate Planner & Acting Commission Secretary; Ron Thompson, Director of Community Development; Gene Minshew, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary IN RE: MINUTES OF JUNE 1 1987 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, that the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of June 1, 1987 as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1596 - SIINO: Proposed development of a two-story second unit within the R-2-6 <RCD) <Residential Duplex - Residential Combining District) zone located on the west side of Grand Street, north of LaVeta Avenue <4?8 S. Grand Street). C C NOTE: This project is exempt from Environmental Review. A staff report was not presented. The public hearing was opened. Scott Siino, 478 South Grand, was ready to answer any questions about the project. Nicky Calagna, 1135 East Culver, spoke in favor of the application because she thinks the property owner should have the same right that was afforded to the other people in the surrounding area with the same type of project. +rr+' Planning Commission Minutes June 15, 1987 - Page 2 Chairman Greek stated Mrs. Calagna also submitted a letter, which will be attached to the project file. Corrine Schreck, 446 North James, was in favor of this project being built; has seen his property and thinks it looks very nice. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hart made a passing comment that did nat strictly apply to the project, but to most of the projects being reviewed by the Commission; that is, the north and south elevations on the buildings. This project has no windows on either side. They are becoming architectural monstrosities because of the requirement of windows overlooking side yards. This seems to be the trend. Commissioner Bosch shares the same view. He appreciates the preservation of the privacy to the neighbors, but thinks it would be nice if they could encourage applicants to work more closely, perhaps through the Design Review Board or at least with the consultants, to arrive at buildings that are not only featuring the materials of Old Towne, but also some of the details to bring Old Towne more closely in line with the previously existing buildings. The proposed building respects privacy, but it is quite plain. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1596 subject to the seven conditions contained in the staff report. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS - ZONE CHANGE 1070, VARIANCE 1812 DOPP 8s CURL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: Request to change the zoning from R-2-6 and R-3 to R-2-6<P> (Residential Duplex - Parking Overlay) and reduce the depth of the landscape setback adjacent to the public street in conjunction with development of a two story office building on the southwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Citrus Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1148 has been prepared for this project. z Planning Commission Minutes June 15, 198? - Page 3 A staff report was requested and presented by Jack McGee. Staff has received a modified site plan which deletes the need for the variance. The property in question is a half acre site made up of two separate parcels. The parcel on the corner has a C-2 commercial zone on it; the parcel to the rear of that has a split zoning. A portion of it is zoned R-2 and a portion of it is zoned R-3. Surrounding uses and zoning are as follows: To the south on Citrus is additional R-2 zoning, primarily with single family residential uses. To the west, north and east are C-2 zoned properties with a variety of commercial uses. The Commission will recall that a zone change, conditional use permit and variance were filed on the site some months ago. The zone change was the same as the one being heard at this meeting. The conditional use permit was a request to increase permitted height on the property from 30 to 38 feet. And the variance was a request to reduce the required side yard setbacks for the building itself, as well as the parking area. The application being heard now is again the zone change. It is geared towards allowing a 9,800 square foot, two story, 30 foot maximum height office structure. The building itself does conform to all the development standards in terms of setbacks and height. The request has been modified. A site plan was received Friday afternoon. The mayor changes on the site plan is a modification of the parking lot layout. An effort was made to delete the need for the variance requirement. In doing so, the landscape setback adjacent to Citrus was increased. The City standard for setbacks are 10 feet in the commercial zone, which would apply to the two most northerly parking stalls adjacent to the street. The current plan shows an 8 foot setback. The residential duplex with parking overlay <the bulk of the parking lot> requires a 15 foot setback adjacent to the street. The proposal shows a 12 foot setback. Both of the setbacks provided on the revised plan are within 20% of the City standard, and therefore, are allowed to be processed under an administrative adjustment as opposed to a full variance. The applicant is requesting a withdraw of that variance application and a request for the Commission's approval of the administrative adjustment. A letter was also received from an adjacent property owner. Mr. Fasbender has addressed Condition ? on the staff report regarding the reciprocal access. The way the condition on the variance is worded, it would require a future reciprocal access to be provided at some future point when the two uses on the properties would be of a compatible nature. Those conditions on the variance could be applied to the administrative adjustment. The ublic hearin was o ened. P g P ,. ' Planning Commission Minutes /r"~ J une 15 , 1987 - Page 4 Jerry King, Jerry King 8a Associates, 3187 Airway, Costa Mesa, represented the applicant. The developer, Craig Curl, was present in the audience, as well as Mr. Selman, the architect. Mr. Phil West who represents current property owner and his legal counsel were also present to resolve any issues or concerns. Mr. King stated Mr. McGee thoroughly covered his presentation in the staff report. The proposed project is located in the Southwest Redevelopment area. They would like to withdraw the request for the variance. The building will house a Federally chartered credit union. Landscaping and the masonry wall will be constructed as provided by the conditions of approval to provide additional insulation and protection of adjacent neighbors. Proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and meet all the zoning designations. With respect to Condition 7 in the variance, they have no difficulty with the Commission applying the conditions as outlined, with the exception of Condition 7 be applied to future uses on the adjacent parcel. They feel it is counter productive to permit the present uses to take access to the site as it will be redeveloped for the pro,j ect . Mr. McGee stated staff would require with a future reciprocal access easement to record a future reciprocal. It grants one side the reciprocal access now. When the adjacent property owner would grant the other side of the reciprocal agreement, it would be complete. That would not happen until the City requested it take place at redevelopment of the property. Craig Curl, 1717 South State College Blvd., Anaheim, principal of Dopp & Curl Development. He was born and raised in the Orange area and is a resident of Orange. Due to the complexities of the property's size, shape and adjoining uses, it is a very difficult piece of property to develop. The design work meets the criteria for the community's needs and the City's. The building will become the home and headquarters of an Orange/Santa Ana based credit union. This building is aesthetically designed and pleasing to the eye that will stand out in the West Chapman area. The building itself will be of a brick or tale paver on a stucco base, with the application of glass paneled corners and an elevation to give a look on both Chapman Avenue and Citrus Street. They feel this will greatly enhance the area of West Chapman and will give Orange a beautiful new building. Those speaking in opposition: Planning Commission Minutes June 15, 1987 - Page 5 Refugio Sanchez, 131 North Citrus, questioned if a credit union would be the type of business to generate a lot of traffic. Over f low of traffic is a concern to him. I t would be an infringement on the residents in the neighborhood. He was also concerned about the block wall fence blocking air flowlcross ventilation. Commissioner Hart responded to Mr. Sanchez's concerns regarding traffic. A building by City code requires 39 spaces, which is being provided. Parking is not the issue anymore. The location of the building is quite a distance from the residences. Mr. McGee stated it is about 120 feet or more from the building itself. Mary Sanchez, 131 North Citrus, is concerned with the hours of the proposed business. Currently there is no available parking in the afternoon hours. Chairman Greek said they could not place any restrictions on the use of the office building. Jerry King had no rebuttal, but wanted to add some additional information to relieve the local residents. Credit unions have non peak hours of operation similar to a bank. He hopes the residents will not experience heavy traffic. The large tree on the property will be maintained. The other vegetation that will be added will blend with the existing landscaping of the area. The wall will be on the property line, but the added landscaping and trees will reduce the impact of having a commercial building in a residential community. The public hearing was closed. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 1148. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to approve Zone Change 1070 and approve the administrative adjustment to reduce landscape setbacks on Citrus Street ad,~acent to the parking area a maximum of "'~.*, +.r/' Planning Commission Minutes ,,,.,,,,, J une 15 , 1987 - Page 6 20% and attach the conditions listed in the staff report except for #7 to that. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1543 - YMCA OF ORANGE: Commissioner Bosch excused himself from the meeting. Public hearing to consider revocation of a previous approval for the YMCA of Orange allowing bingo games at facilities on the north side of Palmyra Avenue, west of Yorba Street. There was no staff report on this item. The public hearing was opened and closed with no audience participation. Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission revoke Conditional Use Permit 1543 at the request of the YMCA. AYES: Commissioners Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSTAINED: Commissioner Bosch ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Bosch returned to the meeting. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 3-87 - CITY OF ORANGE: Proposed amendment to the City of Orange Zoning Ordinance establishing proper locations and development standards for Senior Citizens Housing Developments. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1153 has been prepared for this pro,~ect. Joan Wolff, Assistant Planner, gave a brief summary on the proposed development standards and processing procedures contained in the draft ordinance. The key issue that was identified was affordability. The ordinance was to provide a reduction of development standards to make senior housing less costly to build and still meet the Planning Commission Minutes June 15, 198? - Page ? needs of senior residents. Housing could then be made available to tenants at a lower cost. There are several sections of State law that specifically address senior housing and those were taken into account in putting together the ordinance amendment. The ordinance is designed to comply with State requirements. Reference has been made to those sections being complied with in the draft ordinance. The mayor concessions listed are in unit sizes and parking spaces required for development standards. Minimum age requirement will be 55 years in projects containing 150 or more units; and 62 years in any other senior development. One of the procedures staff is recommending is a conditional use permit be required for any senior project so that the site's specific criteria can be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. It is also recommended that deed restrictions be imposed on senior projects so there would not be an impact at a later time if a project were converted from a senior to a standard apartment. Density bonuses and regulatory concessions were also addressed. State law provides that any senior project is eligible for a 25% density bonus. Staff is proposing that if a developer would like more than a 25% density bonus or would like the reduction in development standards, a provision for affordable units would be required. Commissioner Bosch commended staff for their work in providing the basic standards for development in the ordinance to assure that there is better compatibility between the developer and existing neighborhoods. The public hearing .was opened. Nicky Calagna, 1135 East Culver, questioned the further affordability over and beyond the 25% density bonus that is allowable under State code. Would a developer be able to use the finders/keepers program? The Housing set aside funds will not always be available. ' s affordable Commissioner Hart explained the County housing program. Commissioner Scott assumed Mrs. Calagna was asking if the bonus density could be increased. Chairman Greek thought a developer could come in and ask for a greater density bonus than 25% through the - conditional use permit process. Mrs. Calagna stated this was not clear and it should be form for this type of mechanism. olic stated in y p ~` Planning Commission Minutes June 15, 198? - Page 8 Bob Nickelson, 328 North Glassell, feels staff has done a very professional fob on the ordinance amendment. He understands that if you limit the project to seniors, there is an automatic density bonus of 25%. In addition to that, if the developer offers at least 25% affordable units, then the City must grant the developer a density bonus, which means a 50% density bonus out of limiting to seniors and providing 25% affordability. Mr. McGee understands the State law, as it is worded, that it allows a 25% density bonus in two conditions; either for a seniors project or for an affordable project -- not both. In a normal apartment project, if it is designed for seniors and if it is designed to normal City apartment standards, the City would allow a 25°!° increase by a conditional use permit. If the density bonus is in excess of the 25%, the City would require that it provide a certain percentage of affordable units, but a double density bonus would not be required. Chairman Greek stated the additional 25% would be negotiable under a conditional use permit. Mr. Nickelson further inquired about the R-3, O-P, and C-P shall use the R-3 standards. And the projects in R-4, C-1, C-2 and C-3 shall use the R-4 standards. In other words, if a senior project is proposed for a commercial zone, either R-3 or R-4 site development standards will be used. Does that include the maximum density of 24 to the acre indicated by the General Plan? Mr. McGee stated that will be a reference point to start from. Mr. Nickelson thinks the base parking ratio of 1 to 1 is a little high. Nation wide the actual need is .5 to 1. If the requirement is too high and results in a dis-incentive, the project might not be built. it Commissioner Hart feels if the Palmyra Hotel is built, will be a test project for the parking ratio. This was based on a political decision. Bob Bennyhoff, 10642 Morada Drive, Orange Park Acres, was curious as to how this was going to be handled in the planned community zones because they have P-C's. He presumes there will be senior housing in East Orange. How will senior housing fit in to a P-C zone? Commissioner Hart stated all projects will be reviewed through a conditional use permit. "~, ~ Planning Commission Minutes June 15, 198? - Page 9 Mr. McGee addressed the issue. Even though there is a P-C zone, there still is a City General Plan. Any use would have to be in conformance with that General Plan. A P-C zone is applied to a large piece of property for which there is also a Specific Plan. In that Specific Plan approval uses would be designated in proper locations. When such a project is proposed, it could be stated that project would conform to the regulations of the City ordinance addressing seniors projects. The public hearing was closed. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 1153. AYES:' Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to approve Ordinance Amendment 3-87. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED IN RE: OTHER ITEMS 1. Planning Association Conference: Commissioners Greek and Scott will be attending. 2. Transportation Committee: Commissioner Scott needed an alternate to attend Thursday night's meeting, June 18, 7:00 p. m. Commissioner Bosch will represent the Planning Commission at that meeting. It was also suggested to designate Commissioner Bosch as the alternate on a permanent basis. 3. Gary Johnson brought up Tract 12711, Lyon Company protect. There are several setback issues not given variances at that time. Staff is having problems with the requirements: setbacks of less than 8 feet or at least 23 feet. The setbacks are measured from the curb line; not from the right of way line. The Lyon Company has solved all the setback problems except one. Planning staff does not feel a variance is in order. He has been asked to issue an encroachment permit. He asked the Commission for some direction. r ~,, Planning Commission Minutes ,,~„ J une 15 , 1987 - Page 10 ~`"'"""~ Commissioner Hart feels this is a self-imposed hardship and the City should not get involved. Mr. McGee said this was the tract that was originally subdivided by Irvine-Pacific. They did provide with that approval a site plan which had houses on each of the lots, which did comply with the development standards. The project was later sold to another developer - the Lyon Company - who then put their own house footprints on those lots. The Commission saw a revised tentative map in February where they changed most of the lot configurations. At that time staff pointed out Lot 38 as being the one which did not conform to those development standards and stated a variance or some unique house footprint be required before they could get a permit for that. They do not have time to process a variance. Commissioner Greek does not think the City should expose themselves by granting an encroachment permit. Further, he feels this is a self-imposed hardship. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p. m., to reconvene at a regular meeting on July 6, 1987, at ?:30 p. m. /sld C 0