Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/19/1986 - Minutes PCPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Orange May 19, 1986 Orange, California Monday, 7:30 p.m. The regular meeting of the City of Orange Planning Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Greek at 7:30 p.m.. PRESENT: Commissioners Greek, Hart, Master, Scott ABSENT: Commissioner Mason STAFF Stan Soo-Hoo, Administrator of Current Planning and Commission PRESENT: Secretary; Jack McGee, Associate Planner; Gene Minshew, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Toba V. Wheeler, Recording Secretary. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF MAY 5, 1986 Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the minutes of the meeting of May 5, 1986, be approved as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Mason IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1506 - ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL OFi',ORANGE, INC. Proposed expansion of the hospital facility within the PI (Public Institution) Zone located on a 5.38 parcel north of LaVeta Avenue and east of Pepper Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1064 has been prepared for this project. Since. there was no one in the audience who wished to oppose the a~rprova`1 of Conditional .Use Permit 1506, the Staff presentation was dispensed with. Vice Chairman Greek opened the public hearing. Robin Ravgiala, Director of Planning for St. Joseph Hospital, said she would answer any questions. Vise Chairman Greek declared the public hearing closed. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file NegativerDec1aration 1506.. AYES:. Commissioners Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Mason MOTION CARRIED ~, Planning Commission Minutes ' May 19, 1986 Page Two Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1506, subject to the conditions in the Staff Report. AYES: Commissioners Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSENT:. Commissioner Mason MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1507 - PEN KO FAMILY TRUST Application to allow a second-story residential unit over a four-car garage in the RD-6 RCD (Residential Duplex - Residential Combining District) Zone on a 6,250-square foot parcel on the east side of Grand Street between LaVeta Avenue and Culver Avenue (475 South Grand Street). NOTE: This project is exempt from environmental review Since there was no one in the audience who wished to oppose the approval of Conditional Use Permit 1507, the Staff presentation was dispensed with. Vice Chairman Greek opened the public hearing. Joe Mark, representing the applicant, said he had no questions and was in agreement with the Staff Report. Vice Chairman Greek declared the public hearing closed. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1507. AYES: Commissioners Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSENT:. Commissioner Mason MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1510 - R. J. CHRISTOFF FOR FIRST SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH Request to allow the expansion of church facilities in the RM-7 Zone and allow two-story development within 70 feet of an R-l Zone on a 1.48-acre parcel on the west side of Shattuck Place, south of Collins Avenue. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1069 has been prepared for this project. Since there was no one in the audience who wished to oppose the approval of Conditional Use Permit 1510, the Staff presentation was dispensed with. Mr. Soo-Hoo said he spoke to the architect for the project this afternoon and he voiced some concern over Condition No. 17, which established the hours during which the facility would ,. Planning Commission Minutes May 19, 1986 Page Three operate. Mr. Soo-Hoo said the hours established in the Staff Report are adequate for the present use of the facility but would not allow any future expansion; therefore, .Staff agreed that Condition No. 17 should be revised to establish activity hours as being between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. daily. Vice Chairman Greek opened the public hearing. Dave Fox, chairman of the church building committee, 13672 Loretta Drive, Tustin, explained that the proposed expansion will accommodate a Sunday School unit and a gymnasium. Vice Chairman Greek declared the public hearing closed. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 1069. AYES: Commissioners NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Greek, Hart, Master, Scott Mason MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1510 for the reasons given in the Staff Report and subject to the conditions in the Staff Report including the revision in Condition No. 77 to change the hours originally stated in the condition to "during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m: daily." AYES: Commissioners Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Mason IN RE: INFORMAL HEARING Planning Program for East Orange Sphere of Influence area. City Council has requested a recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed study. Bert K. Yamasaki, Director of Planning and Development Services, made the presentation. He said this is basically a two item proposal: 1) a letter from Tom Neilsen, President of The Irvine Company., proposing a work program, and 2) an accompanying flow chart diagram showing the work at various stages and in a time frame. He referred to a memorandum dated May 15, 1986, which he sent to the Planning Commission containing Items 1 through 7 with.reference to The Irvine Company ,Work Program. He said it is his understanding that the Commission wishes to 1) consider the proposal and discuss it and 2) to discuss Items 1 through 7, and perhaps others which might come up in this evening's discussion, as well as some of the public input that might suggest additional areas of concern, and allow the public to discuss the work program with the Commission. ,. • Planning Commission Minutes May 19, 1986 Page Four Vice Chairman Greek the hearing is only the procedures that property and not a opened the informal hearing and pointed out that to discuss the work program, i.e., only to discuss will be followed to determine the best uses of the pre-conceived program of land use. Monica Fleury, a vice president of The Irvine Company, said that at the conclusion of The Irvine~~Company`s policy planning process with the City Council., the Council asked that the Company propose what it feels that the Company and the City might perceive in terms of the next steps in the planning and ultimate development of the East Orange area, and as a result of that request the Company presented the letter from Mr. Neilsen which outlined in conceptual form a several-point program or several-step process, the most important of which in the Company's view is the general planning study or program that is file subject of discussion at this meeting. Ms. Fleury said that based on the Council`s concept of t11e proposal and the Company's understanding that it and City Staff. were directed to then take that concept and define it in greater detail into literally a work program and process, the Company did so,-and what it has been discussing with the Planning Commission at a study session and wi_11 continue to discuss at this meeting is really a further refinement of the process and content of a study program and planning program that will lead to a plan for the area. She said the Company appreciates the opportunity to share its point of view on how the process can work and how the Company and City can together proceed on a compre- pensive in-stage program, Ms. Fleury presented an overview of the work program elements. and the process and organization that will implement it and eventually lead to a general plan for development of the 7500 acres that have been identified as the study area.: These steps were detailed on a chart prepared by The Irvine Company which reflects the cooperative effort Between the City and the Company in which the City participates on an ongoing daily basis in selection of consultants, in confirming what the work program is, in defining the goals and objectives of the study early one, in reviewing all of the technical studies and in- formation that is developed through the process, yin i-dentifyi.ng alternative land us'e plans through the process, and.fiinally.in identifying a preferred plan or plans that should go through the City's formal general plan amendment process. Ms. Fleury said The Irvine Company feels that the main vehicle for doing this on a day-to-day basis is a Technical Advisory Committee which it feels should be composed of representatives from thE`;Eity and the Company at a Staff level primarily and working .with the Staffs of all of the other agencies that may have some particular role in review orscomments. in. defiini_tion 'of~the plan. She said the Company sees this committee as a real key day-to-day management entity in the study. ' Planning Commission Minutes ' May 19, 1986 Page Five Ms. Fleury pointed out on the chart The Irvine Company's perception of the process as primarily between the City and the Company, some- what unlike the policy p1 an program just finished which was really managed and run by a multi-agency steering committee. In fact, she said, one of the main reasons everyone agreed in the beginning that a policy plan was necessary was to identify early~on the regional and other agency issues with the entire East Orange area so that once those major issues and objectives were identified, the Company and the City could proceed more .specifically with the definition of land use plans that are the purview of the City, Ms. Fleury pointed out a few of the issues that were left on the table at the Study Session: 1) Development of determining goals and object-ivies for the study, which are an important part of the work program. She said the Company feels it is very important for the City and the Company to clearly define what the goals are for the planning area and what objectives both have that the plan will ultimately come down to the process and meet the goals and objectives. 2) The role of the Policy Plan Review Committee. T'he Irvine Company believes this to be to look at the work program,=to look at the aspects of the studies, keep all the agencies involved in the program and, meeting on a regular basis, keep communication between everyone involved in the formulation of ..the p1 an. 3) The provision that at some point during the overall general plan program there be oppor~ tunities to initiate specific plans on some subsection of the Overall ~enera~l p1 an area, Commissioner Hart said that there are some areas on the flow chart where he feels the Planning Commission should come into the process a litfle sooner than is indicated... Ms, Fleury said she feels that in a7 most eac1~ one of the steps it could be identified that there be a discus ion with the Planning Commission at both the formulatioe position and the final draft position. Commissioners Scott and Plaster also expressed concern that this be done. Bob Bennyhoff, 10642 to Mirada Drive,-Orange, said he hopes that out of this process there will evolve something that is mo~°e pleasing to the people of East Orange and to most of the members of the Planning Commission than what is in Santiago Hills. He said Orange Park Acres has no objection to the work outlined by Mr. Neilsen in his letter but ias`,~residents still have some questions and suggestions for the Planning Commission. He said they believe there should be a minimum of two pub'~ic members on the committee, one. representing the downtown area and one representing the East Orange area, and that these people be selected very very carefully. He said it is important that the City Council and the Planning Commission keep aware of what is going on with this plan, month by month.. He said, he would prefer that only the City be involved in this plan but he knows that won't happen, and therefore; since there will be a two-headed plan, it behooves the City and its residents to watch it very closely,=because the entire City wi.11 be impacted dramatically by what happens in the East Orange area. Planning Commission Minutes May 19, 1986 Page Six Mr. Bennyhoff suggested that there be two concurrent studies going on at the same time: 1) the cul-de-sac situation, and 2) hillside standards. He said he also wants the City to have the final say on selection of the consultants and approve them. He said the liaison committee on the eastern corridor freeway worries him because he believes The Irvine Company will want to move the location of this freeway. He said he also wants some kind of a phasing program to require that the transportation infrastructure must be in place before homes are sold in the area. Joann Koontz, 601 Palmdale, said she thinks The Irvine Company's letter of February 14, 1986, is condescending and arrogant. She said it is well past the time when policy should have been established regulated and implemented by the City of Orange. She said the City of Orange should not continue to drift without leadership and commit- ment to this project. She said she feels there should be a complete general plan for the 7500 acres regarding the land. use element, infrastructure, schools, circulation element, housing, open space and parks, fiscal responsibility, and public safety. She said this general plan would establish the basic development philosophy and framework for continuing development for many years, and then specific details such as development standards, grading, architectural standards, etc., can be worked out.. She said circumvention of the idea of an overall general plan for the 7500 acres is found in the letter from The Irvine Company, and read the portion of the letter that she felt expressed this idea. She said she and many residents of Orange were concerned about annexation of the area and suggested that there be a pre-annexation agreement drawn up for the 7500 acres... She said she also feels that infrastructure is something that needs to be looked at. Sherry Meddick, 10861 White Way, Silverado, of the Rural Canyon Resi- dents Association, said she is very supportive of Mr. Bennyhoff`s position and would like to see public input in all of the. processes. She said the residents of the Rural Canyon Residents Association are extremely concerned about the grading processes in the area proposed for development as well as landscaped areas and hillside development. Ted Botens, 10802 Meads,. Orange, president of Orange Park Association, reiterated the desire of the association to have public members on the committee and urged that public members be involved at the top level of decision-making. He asked why the County is not included in the top advisory committee. Mr. Yamasaki said it is basically a CityJCompany advisory committee but as issues come forward con- cerning other agencies such as the County, the School District, etc., they will be contacted. Mr. Botens said he feels the County should play more of a part in the process than just answering questions when it is asked ,and he is wondering if the City is taking advantage of the County resources at its disposal. Al Bender, 1659 Gymkana Street, Orange Park Acres, said he objects Planning Commission Minutes May 19, 1986 Page E to the fact that the Planning Commission and the City of Orange do not seem to have any representatives on traffic studies being made in the County of Orange, He said the cities of Irvine, Newport Beach, Costa Mesa, Tustin and Santa Ana are involved in a liaison committee with the County and he is wondering why the City of Orange is not also on this committee and hopes the Planning Commission will remedy this shortcoming. Chairman Greek declared the informal public hearing closed. Commissioner Hart reiterated his desire that the Planning Commission be brought into the planning process earlier than is indicated now on the flow chart. Commissioner Master suggested that the overseeing committee mentioned in Item 2 of Mr, Yamasaki`s memorandum should report to the,Po7icy P1 an Review Committee, Commissioner Hart agreed with him. Commissioner Greek said he feels that the overseeing committee should report directly to the Planning Commission and the City Council but not to the Policy Plan Review Committee, Commissioner Scott recommended that as many acres of the total 18,000 should be included rather than limiting it to 7500 acres. Commissioner Greek suggested taking Mr. Yamasaki`s memorandum item by item and voting on them as possible recommendations to the City Council, This was then done, as follows: 1. The advisability of including one or two public members on the Pa~icy.Plan Review Committee, Commissioner Hart said he thinks this is a good idea. Commissioner Greek said he feels anyone from the public can attend committee meetings at any time and when you have to assign someone to a committee they have to be responsible. He explained that when he goes to the policy planning committee or any other committee he speaks for the Planning Commission and represents its view, but with a public member that member may not answer to a group so he would be presenting his personal opinion. He said he feels there is enough opportunity in the public hearing processes to get public input and it is not necessary to have public members on the committee. The vote was taken on whether or not to leave Item 1 as it is and resulted in Commissioners Hart, Master and Scott voting yes, with Commissioner Greek voting no. 2. The introduction of an overseeing committee, perhaps composed of the existing City Council Annexation Policy Committee and the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission to overview the work in progress. Discussion on this resulted in the recommendation that this committee be between the Planning Commission and the City Council on the right- hand side of the organization chart. All four Commissioners voted in favor of this item. Planning Commission Minutes May 19, 1986 Page Nj,~" 3. A suggestion to the City Council that early review and discussion be held between the City. Council, Planning Commission, and the consultant regarding community interests, issue identification, discussion of general goals and directions, etc.: All four Commissioners voted in favor of this item. 4. Consider a more realistic time frame in which the work will likely be performed.. A17 four Commissioners voted in favor of this item. 5. That prior to any specific plan being worked on or approved, the general plan covering the subject area be completed and approved by the City in order that fiscal, as well as legal, requirements are met. All four Commissioners voted in favor of this item. 6. A comprehensive fiscal analysis for as large an area as possible be included as a backbone set of date in which both specific and general plans can be developed. All four Commissioners voted in favor of this item. 7. A desire of the Commission to request meaningful annexation commitments within the sphere of influence and that appropriate service and facility improvements accompany annexations to the c;ty. All four Commissioners voted in favor of 8. A revised comprehensive general plan Commission participation early in ear A11 four Commissioners voted in favor of fihe Commissioners agreed that the Items to the City Council as a work program. this item, study to include Planning ~h phase. this item, 1 through 8 above be recommended Commissioner Hart suggested that Commissioner Greek be designated a member of the new Policy Plan Review Committee. and Commissioner Master be the alternative member. This was agreed to by unanimous vote of the four .Commissioners. IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 86-168 - NEXUS Proposed six-lot tentative parcel map in the C-1 Zone for a 19.43-acre parcel located on the northwest corner of Garden Grove Boulevard and The City Drive. f ~ i Planning Commission Minutes May 19, 1986 Page NOTE: Negative Declaration 1030 was previously prepared for this project. Commissioner Greek askbd to be excused due to conflict of interest. Commissioner Master took over as Chairman. Since there was no one in the audience who wished to oppose the approval of Tentative Parcel Piap 86-168, the Staff presentation was dispensed with. Chairman pro tem Master opened the public hearing. George Kearns;- Salkin Engineering Company,-1215 East Chapman, Orange, representing the applicant, said he concurs with the Staff Report. Chairman pro tem Master declared the public hearing closed, Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that it approve Tentative Parcel Map 86-168. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Mason, Greek MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:.00 p.m,, to reconvene at a regular meeting on June 2, 1986, at 7:30 p,m,, at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California..