HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/1/1982 - Minutes PCPLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
City of Orange
Orange, California
November 1, 1982
Monday, 7:30 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Orange City Planning Commission was called to order by
Chairman Mickelson at 7:30 p,m.
PRESENT: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez
ABSENT: Commissioners none
STAFF Jere P. Murphy, Administrator of Current Planning and Commission
PRESENT: Secretary; Norvin Lanz, Associate Planner; Gene Minshew, Assistant
City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; Bert K. Yamasaki,
Director of Planning & Development Services; and Doris Ofsthun,
Recording Secretary.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IN RE: NEW HEARINGS:
ZONE CHANGE 979, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1235, TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP 82-764 - AMADOR GONZALEZ, JR.:
A request to change from the OP (Office Professional) District to
• C-1 (Local Business) District, form three lots and create a lot
without frontage on a public street to allow construction of
22,500 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses on property
located on the south side of Chapman Avenue, approximately 460
feet west of Newport Boulevard (7446 East Chapman Avenue).
(NOTE: Negative Declaration 791 has been prepared in lieu of an
Environmental Impact Report.)
Norvin Lanz presented this application to the Commission, stating
that this property contains 1,43 acres and is located on the south
side of Chapman Avenue approximately 460 feet west of the centerline
of Newport Boulevard (7446 E. Chapman Avenue). The property is zoned
OP (Office-Professional) and contains asingle-family residence and a
vacant dog kennel. The applicant is requesting a change of the zoning
designation from OP (Office-Professional) to C-1 (Local Commercial)
and approval of a conditional use permit to create 3 lots, the third
lot being without frontage onto a public street.
Mr. Lanz pointed. out that the applicant specifically proposes to do
extensive grading and install retaining wa71s on the site to create
three building pads for future commercial buildings, the three
building pads to total 18,386 sq. ft., with a parking and circulation
plan which provides a total of 88 parking spaces. However, without
specific floor plans for the buildings, it is not possible to evaluate
the adequacy of the proposed parking.
The Staff has reviewed the proposal and has several concerns:
1. Additional fire facilities will need to be provided.
2. The project involves extensive grading and retaining requiring
evaluation in accordance with City standards, on-site inspection
and mitigation measures to be used.
3. Trash enclosures be approved by the Sanitation Inspector.
4. Handicapped parking be provided.
5. The architectural plans be compatible with the residential
residential environment of the area and the approved adjacent
Irvine Farmer's Market shopping center.
6. Due to the creation of separate legal lots, parking for each
parcel and building pad will be required to support the floor
space on the particular parcel unless a reciprocal parking and
access agreement is made.
~ Planning Commission Minutes
November 1, 1982
Page Two
7. Due to the creation of separate legal lots parking for each
parcel and building pad will be required to support the floor
space on the particular parcel unless a reciprocal parking
and access agreement is made.
8. Some types of commercial uses (i.e. restaurants) which require
more parking than general commercial uses will limit the
allowable square footage. Parking compliance will be reviewed
when specific development plans are submitted.
9. The Design Review Board may require additional landscaping area
than proposed, thereby affecting the parking plan and total
allowable square footage.
10. The site, due to the extensive grading, may be subject to wind
and water erosion of the soil.
11. The driveways be 25 feet wide instead of 24 feet, as shown, and
aisleways and parking stalls be of grades 5% or less, with
entranceways of grades of 10% or less.
12. The proposal creates the potential for traffic safety hazards,
especially the existing and entrance onto Chapman Avenue, due
to limited sightline visibility.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept the findings
of the Environmental Review Board to file "mitigated" Negative
Declaration 791, only if adequate mitigating measures relating
to grading and wall designs are adopted with an approval of the
zone change and conditional use permit.
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel. Map 82-764, subject
to 6 conditions listed in the Staff Report. Regarding Zone Change
979 and Conditional Use Permit 1235, in order to afford a review of
City codes and areas of concerns, a set of specific development plans
need to be submitted. Therefore, the Staff recommends approval of
the applicant's proposal subject to the intent to rezone procedure,
for two reasons : (1) the applicant's .proposal is consistent wi th
the intent of the City of Orange General P1 an; and (2) the appl icant's
proposa] is compatible with the existing zoning, surrounding land uses
upon the adoption of appropriate special grading and visual conditionsl
If Zone Change 979 and Conditional Use Permit 1235 are approved, Staff
recommends approval, subject to the 8 conditions listed in the Staff
Report.
Chairman Mickelson asked about the OP zoning on this piece of property
and Mr. Lanz explained this in greater detail. Chairman Mickelson
then asked a question with regard to the retaining wall and the fact
that he thought the Commission had discusses a block wall in this area
sometime ago. Mr. Lanz explained that to place a block wa71 on top
of a retaining wall would not be too feasible. Chairman Mickelson
asked if a grading plan had been approved and-was told that it had.
He did not recall that th e grading had been as severe on the previous
plans,. Mr. Murphy explained the situation in greater detail,
Chairman Mickelson opened the public hearing.
Amador Gonzalex, Jr., 5522 Club U Drive, Yorba Linda, the applicant,
addressed the Commission in favor of this application, stating that
he was ih complete agreement with the Staff recommendations in the
Staff Report. Regarding the retaining wall, both in the adjoining
shopping center and his property, plans have been submitted showing
a slope in lieu of the wall. This has been shown to the High Forest
Trails Homeowners Association and Home Savings & Loan and they have
approved it. The plan is now being revised for the shopping center
and his plan will be submitted shortly, showing a slope in lieu of
the wall. In his portion the highest area will be about 20 feet and
the shopping center now has a two to 1 slope, with the highest area
Planning Commission Minutes
~ November 1, 1982
Page Three
being 14 ft., which at 2 to 1 would be 28 feet. There are terraces
and swales in that area also.
Commissioner Coontz asked what the status is of the other parcel
and Mr. Johnson explained that Mr. Gonzalez has tried to make the
two sites compatible. He has control of both sites because he represents
the developer on one parcel and is the developer on the other. They
must be compatible because the idea is to join them with one driveway.
He explained that any time retaining walls can be eliminated they try
to encourage it. If they can eliminate retaining walls by a change
in grade, he felt that this is a step in the right direction.
George Rach, Acting Chairman of the Orange Park Acres Committee,
addressed the Commission, stating that the property itself is an
elevated portion as you are going east on Chapman and it is very
visible. The concerns were that the nature of the architecture should
strive to be compatible. He felt that they should strive to develop
the property in some compatibility with one another. Also they would
hope that consideration should be given to the type of businesses which
are approved for the area, which would not cause any type of concern
in the community. He also wondered if cars traveling west on Chapman
would have a way to get across the raod to enter this property. He
pointed out that as you enter this property the grade is more than
10%. Mr. Johnson explained that the grade .coming off of Chapman,
going south, is a 6% area, then a landing and then going to 11 2%
grade, then flattening and going. up again at about 10% grade. Mr.
Rach said that the community's concern is for traffic safety in this
area.
Mr. Rach also said that one of the underlying concerns is what the
commercial interests will be for that area. Will this be all in the
commercial area or are there other parcels which will become commercial?
There is concern in that area. Their other concern is that of the
grading. They would prefer a graded-slope rather than a retaining wall.
Commissioner Hart pointed out that the Commission has nothing to do with
design. The Design Review Board has taken over thi s function. They
are very careful about design an d he did not think the residents should
have a concern in this area.
Mr. Johnson spoke to the traffic concern, stating that there would
certainly be a left turn pocket in that area to provide a protected
area to move in and out of the drive.
Anita Bennyhoff, 10642 Morada Drive, Orange Park Acres, addressed the
Commission, stating that she was under the impression that C-7 allows
almost any kind of development. She wondered when they would be
apprised of what the developer plans to place there. She also won-
dered why the office-professional building was not pursued.
Commissioner Coontz thought that perhaps there was a misunderstanding
with regard to the C-1 zoning. C-1 has several uses and the developer
will develop according to the uses. Anyone who would fall in those
categories would be able to lease in that development. The Planning
Commission has no control over who would lease in that property.
Commissioner Hart explained that the Commission does not control each
use that comes into the City. That would be a monumental task.
Commissioner Mickelson summarized by saying that if this were approved
C-1, any use that fal 1 s i n that category woul d be allowed i n that
development.
^~
Planning Commission Minutes
November 1, 1982
Page Four
~' Mr. Gonzalez responded that with regard to the traffic in that
area, Chapman Avenue is going to be realigned. They have dedicated
a strip of land to the City in order for Chapman to be widened.
Their grades will not exceed 10% and, as far as parking is concerned,
there will be 92 parking stalls, in addition to three trash enclosure
areas. He explained that they had a meeting with Staff with regard
to developing the shopping center and the fact that when they develop
this parcel it must be compatible with the shopping center.
Chairman Mickelson was curious as to why he was opting for C-1 rather
than 0-P. Mr. Gonzalez explained that studies they have run show
that the shopping center is feasible, but 0-P is not needed there.
There are already too many offices standing empty in the City of
Orange.
There being no one else to speak for or against this application, the
Chairman closed the public hearing.
Chair°man Mickelson had some concerns about the parcel, agreeing with
Mr. Gonzalez that there is not any immediate need for 0-P development
out there. However, he would feel better about this being zoned C-1
if it were designed as a single shopping center, or designed to fit
together better than this one does. He thought that the grading
would have to be very severe in order to get pads to build on. This
leaves a rather steep approach to a commercial site. He was also
concerned that creati ng 8-10 ft. retaining wa71 s or some rather high
slopes on commer.ci al property could be a prob 1 em. He was not i n favor
of maximizing the property to the degree of what has been shown on
the plan. He did not have trouble with zoning C-1, however.
Commissioner Coontz said that this is the reason. why she questioned
the property to the east. She thought that a point in its favor was
the attempt to coordinate with the adjoining shopping center.
Mr. Gonzalez again addressed the Commission, explaining that he is
the vice-president in charge of the development of the shopping center
and he designed the shopping center. The Staff had a few concerns and
he had allayed these concerns. There would have. to be a connection
between the two properties. He spoke to the concerns about massive
grading on the site, pointing out that there will be only two terraces
where the previous plan had terraces all the way to the top of the
parcel. They are cutting this down, but making it much more level than
the original proposal. They want to make this as compatible as possible
with the shopping center. He has tried to make the grading so that there
will be a series of terraces.
Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Coontz, to accept
the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative
Declaration 791.
AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED
Moved by Commissioner Coontz, seconded by Commissioner Vasquez to
recommend approval of Zone Cha nge 979, using the intent to rezone
procedure and with the grading plan to be brought to approval under
the intent to rezone.
AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED
^r-
~ Planning Commission Minutes
November 1, 1982
Page Five
Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Master to
recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 1235 and Tentative
Parcel Map 82-764, subject to the conditions set forth in the Staff
Report and the Engineer's Plan Check Sheet.
AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1234 - DAVID FRENCH:
A request to allow construction of a second living unit over a
detached garage which exceeds the one-story height restri ction i n
the RCD (Residential Combining) District overlay zone for any new
construction on property located on the southwest corner of Harwood
Street and Moreland Drive (140 South Harwood Street). (NOTE: This
project is exempt from environmental review.)
By consensus of the Commission, no presentation was given.
Chairman Mickelson opened the public hearing.
There being no one to speak for or against this application, the
Chairman closed the public hearing.
Moved by Commissioner Vasquez, seconded by Commissioner Hart to
approve Condi tional Use Perini t 1234, for the reasons as stated i n
the Staff Report and subject to the conditions listed therein.
AYES: Commissioners Mickelson,
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners none
IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS:
Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez
MOTION CARRIED
ZONE CHANGE 939 - CENTURY AMERICAN:
A request to approve construction drawings as being in compliance
with the conditions of City Cou nci 1 Resolution 5398 approving Zone
Change 939, using the intent to rezone procedure, and a request to
recommend the reading of the appropriate ordinance to complete the
zone change from the R-1-6 to the OP District on property located on
the northeast corner of Katel]a Avenue and Wanda Road.
Jere Murphy explained that Zone Change 939 had been a resolution of
intent because of the some of the questions which were raised during
the public hearing with regard to the interface between the project
and the residential properties surrounding it. He pointed out that
the City Council had specifically directed that that the buildings
be one story in height. He said that the Design Review Board has
approved the preliminary plans, which are basically a residentially
styled one-story building, approximately 28 feet i n height.
Mr. Murphy further explained that the applicant is also proposing to
place a bank in the southern portion of the southern building and
has filed a preliminary zone change on that portion of the property.
However, he wishes to hold off any action on that. zone change until
the 0-P zoning is complete and the. City Council has approved the plans
which are now before the Planning Commission.
Staff recommends approval of the revised plans for the property and
that the City Attorney be directed by the Counci 1 to place an ordinance
affecting the zone change when final project plans have been approved.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 1, 1982
Page Six
Commissioner Master asked a question about the height of the building
and Mr. Murphy explained that the 28 ft. is a little taller than most
single story structures but this could be found in almost any kind of
zone. The two-story height is 30 ft, regardless of the zoning, al-
though in this day and age, they are finding that with air conditioning
equipment, etc. this is a little low for office and commercial buildings.
He thought that perhaps the extra height might be needed because of the
depth of the bui 1 di ng. The roof needs to be pitched more for the depth
of the building.
Barry Cottle, representing the applicant, Century American, 1428 E.
Chapman Avenue, Orange, addressed the Commission and stated that they
had done a study with regard to the residences which overlook this
project from their back yards and what they would be loo king at. With
this proposed plan, they would be looking at a residential roof. He
explained that the dormers are strictly for looks and that the roof
line in the back will be trussed but there will be no access in the
attic area and no plans are there for a second story. This will be
a French Normandy type of building. He stated that they would take
care of the concerns mentioned in the memorandum from Staff.
Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Coontz to
recommend approval of the preliminary plans; and that the City Attorney
place the ordinance affecting the zone change when final project plans
have been approved..
AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez
NOES: Commissioners none
ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED
Mr. Murphy explained that there had been a request by the Santa Anita
group for a study session with regard to their proposal of developing
the property at Tustin and Meats. A study session was tentatively
set for November 17, 1982 at 5:30 p.m., to be confirmed at the
November 15th meeting.
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. to be reconvened to a regular
meeting on Monday, November 15, 1982 at 7:30 p.m, at the Civic
Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California.
U
^~