Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/5/1984 - Minutes PCPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~- City of Orange November 5, 1984 Orange, California I Monday, 7:30 p.m. The regular meeting of the City of Orange Planning Commission was called to order by Charman Hart at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Mart, Greek, Mason, Master ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez STAFF John Lane, Administrator PRESENT: tary; Jim Reichert, Assc Attorney; Gary Johnson, Secretary. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: PRESENTATION Chairman Hart presented Joanne Coontz and Bob Mi the Planning Commission. IN RE: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF of Current Planning and Commission Secre- ~ciate Planner; Gene Minshew, Assistant City City Engineer; and Toba V. Wheeler, Recording plaques to former Planning Commissioners chelson in appreciation of their service on BER 15. 1 Moved by Commissioner M~ster, seconded by Commissioner Mason, that the minutes of October 5, 1984, be approved as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Masi NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez ABSTAINED: Commissioner Greek IN RE: CONTINUED HEARINGS ~h, Vasquez MOTION CARRIED GENERAL PLAN - LAND USE. ELEMENT 2-84-A, ZONE CHANGE 1014 - ORANGE SENIOR HOUSING, INC. A request to amend the General Plan - Land Use Element designation from Low Density and Medium Density to High Density Residential (15 to 24 du/ac) and to change the zoning from R-1-6 ~~nd R-D-6 to RM-7 on a 7±-acre parcel adjacent to the north side of Santiago Creek, between Cambridge Street and Shaffer Street. NOTE: This item was continued from the May 7, 1984, and September 5, 1984, Planning Commission Meetings. n Mr. Lane said Orange Senior Housing, Inc., requested a continuance to sometime in February, 1985. Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 Page Two Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Mason, that this item be continued to the meeting of February 18, 1985. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master. NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED IN RE: RESOLUTION PC 53-84 -THE CTTY SHOPPING CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Chaff"rman Hart brought up the matter. of correcting some language that was used ~n the original resolution regarding the redevelop- ment plan of The City Shopping Center. He said a technical change has been made to avoid confusion but it now needs to be verified by the P1 anning`Commission. Robin Leiter explained the change. She said the Planning Commission is now-asked to adopt Resolution PC 53-84. C Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded.. by Commissioner Mason, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC~-53-84. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez ABSTAINED: Commissioner Greek.MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Greek explained that he was .abstaining because he has done work on various properties in that area during the past twenty years. I:N RE: NEW HEARINGS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: ELEMENT AMENDMENT 4A-84, LTEM A - CITY OF ORANGE Proposed redesignaton of the General Plan Land Use Element from Industrial to Medium Density Residential (6-15 du/ac) on approxi- mately 25 acres situated on the north side of Rampart Street between State College Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue (Park Royale Mobile Home Park). NOTE: Negative Declaration 936 has been prepared for this project. Presentation was made. by Mr, Lane who said a request for a two-week Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 Page Three continuance was received this afternoon from the attorneys repre- senting the leaseholder of the property because they have not had sufficient time to prepare their position.. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Randal Mock, resident and member/treasurer of the Board of Directors of Park Royale Mobile Home Park, speaking on behalf of the residents of the mobile home park, said they have repeatedly been called to City Council meetings on this issue and are getting tired of it. He said that at the last City Council meeting they attended the vote was unanimous to change the zoning of that area to M-1 and now they have been requested to appear at this meeting and don't know why. Mr. Lane explained that even though the City Council voted to change ® the zoning from industrial to medium density, the general plan for the City shows that area as industrial and therefore the general plan has to be amended before the zoning can officially be changed. For that reason this hearing is necessary in order to make the proposed zoning for which the City Council has already taken action consistent with the general plan to make sure that the zoning isn't challenged on a technical point as not being consistent with the general plan. Mr. Mock said if that is the case then the residents of the mobile home park do not want the postponement. He said they were faced months ago by an attorney representing the leaseholder of the property and they are wondering why the same attorney is not now representing the leaseholder instead of new attorneys who are not familiar with the situation. He said the decision has already been made, the Park Royale residents are happy with it, and if this hearing is merely a technicality to ratify the decision then there is no reason fora continuance. Patrick Wood of the law firm of Lazoff and Swanson, representing the leaseholder, said that his firm had not been made aware of this hearing until this morning and he feels that because of the nature of the proposed amendment to the general plan, his firm cannot provide adequate client representation without more preparation than can be done in one day; therefore, a request for a two-week continuance is not unreasonable when one looks at what the effect of the zoning would be upon the leasehold owners of the property. Chairman Hart pointed out that the zoning change is already a fact and that all that is being talked about at this hearing 'as the general plan amendment. Commissioner Greek asked Mr. Wood from whom he had received the notice this morning about this hearing and he responded that it was received in the mail from the Ericksons, the leaseholders of the property. Jack McGee, City of Orange Planning Staff, indicated that notices of the hearing had been sent ten days ago to the leaseholders and all other persons concerned. Planning Commission Meeting. November 5, 1984 Page ~-Four Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the hearing proceed. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED Chairman Hart pointed out to Mr. Wood that the Planning Commission's actions are subject to verification by the City Council so if he has a problem he can prepare for presentation to the City Council. :7 U Mr. McGee made the presentation, stating that the City Council took action on September 25 to change the zoning on the property and that the action before the Planning Commission now is a follow-up to the City Council's action in order to amend the designation on the City's land use element from industrial to medium density resi- dential. He said the mobile home park is consistent with both the proposed designation and the zoning being intended to apply to the property. He said Staff recommends approval of the land use element and the negative declaration which applies to it. Mr. Wood spoke against the amendment saying that: 1. The current zoning of industrial is something that preserves the rights of the tenants in that under the mobile home law enacted by the State of California there are already adequate protections for tenants in situations where there is an attempt to change the use of the mobile home park. He detailed the provisions of this law. 2. At the present time the leasehold owners have no plans to develop the area for any other usage than the present mobile home park. 3. The leasehold owners object to the negative declaration because the property is a large parcel and due to its size and the unique industrial area in which it is located, a negative declaration is not an adequate review, but that something more in depth, namely an environmental impact report, needs to be prepared and needs to be evaluated by members of the public in the area, as well as the Planning Commission, prior to action being taken to approve the amendment to the general plan, because without an environmental impact report the taking of this action would be invalid. Mr. Mock responded to this by saying that the mere fact that current legal counsel for the leaseholder was not prepared is not valid because. the leaseholder had legal counsel in attendance in the past who was prepared and presented his case at that time, at which time a vote was made by the City Council. He said that as far as the residents of the mobile home park are concerned that ended the issue and they cannot understand why it has suddenly been brought up again and feel that such an action is unfair to them. He also brought up the point of what would happen to the residents of the mobile home park, most of whom are older and retired, who have lived there for twelve years, if the leaseholder were to make a change and decide to use the are for industrial purposes. Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 Page Five Mr. Wood reiterated that fact that the leaseholders are not seeking to develop the property at the present time and have not made an application to change the usage of the property and feel that there are more than adequate protections to the residents of the mobile home park afforded by the mobile home park law. Chairman Hart declared the hearing closed. Moved by Commissioner Greek, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 936 for the reasons stated in the Environmental Review Board report. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez .MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Mason, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission accept the amendment to the General Plan, Land Use Element 4A-84=A, which is designated industrial, to medium- density residential on the 25-acre parcel on Rampart Street north of State College Boulevard because it has occupied that site for a number of years and the Planning Commission would like to see it remain as quality affordable housing during the years to come. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED Chairman Hart said this item will be heard by the City Council at a later date and those involved will be notified as to the date of that hearing. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1375 - STRICKLAND Proposed two-story duplex in the R-D-6 (RCD) District on .15 acre. situated on the east side of Orange Street, approximately 150 feet south of Palmyra Street. NOTE: .The project is exempt from environmental review. Presentation was made by Mr. Lane who said Staff recommends approval subject to the conditions in the Staff Report. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Applicant Dale Strickland said he concurs with the staff report. Ron Huber, 363 South Orange Street, Orange, said he and the other adjacent property owners are not concerned with the development of Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 Page Six the property per se but only with the off-site parking spaces. Chairman Hart informed him that the plans call for two two-car garages, whereupon he stated that that would be satisfactory. Moved by Commissioner Mason, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1375 with the conditions listed. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS TENTATIVE TRACT 10653, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ]376 - SOUTHRIDGE HOMES ® Proposed subdivision of 1.56 acres into eight lots to be improved with a planned unit development consisting of one-story, single- family residences on the east side of Shaffer, approximately 446 feet north from Collins. NOTE: Negative Declaration 933 has been prepared for this project. Presentation was made by Mr. Lane who said that Staff recommends approval subject to conditions listed in`its report. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Applicant Duf Sfreddo, general partner in South ridge Homes, stated that .this development is .quite similar to an earlier development in Orange by Southridge Homes and he feels that the conditions for this development have been met. In response to a question from Commissioner Greek, Mr. Sfreddo said this development will have a 25'-wide private street and no sidewalks, the same as are in the previous development. Beverly Martin, 994 North Cleveland Street, owner of the property ® adjacent to the proposed development, voiced her objection to the development on the grounds that the lot sizes are considerably smaller than those in the two adjacent cul-de-sacs and do not fit into the current neighborhood; also that the proposed tract will have a narrower street with no sidewalks and parkways which is entirely out of character with the area. Various other residents of the area--Gunny and Chuck Elliott, 953 North Shaffer; Hilma Brandt, 976 North .Cleveland; Greg Amador, 950 North Cleveland; Walter Graff, 994 North Shaffer; and Doris Hunsaker, 1046 North Shaffer--voiced their concurrence with the objections presented by Mrs. Martin and also commented on the already heavy traffic and lack of parking facilities in the area Planning Commission Meeting. November 5, 1984 Page Seven which would be aggravated by the addition of eight residences in an area they felt should have no more than six residences, as well as the facts that the proposed selling price of the new houses would be lower than the value of their homes and the potential for inadequate firefighting due to the impossibility of afire truck being able to turn around on a 25'-wide street. It was pointed out in response to these objections that the selling price of the proposed homes is not relative to the suitability of the property for develop- ment; that there are other developments where fire trucks can't turn around and this is solved by hoses being carried in; that the property has always been zoned for 6,000-square-foot lots and all eight of the proposed lots will be larger than that because with the street being a narrower private street instead of a wider public street there is enough land available to fit in eight lots that meet the minimum required lot size; that each of the eight proposed houses wi11 have a two-car garage and standard-length 20' driveways, plus there is room for six guest parking spots, which exceeds the require- ments of the City fora planned unit development; and that the property meets all the City zoning requirements. Chairman Hart pointed out that the builder is askingionly for a conditional use permit not a variance and that he is entitled to what he is asking for within the zoning of the area. He said that on a previous occasion when a request had been made to construct six two-story houses on the same property, the request had not been granted because the area is zoned for single-story residences, but the zoning for minimum 6,000-square-foot lots had never been changed. Chairman Hart declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Mason asked if changing the street from 50' to 25' met with the approval of the fire department. Mr. Johnson pointed out that in 1981 the request was made for a standard subdivision with a dedicated street, and six homes was all that could be put upon the remaining property at that time, but that the request now is fora planned unit develop- ment, which allows for 25'-wide private streets, and therefore there would be enough property on which to build eight houses on lots that would fall within the zoning requirements. Commissioner Greek said he has a serious problem with the 25'-wide street and the lack of adequate parking for eight homes and he would like to view the development before deciding whether or not he can support it. Commissioner Master asked, if the fire department approved of the 25'-wide street and Mr. Lane responded that the fire department was in attendance at the interdepartmental committee meetings on this item and indicated it did not have a problem with the narrower street. Moved by Commissioner Greek, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission postpone this hearing until the meeting of November 19, and that the Planning .Department send a letter to the fire department asking that it declare in writing whether or not it approves of the 25'-wide street. Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 Page Eight AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE. PERMIT 1377 - STOVALL Proposed construction of six two-story apartment units within 70 feet of single-family residences as part of a 30-unit apartment development on approximately two acres on the north side of F1 etcher, approximately 660 feet east from Batavia Street. NOTE.: Negative Declaration 934 has been prepared for this project. Presentation made by Mr. Lane who said Staff recommends approval subject to conditions in its report. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Dave Keck, of J. Ward Dawson & Associates, 2808 East Katella, the applicant's representative, said he has nothing to add to the Staff Report. John Charlesbois, 706 West Brentwood, Orange, the property directly .behind the proposed development, voiced his objections to having two-story structures only ten to 20 feet from the back wall of his residential property. He also asked whether or not he was correct in interpreting the plans to show that there would be second-story balconies on the proposed structures, which would further increase his lack of privacy. A perusal of the plans showed that indeed there will be balconies which would be ten feet higher than Mr. Charlesbois' back wall. Mr. Charlesbois also objected to the construction of apartments in an area that is currently only single-family residences and townhouse condominiums. Commissioner Master pointed out that in the original application the applicants states he plans to build these apartments to condominium standards so they can be converted to condominium units. Discussion followed as to whether or not the apartmens would indeed eventually be con- verted to condominiums or even if the attempt to sell them as condominiums would be successful, in which case they might have to be used as rental apartments. Two other residents in the area--Ann Huckle and Gary Blackwood, both living on Brentwood--spoke in agreement with Mr. Charlesbois. Mrs. Huckle submitted snapshots taken from her back yard showing the proximity of the already under construction portion of the apartment complex to which the proposed development will be connected. She pointed out that the windows on these structures are in such a position that anyone looking from them has a clear view of her back yard, and said she had been promised prior to construction that there would be no windows so located. Mr. Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 page Nine Blackwood stressed in particular the incidence of increasing high-density multiple dwellings into what was originally designated amedium-density single-family area. He said he felt the Planning Commission should visit the area and looked at the situation before coming to a decision. Robert Carter, 715 West Fletcher, asked if there could be some- thing more than a six-foot-high fence between the proposed develop- ment and the homes already in existence, because a six-foot-high fence would not keep out the noise. Chairman Hart said the existing code does not allow a fence higher than six feet, Mr. Carter pointed out that there is a 15-foot-high wall the entire distance of the property to his left on which there is a welding shop. Mr. Keck said the proposed units are intended to be converted to condominiums and he believes the setback is appropriate for a condominium complex. Mr. Lane said the setback is determined by the zoning and a condominium is nothing more than the form of ownership of the units. Mr. Keck said he thought the issue was the apartments would not be allowed within 70 feet of a two-story unit but it was his understanding that if it were condominiums it would be allowed. Mr. Lane said the zoning. is already set and what does not allow any closer than 70 feet is the RM-7 zone and the development standards therein. Mr. Keck asked if it would be possible, if this matter is approved, to make the conversion to a condominium a condition of the approval. Chairman Hart said he would have no problem with that but that the issue being faced is that of height limitation. Commissioner Master asked Mr. Keck if he had been involved in the building of the units now under construction that had windows in the back facing the single-family residences even though it had been promised that there would be no windows. Mr. Keck responded that those units are being built by another developer. Chairman Hart declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Master said he has problems supporting the motion when there is such an impact on the. adjoining property and he finds the design insensitive. He asked Mr. Keck if he would accept a continuance to do some redesigning. Mr. Keck responded in the affirmative. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Mason, that this item be continued to the meeting of November 19. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez ABSTAINED: Commissioner Greek MOTION CARRIED Planning November '! Page Ten Commission Meeting 5, 1984 Chairman Hart said that if the plans are revised in such a way that they meet the Code and don't require a conditional use permit, a public hearing will not be needed; however, if a hearing will take place on November 19, then it may be too late to notify the residents of the single-family homes. It was suggested that they contact Mr. Lane on Friday, November 16, to ascertain the status of the situation. U IN RE: Commissioner Master said it appeared to him that the previous portion of the project that is now being constructed would have needed a conditional use permit and asked if it had appeard before the Planning Commission. Mr. Lane said he is assuming that it did because he is assuming that the units in the back are within 70 feet of the single-family homes adjoining the property. Neither Chairman Hart nor G'ommissioner Master could recall being involved in it. Mr. Charlesbois said. that development had :come before the City Council only,, not the Planning Commission. Commissioner Master requested Staff to give the Planning Commission the chronological historical information on that project.. NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1378 - FOODMAKER Proposed fast food restaurant with drive-thru window on approximately .5 acre situated at the northwest corner of Tustin and Heim. NOTE: Negative Declaration 935 has been prepared for this project. Presentation by Mr. Lane who. said Staff recommends approval with the conditions listed in its report. Chairman Hart declared the public hearing open. Applicant Reuben Martinez, 9040 Telstar Avenue, E1 Monte, asked for clarification of Condition #2 regarding his contribution toward the cost of street improvements and asked for the dollar figure that would be required. Mr. Johnson explained that the street improvements would be those required by the redevelopment of that area and it was anticipated that the ones on Heim Avenue, to which Mr. Martinez would be required to contribute, would not be made until 1987, prior to which time an estimate of the cost could be prepared, and that the ones in connection with the widening of Tustin Street would not be necessary until the redevelopment agency was ready to widen Tustin Street to six lanes. Commissioner Master asked Mr. Martinez what his planned hours of operation would be and he responded that he planned to stay open 24 hours a day but it could be less depending on what the local market would bear. Commissioner Master asked about the intercom public address system and Mr. Martinez said that one would be in use but that the speaker would face away from the residential property in the area. Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 Page Eleven AYES: NOES: ® ABSENT: Chairman Hart declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Master asked why City Staff is recommending that the City pay for one~half of the improvements on a development instead of the developer paying for all the improvements. Mr. Johnson explained that this is a special situation worked out by the redevelopment agency under the Tustin Street development plan. Commissioner Greek requested that the Planning Commission be given the specific policy that indicates where the City will participate. Chairman Hart asked Mr. Lane to provide clarification on this matter. Moved by Commissioner Mason, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 935. Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master None Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Moved by Commissioner Mason, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1378 because it in consistent with the land use element of the general plan and compatible with the surrounding commercial uses. Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master None Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS Upper Peters Canyon Policy Plan status. Request from the Upper Peters Canyon Policy Plan Steering Committee to review the status of the Policy Plan currently being initiated. NOTE: This item was continued from the October 15, 1984, Planning Commission Meeting and the October 22, 1984, Planning Commission Study Session. Chairman Hart explained that the Planning Commission was requested at its previous meeting to vote on whether this was a policy plan or a general plan and consequently had. held a study session on the matter. Discussion followed. Robert Bennyhoff, resident of Orange Park Acres, stated that there cannot be a general plan amendment without an environmental impact report and an environmental impact report for 19,000 acres would be a large expense which neither Orange County nor The Irvine Company is willing to pay at this time. Chairman Hart responded that the Planning Commission is trying to determine whether or not it wants the environmental impact report Planning Commission Meeting November 5, 1984 f~ Page Twelve and feels at this time the guiding committee does not want the environmental impact report so the Planning Commission is limited to a policy plan. Moved by Commissioner Greek, seconded by Commissioner Mason, that the Planning Commission recommend to the East Orange Steering Committee that the procedure be adopted toward developing a policy plan as Step One for the development of the East Orange area. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. to reconvene to a regular meeting on Monday, November 19, 1984, at 7:30 p.m., at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California. u