HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/7/1988 - Minutes PCPLANNING COMIYIISSION !~lINUTSS
mow, City of Orange November 7, 1988
1~ ~ Orange, California Monday - 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott
ABSENT: Commissioners Greek, Master
STAFF
PRESENT: John Godlewski, Sr. Planner & Commission Secretary;
Chris Carnes, Assistant Planner;
Jack McGee, Administrator - Current Planning;
Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and
Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IN RE: ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED
Three requests were received for continuance to the
November 21, 1988 meeting:
(1) Conditional Use Permit 1?17-88 - Lori Lang, 1414
North Batavia Street;
® (2) Conditional Use Permit 1719-88 - K-C Associates,
Inc., 1930 East Katella Avenue; and
(3) Conditional Use Permit 1720-88 - K-C Associates,
Inc., 2085 North Tustin Street.
Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner
Bosch, that the Planning Commission continue
Conditional Use Permits 1717-88, 1719-88 and 1720-88 to
the November 21, 1988 public hearing.
AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Greek, Master MOTION CARRIED
IN RE: MINUTES OF OCTOBER 20, 1988
Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner
Hart, that the Planning Commission approve the Minutes
of October 20, 1988 as recorded.
AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Greek, Master MOTION CARRIED
Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 1988 - Page 2
IN RE: CONTINUED HEARINGS
CONDITIONAL OSS PSRhIT 1715-88 - NYRON D. 9ARTWIG:
A proposed Conditional Use Permit to allow construction
of a two-story residential second unit in the R-2-6 RCD
(Residential Duplex - Residential Combining District)
on property located on the southeast corner of Almond
Avenue and Harwood Street. (Continued from the October
3, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting.)
NOTE: This project is exempt from environmental
review.
John Godlewski presented the staff report. This item
was heard at the previous meeting and it is a request
for a detached second unit. Of primary concern to the
Commission at that time was the fact that the second
unit focused itself primarily onto the neighboring
properties. The main entrance to the unit was in the
far corner of the site and the major windows and patios
focused on the side property lines rather than on the
existing house on the property. The applicant has
revised the plans indicating some changes have been
made. The second story walking deck has been deleted;
the main entrance to the project has been changed to be
off the rear yard of the existing dwelling rather than
the far corner of the project; and some minor changes
have been made to the windows. There was also concern
expressed at the last meeting that the recreation room
be shown such that it would not be construed to be
another unit. A condition was attached that there
would only be two units on the property.
Commissioner Hart noted the game room was still
isolated from the rest of the apartment.
Staff responded that was correct; no changes were made
to the game room.
The public hearing was opened.
® Proponent, Myron Hartwig, 708 East Almond, owner of the
property, stated they made some major modifications to
the original plan in an attempt to be responsive to the
Commission's suggestions at the last meeting. It is
their intent to live in peace with their neighbors.
The entrance change affords a safer situation; the
height of the windows were also raised to eliminate any
direct on-looking that might be done. He spoke about
the game room and bath for use by his growing family.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 1988 - Page 3
'"; Commissioner Bosch referred to the previous meeting in
which Mr. Hartwig had some difficulty with several of
the conditions proposed for attachment to the
Conditional Use Permit. One was relative to the corner
cut off. He noted that the corner was now a 25 feet
radius, existing. He asked if that was an adequate cut
off to meet the City requirements, or whether the
condition needed to be eliminated? The second was a
requirement for a soils report and grading plan to be
submitted. He asked the applicant if he still had
difficulty with those conditions or are they acceptable
as written?
Mr. Hartwig spoke to Mr. Brotherton and explained there
was an existing 25 foot radius. That had been
re-worked about a year before they purchased the
property. The City still required a modification to
the corner. A soils report was discussed and at the
time permits are pulled, an inspection will be made to
determine whether or not a report was mandatory.
Mr. Johnson stated the City's standard of a 32 foot
radius has been in force for quite a few years. A few
years ago the City went in and did some maintenance
work and increased the size of the radius, but were
limited by the right-of-way involved. There was no
corner cut off at this location. A normal requirement
would be once the property develops, then it shall be
developed to the City's standard requirement, which is
10 x 10 corner cut off and a standard 32 foot radius.
In reference to the soils report, if there is no
evidence of problems with the soil, then it will not be
required. But in many cases, they have found that
there has been an old house with a basement that has to
be compacted. Unforeseen problems are then
encountered. An inspection will be made and that
determination made by the Grading Inspector.
Those speaking in opposition:
Helen Thayer, 191 South Harwood, considered the house a
landmark and opposed the two story addition as it would
cheapen the landmark.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Hart stated the property is zoned R-2 to
allow for the additional unit. The architecture seems
to be somewhat sensitive to the area and Old Towne
theme.
Planning Commission Minutes
' November 7, 1988 - Page 4
Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner
Bosch, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional
Use Permit 1715-88 subject to the staff report and
conditions as listed.
AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Greek, Master MOTION CARRIED
Commissioner Bosch was concerned about the size,
massing and effect on the historical elements in the
community; however, the decision was made long ago and
the property rights established in the area so their
determination is limited to the impacts on the site.
He believes the applicant has done a good job in
answering the concerns from the previous meeting.
IN RE: NEW HEARINGS
CONDITIONAL USB PBRMIT 1718-88, VARIANCE 1 851-88 -
RWIS RADIO STATIONS
Proposed Conditional Use Permit to replace an existing
150 foot antenna tower with a new 280 foot tower and a
® Variance to allow the structure to exceed
height limit specified for the A-1 zone on the 30 foot
property
located at the east end of Glen Albyn Lane (5230-5250
East Glen Albyn Lane).
NOTE: Negative Declaration 1257 has been prepared
for this project.
Chris Carnes presented the staff report. The applicant
is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of a radio antenna, which staff is
considering a public structure in the A-1 zone. The
Variance request is to build a structure 280 feet in
height, which exceeds the maximum 30 foot height. The
site is located one-quarter mile east of Santiago
Boulevard and approximately one mile north of Chapman
Avenue. The site is bordered on the west by large lot
residential area that is under County jurisdiction and
® the on the east by permanent open space. The open
space area is part of the Crawford Hills residential
development. The City approved Conditional Use Permit
693 in 1979. That approved the construction of the
transmission building and 150 foot radio tower. The
original tower blew down in a storm earlier this year
and was replaced with an identical tower in the Spring.
The proposed radio tower will be used for the radio
transmission of KWIZ radio station and will be
replacing the existing antenna. After the construction
Planning Commission Minutes
~, November 7, 1988 - Page 5
of the proposed tower, the existing antenna will be
removed. The proposed tower will be located just to
the east of the existing transmission building and will
require no further grading on the site except for the
construction of the foundation piers. Staff has
reviewed the proposed tower with the FCC to check about
interference with television and radio reception to the
residential area to the west. They have assured staff
the antenna should not interfere with either of those.
Staff also reviewed the proposed antenna with the FAA
regarding interference with the air traffic. The FAA
has assured staff that it is not high enough to
interfere, but they will be reviewing the antenna's
location and height to see if lighting and radio
markers are needed to warn pilots of it's location
Staff's major concern with the tower has been it's
visual impact on the surrounding area. The existing
tower is almost half the size of this and it is visible
from Chapman, Santiago and Hewes. Staff also reviewed
the possibility if the antenna fell over, if it could
reach the residential area to the west; the applicant's
engineer assured that the tower would disintegrate in
~, sections and would fall on-site.
The public hearing was opened.
Proponent, Charles Hawkins, 22941 Triton Way, Laguna
Hills, represented KWIZ. They would like to build this
tower for service to the people who enjoy the station
now, and be able to better serve people in emergency
situations. The new tower will be built of a
triangular structure.
Chairman Scott was disappointed that he did not get a
visual display of what the tower would look like.
Commissioner Hart explained the requirements for a
variance= one being hardship. He asked for an
explanation of the applicant's hardship.
Mr. Hawkins was not prepared to talk about a hardship
and did not know that was one of the requirements.
Commissioner Bosch pointed out what was written on the
variance application. He read the three questions and
Mr. Liberman's answers for the record.
Commissioner Bosch asked what the potential impacts
would be on radio interference or television
interference with surrounding properties in terms of
what exists today and the difference that might occur
with a taller tower?
Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 1988 - Page 6
'~ Mr. Hawkins was not sure because he was not an expert.
He did not think there would be a change. He also did
not believe there would be impacts on the neighbors.
He referred these questions to Mr. Hopkins from the
tower company.
Ben Hopkins, 3570 Procter Valley Road, Benita, is a
structural engineer. He could not comment on whether
there will be any electro-magnetic or radio
interference with the t.v. stations, but guarantees the
tower will stay there; it will not blow down. He
designed the other one, but he designed it to support a
certain type of antenna. The previous owners of the
tower put up the three big bat wings on the tower.
During the winds of 1982/83, the tower started
cracking.
Those speaking in opposition:
Wes Gunnerson, 5210 Glen Aibyn, happens to live in the
City of Orange rather than the County. He is strongly
opposed to the 300 foot antenna in his back yard. The
original antenna that was put up was a single element
with no reflector. Currently there is a three element
array with three reflectors. The visual impact is 100$
greater than what was originally proposed. He was also
concerned that they were going to relocate the access
road on his property. He has not given them permission
to move it.
Mr. Godlewski said it was the station's intent to leave
the road where it is. The road is not over the
easement that was originally granted to them.
Shirley Grindle, 19051 Glen Aaron Lane, thanked the
staff for notifying more people about the hearing. The
property was annexed into the City in 1976. The
application was first brought to the Commission in
1979. The antenna was not built until 1980 or 1981,
but it was approved by the Commission. Only two or
three homes were given notice about the antenna. The
existing antenna has caused interference with garage
door openers and telephones. She stated one of the
conditions in the previous Resolution that is not being
followed regarding radio interference. She read the
previous Minutes for the record. When the tower blew
down, it fell from the base in one piece -- not in
sections. The proposed antenna is twice as high as the
one there now. The hills are the backdrop to the City
of Orange and their association is striving to obtain
title to the open space. Photos were submitted to the
Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 1988 - Page 7
Commission for their review. She briefly discussed the
traffic and landing patterns of the planes and
helicopters -- a potential safety threat. She pointed
out that she served on the Orange County Planning
Commission for a number of years. They approved
numerous radio antennas and put them on the hills way
back in the Cleveland National Forest up on the
Santiago Peaks.
Roy Moss, 19041 Equestrian Lane, is an attorney here in
Orange. He reaffirmed his opposition. Since its
inception, he has been a member of the East Orange
Implementation Committee to study the development of
the East Orange area. A common goal is to preserve the
sanctity of the ridge line. By putting the first
antenna up, violated their efforts. Everyone would
like to see the first antenna removed. He believes a
beacon would be required on a 280 foot antenna by the
FAA; another impact on the area. The low band channels
on their t.v. were affected when the first antenna was
built.
Richard Garfield, 19311 Lomita, strongly opposes the
antenna. He was not informed about the original
antenna in 1980. He is less than 200 feet from that
property. If the wind had been blowing in a different
direction, the antenna would have blown over into his
back yard. When the original antenna was approved,
conditions were placed on it. Those conditions have
not been met and have been changed by the owner.
0
U
Bob Bennyhoff, 10642 Morada Drive, Orange Park Acres,
stated their Association adamantly opposes the proposed
antenna. He spoke about the frequent winds in the
area. There will be a visual impact of the tower upon
the neighbors. He emphasized and reinforced the open
space for the hills.
Peter Carissimo, 985 Palo Alto Place, can see the
existing tower from his property. The proposed tower
causes him concern. He is a professional appraiser and
he spoke about the power lines, towers and easements --
visibility -- and the problems it creates for property
evaluation.
Alice Moss, 19041 Equestrian Lane, had problems with
their garage door. In checking with her neighbors, all
of them had problems with their televisions. She
contacted Dave Armstrong at the radio station for help,
but he did not respond. Soon thereafter, he no longer
worked for KWIZ. She tried to contact Pat Michaels,
• Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 1988 - Page 8
but he never returned her calls. The neighbors have
never been compensated for their expenses; KWIZ does
not stand behind what they said they would do.
David Hath, 1074.4 Glen Alybn, was not given a notice of
the original hearing and appreciates receiving notice
for this public hearing. He is a member of the East
Orange Policy Planning Committee and is sensitive to
the very serious concern people have about the
preservation of the ridgeline. The antenna is in
violation of that. He has also experienced some
television interference. Two of his neighbors have had
interference with their phones.
Ronald Rose, 19122 Equestrian Lane, joined in with the
opposition. He urged the Commission to deny the
proposal based on the applicant's not showing a
hardship or need for getting a variance.
Julie Ruben-Hamilton, 10951 Wonderview, did not receive
a notice of the hearing, but was informed by her
neighbors. The 280 foot antenna was compared to a 20
story building. She voiced her support of opposition.
Margaret Hemmings, 19111 Equestrian Lane, has
experienced considerable garage door problems and t.v.
problems. She had to replace all the telephones in the
house because of the interference from KWIZ.
Lloyd Visner, 970 Palo Alto Place, supported the
opposition to this project.
A rebuttal was not heard.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Bosch commented on the evidence of a
variety of potential environmental problems not
addressed with mitigating measures acceptable within
the Negative Declaration relative to the visual
intrusion on neighboring homes, the electronic
interference, potential of the tower, which has not
been demonstrated to be mitigated by the applicant, and
the potential structural dangers to bordering
properties.
Moved by
Hart, th
findings
Negative
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner
at the Planning Commission not accept the
of the Environmental Review Board to file
Declaration 1257.
Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott
None
Commissioners Greek, Master MOTION CARRIED
• Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 1988 - Page 9
Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner
Hart, that the Planning Commission deny Conditional Use
Permit 1718-88 and Variance 1851-88 for the reasons
that first, with regard to the Conditional Use Permit,
sound land use and services required by the community
are not found to be f ulfilled by increasing the height
of the tower from the existing height; the use proposed
would cause deterioration of bordering land uses and
create special problems for the area; also, that the
immediately adjacent community and the neighborhood
plan for the area, including Jones Ranch and the open
space with particular regard to the ridgeline
preservation, would be negatively impacted. With
regard to the variance, no evidence has been given that
granting of this variance would not constitute a grant
of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties in the vicinity; and that no
special circumstances applicable to the subject
property, as allowed under the findings for approval of
a variance, including size, shape, topography, location
or surroundings, and the application of the zoning
ordinance is found to be deprived on this property
relative to those enjoyed by others in the vicinity.
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners
Chairman Scott directed
conditional use permit.
existing tower has been
use. The issue of elec
also be addressed.
Bosch, Hart, Scott
Greek, Master MOTION CARRIED
staff to look into the initial
Comments were made that the
expanded beyond the permitted
tronic equipment problems should
IN RE: NEW HEARINGS
7-88 - CITY OF ORAIdGS:
Proposed amendment to the Orange Municipal Code
permitting the addition of on-site recycling facilities
to existing commercial and manufacturing developments
in the City's commercial and industrial zones.
NOTE: Negative Declaration 1263 has been prepared
for this project.
A staff report was not presented and the public hearing
was opened.
Commissioner Hart questioned the why of this amendment.
He thought this was an issue between the state and the
markets.
,' Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 1988 - Page 10
Chairman Scott said this was mandated by law. There
must be a recycling center within a given distance of a
shopping center. There are two options being
presented: take no action or revise the zoning
ordinance.
Commissioner Bosch said under state law the City of
Orange would be required to allow either in-door or
out-door centers unless it was absolutely determined
that it would be detrimental to the health, safety and
well being in particular areas.
Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner
Scott, that the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council to accept the findings of the Environmental
Review Board to file Negative Declaration 1263.
AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Greek, Master MOTION CARRIED
Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner
Scott, that the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council to approve Amendment 7-88.
AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Greek, Master MOTION CARRIED
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
It was moved to adjourn to a study session November 14,
1988 at 5:00 p.m. in the Weimer Room; then to adjourn
to the next regular meeting November 21, 1988, with a
study session at 6:30 p.m. in the Weimer Room and the
public hearing at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
/sld
C