Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/18/1988 - Minutes PC~; PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Orange January 1$, 1988 __.. Orange, California Monday - 7:00 p.m. The regular meeting of the City of Orange Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Scott at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott ABSENT: Commissioner Master STAFF PRESENT: Jack McGee, Administrator and Commission Secretary; Ron Thompson, Director of Community Development; Gene Minshew, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF DECEMBER 21. 1987 AND JANUARY 4. 1988 Commissioner Greek noted one correction to the Minutes of January 4, 1988: Page 5, Paragraph 3, Line 5 -- "rod ~~ iron" sh ould be "wrought iron". Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Co mmissioner Hart, th at the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of December 21, 1987 as recorded, and approve the Minutes of January 4, 1988 as corrected. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED IN RE: CONTINUED ITEMS A letter has been received asking for continuance of Item 2, Conditional Use Permit 1636 - La Veta Ltd., until February 17. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the Planning Commission continue the item until February 17, 1988. ~i~' AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 2 ~"'""`, iN RE: CONTINUED MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS ~,r PRECISE SITE PLAN, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-235, AND REQUEST FOR STREET ABANDONMENT - KOLL COMPANY: Requested approval of a precise site plan, tentative parcel map, and abandonment of portions of public streets for Phase II of the Koll Center Orange located southwest of State College Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue. (Continued from the January 4, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting.) This item was not a public hearing; however, the proponent wished to add his comments. Steve Layton, Development Project Manager with the Koll Company, 4343 Von Karmen, Newport Beach, agrees with the staff report except for the one recommendation by the Design Review Board (Item 2). It asks that architectural reliefs be provided on the face of the parking structure to create pockets for landscaping and trees; and that the reliefs are pockets -- about 50it of the building face. He showed their own drawing on this issue and take exception to the recommendation. This would be used if Cal Trans expands the freeway and takes over a majority of the property on the frontage. He explained and showed what they suggested for the landscaping plan. Palm trees would be a major theme on the site. Commissioner Hart asked if it was a zero lot line building. Mr. Layton stated it was and the palm trees could be accommodated. Commissioner Bosch stated one of the requirements of Public Works was for the identification of a well site and he did not see any evidence of that. He wanted to know how the plans were proceeding for the well site. Mr. Layton explained their agreement with the City regarding the welt site would be at the time they brought in their third building or 'within a five year period a well site would be acknowledged and then deeded over to the City. A lot has to do with what Cal Trans intends tc do. Commissioner Bosch wanted to know if Cal Trans does not proceed with the full widening, would the residences be impacted in terms of their access by the street abandonment. What provisions have been made to ensure they will have adequate access? Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 3 Mr. Layton stated the access for the properties along Anaheim Blvd. is accessed off of Anaheim Blvd. and an alley that is behind Anaheim Blvd. None of that will be affected by the abandonment. It will remain the same as it is now. Chairman Scott asked Mr. Johnson if his Department was comfortable with the condition. Mr. Johnson believes they are. There have been some discussions with the Water Department. And as long as Koll understands and will honor the requirement, the Water Department is not in need of that site today. It is something that will be needed in the future. This item was brought back to the Commission for action. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to accept the D.R.B. concerns with the exception of providing architectural reliefs titem 2); that suggestion to be deleted. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master ABSTAINED: Commissioner Greek MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to accept the Precise Site Pian, Tentative Parcel Map 87-235, and request for street abandonment. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master ABSTAINED: Commissioner Greek MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS ZONE CHANGE 1083 - FARID ALAGHBAD AND WILLIAM CALVY: Proposal to change the zoning from C-1 to C-2 and County M-1 to C-2 for a portion of a 30,741 square foot site located on the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Olive Avenue. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1189 has been prepared for this pro,iect. r~ u Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 4 A staff report was not presented. The public hearing was opened. Greg Siminoff, architect of the project, located at Bird Street in Santa Ana Heights, stated they proposed to provide three single standing buildings on the property. They are asking for the C-2 zone to permit the use of the Econo Lube and Tune. As the lot stands now, they have a partial C-2 zoning, but they want to have uniform zoning on the property. The Commission did not have any questions; therefore, the public hearing was closed. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that it accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 1189. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Greek, t hat the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that it approve Zone Change 1083. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS ZONE CHANGE 1086 - JOHN SALZBRUNN/CASEY JURADO: Proposal to change the zoning from C-2 to R-4 for a portion of a 12,830 square foot parcel located on the south side of Almond Avenue between Olive Street and Lemon Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1192 has been prepared for this project. Joan Wolff presented the staff report: The property is located within the Old Towne area, 230 West Almond. The lot currently contains one single family residence, which is now vacant. The property has a split zoning designation. The northerly 1/3 of the lot is zoned C-2 (Commercial) and the southerly 2/3's are zoned R-4 Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 5 (Residential-Multiple Family). The applicants' request is to re-zone the northern third of the property from C-2 to R-4 to obtain an uniform zone over the entire site. The purpose of the zone change request is to facilitate the development of a seven unit residential project on the property. The applicant is proposing to add to the existing house and to convert it into four apartment units, and further, to construct three units above new garage structures on what is now the rear portion of the lot. All units will either be two or three bedrooms and range in size from approximately 800 square feet to just under 1100 square feet. Plans show there will be one driveway entrance to the property off of Almond and that it will be located along the lot's eastern property line. Thirteen parking spaces will be provided on site. The proposed development meets ail the zoning standards of the R-4 zone, including the setback requirements, the coverage requirements and the parking. it is also consistent with the General Plan designation, which is Residential-High Density. The Design Review Board will be reviewing the project, if approved, prior to issuance of building permits and will evaluate it's compliance with the Old Towne Design Guidelines. Staff has received a letter from the owner of the adjacent property to the west. The letter states that an existing sewer line ties the sewer main, which is on Lemon Street, over to the subject property. The sewer tie crosses through the person's property. The person has stated she does not want all seven of the units to be served this way. The applicant is aware of the situation and there are alternative routings on the sewer line that could be achieved. The public hearing was opened. Casey Jurado, Gannon Development, 856 North Elm, stated the project is in compliance with the neighborhood and local properties. There are several apartments in the immediate area and they will not be affecting adjacent properties in a negative manner. The residential zoning will better serve the parking problem vs. commercial zoning. The design of the project will keep all parking in the back. They have complied with the Old Towne Guidelines and feels the project looks very good for the area. Commissioner Greek wanted the applicant to know the Commission was only considering the zone change. The information that was submitted will not be considered as part of the zone change. . Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 6 Those speaking in opposition: Melissa Ello, 224 South Olive, lives directly behind the proposed project. She has a problem with the, proposed project being built so close to her property. Chairman-Scott told Ms. Ello the only thing being considered was the zone change. The plans that were presented will not be approved at this meeting. Commissioner Greek intervened stating the zone change being requested is only for the front portion of the property because the property has a split zoning. He explained the applicants are requesting to convert the entire lot to R-4. Monroe Rice, 224 South Olive, Ms. Ello's father, spoke against the project and was concerned about the additional parking towards the rear of the lot. He objects to seven apartments being built. Mr. Jurado would be more than willing to listen to the neighbor' concerns regarding the parking. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bosch felt this was a difficult situation because of the split zoning. It has been proven to be difficult to maintain this type of zoning. The R-4 on the back of the property is identical to the R-4 of the surrounding neighborhood, including those who are in opposition. Although the site plan represents something that could be done there, hopefully through the Design Review Process and the applicant working with the neighbors, something can be mitigated about the parking concerns. He is a little concerned about impacting the current nice graphical line of the C-2 zone on the map, but that does not mean anything; it's the environment that counts. That area has demonstrated an inability to transition to a good C-2 over a period of years and feels it would be inappropriate to try and have those inappropriate transitions in the future. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City council that it accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to fife Negative Declaration 1192. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 7 Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that it approve Zone Change 1085. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Mr. McGee stated this item was a recommendation to the City Council. It will be heard by the Council in approximately four to six weeks. There will be notices that are sent out to the same residents who received notices for the Planning Commission Meeting. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS ZONE CHANGE 1088 - CITY OF ORANGE: Proposal to change the zoning from 0-P to P-I (Public Institutional) for a 3.6 acre parcel located on the south side of Chapman Avenue between Center Street and Grand Street (City Hall). NOTE: Negative Declaration 1194 has been prepared for this project. A staff report was not presented. The public hearing was opened and closed. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that it accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 1194. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that it approve Zone Change 1088. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED G Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 8 IN RE: NEW HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1644 - BOB GRANT: Proposal to allow two (2) temporary trailers in the M-1 zone on property located on the east side of Batavia Street between Fletcher Avenue and Cully Drive, addressed 2387 N. Batavia Street. NOTE: This item was referred to the Planning Commission by the Zoning Administrator. Reggie Meigs, Building Administrator, spoke in opposition to this request. Code Enforcement has had many complaints on the property for some time from the Police Department and neighbors in the area. Some of the problems include mixed uses, buildings brought onto the property without permits, inspections, and buildings being used for residential purposes. Since Mr. Grant has applied for approval of a conditional use permit, substantial progress has been made to clean up the property. However, there should still be more exacting conditions so the problems with temporary trailers will cease to exist. One of the problems is the unspecified number of years a trailer is put on the property without a condition to remove them. Temporary trailers end up as permanent structures. He would like the Commission to consider adding four conditions that will help alleviate some of the current problems for temporary trailers: (1) Prior to commencement of any work, complete plans and calculations must be submitted to the Department of Community Development for plan review and Building Division plan check; (2) Outside storage shall be limited to the height of the approved screening so as not to be visible from public view and adjacent properties; (3) All }unk and debris (auto parts and other parts as defined by the Orange Municipal Code) be stored within an enclosed permitted structure; and (4) Obtain a building permit for each structure, temporary or permanent, prior to commencing work. The applicant is asking for a conditional use permit; however, his trailers are already on the property. Discussion centered around the definition of a temporary trailer and its intended uses. A specified amount of time determines whether the trailer is intended for temporary and permanent use. Mr. McGee stated there was a condition of approval in the information packet -- Condition ~4, which states the permit is valid for two years from the date of approval. Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 9 Commissioner Hart said there were a number of obvious violations that have been noted. He wanted to know if there was a mechanism to enforce the cleaning up of those violations. Mr. Meigs does not believe it was the original intent of the applicant to store his materials, although that use is not excluded. He made reference to the applicant's pallets needing to be screened from view. The Commission needs to consider what type of screening that would be approved for this project. Commissioner Bosch asked about Mr. Meigs' idea of bonding. Mr. Meigs said the only thing available in terms of bonding would be to bond in case the two year limit has expired and the applicant chooses not to move the trailers; then, the City would have a mechanism to actually file suit against the owners and force the removal of the trailers. The bond would be enacted to defray a lot of the costs for the City if the City chose to remove the structure. Chairman Scott asked Mr. Minshew about putting a lien on the property in order to move the trailers? Mr. Minshew stated you could. However, both methods need to be put into the Code to }ustify it. The public hearing was opened. Bob Grant, 2387 North Batavia, asked the Commission to listen to his perspective in this situation. He has done business in the City of Orange for 22 years and performs a valuable service. His trailer is very important to the operation of his business. It is not economically feasible to develop a repair facility at this time because of land costs and he is certain that the property will eventually become some type of industrial or office-type building. He has a three year lease on the property and the use of the property is an interim use. He has operated the trailer, which is legally approved, and has no intention of abandoning it. The total debris on the property is less than one percent of the total of the property. It is not visible from the street. He feels it is very difficult to put up a 12 foot screen and feels he is being singled out in this regard. He sees far worse conditions on Batavia than his property. He has abated the conditions and intends to complete those abatements. He has had the trailer 16 years and had no idea he was in violation of the Code. Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 10 The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hart would feel more comfortable if Mr. Grant were not being singled out. Mr. Meigs responded that Mr. Grant was not being singled out and that was explained to him. Mr. Grant had his trailer at another site before moving to the current location. if the trailer had been at the previous site for 16 years and not have been moved, they would have had to consider it as existing non-conforming use. However, he moved the trailer onto the new site within the last two or three years and never got permits or had inspections of the trailer. There was a Code Enforcement Study and it pointed out there were many long term uses in the City that were in violation of the City codes. Code Enforcement needs to start making a comprehensive overview of the City to bring those into abatement. They are currently working on a complaint basis as they do not have the staff to work on a pro-active basis. If he were given approval for the Conditional Use Permit, conditions need to be placed on his property so that his property would be brought into conformance now. Commissioner Greek asked Mr. Grant if he had read the recommended conditions of approval and could he satisfy them? Mr. Grant had read the 19 requirements, but feels Mr. Meigs was going to the maximum on interpretation of some of the conditions (i.e., screening). He thinks the property can be screened, although he does not understand the need for screening up to twelve feet. He does not have a problem with the requirements of the Fire and Police Departments, but there is a problem with the screening situation. This would be a great expense for a piece of property that will be developed in another way within three years. Commissioner Hart does not believe Mr. Grant is being asked to screen his pallets twelve feet; he is being asked not to stack them twelve feet. Commissioner Hart also explained their concern of the so-called temporary uses ending up as 15 year uses, as already indicated. The Commissioners reviewed the conditions relating to screening and discussed the issue at length. Temporary standards need to be formulated with certain conditions placed on the uses without deviations. G Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 11 Commissioner Bosch asked Mr. McGee for confirmation of the '' requirement for screening. Mr. McGee referred to the Orange Municipal Code, Section 17.46.210, Item D, ~2: "All areas used for outdoor storage must be screened with a view obscuring fence, wall or landscaping of a height at least equal to that of the storage container or stored materials, whichever is higher." it allows it to be a fenced wall or landscaping to screen it a height equal to the materials stored. Commissioner Greek asked the applicant if he knew approximately how much money it would be to make the needed improvements to his property, including paving the parking lot. Mr. Grant stated paving was not a requirement. The Fire Department had asked for an all weather road for the access which is 25 feet wide. The Commission felt it was very unusual for the Fire Department not to require paving of the open storage lot. Mr. McGee stated there is no formal requirement for a paved storage yard, but the City has had many instances in the industrial area where operators of heavy equipment do not want to do a formal paving material and that has been acceptable. Chairman Scott asked for the definition of an all-weather road. Mr. Johnson thought the Fire Department would be thinking in terms of a paved road. However, they are the ones that need to answer certain questions for the condition. There are many temporary uses out there who do not want to put in the permanency of pavement that will be ripped out again. Commissioner Greek asked if a meeting has been scheduled with Police and Fire to discuss parking standards. Mr. .Thompson responded he has met with Chapman College's planning consultant to come up with some design standards; however, meetings have not been arranged with Police or Fire. Commissioner Greek would like to postpone a decision on this item until they talk with Police and Fire regarding parking standards and conditions for temporary uses. Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 12 Commissioner Bosch was somewhat familiar with the Security Ordinance and does not recollect how it applied to temporary structures. It seemed to apply to permanent structures. Does the Design Review Board have a standard accessible for screening to_give applicants an indication of how screening is interpreted by the D.R.B.? Mr. McGee said the Design Review Board reviews these types of situations when required, but he couldn't cite the most recent ones for an example. Chairman Scott asked when they were suppose to meet with the Police Department? Mr. McGee stated February 8 is the date scheduled for their meeting with the Police Department. He had not talked to the Fire Department about having a study session on this topic. Commissioner Bosch thought if the applicant were willing to accept a continuance to help clarify these items, and to get a definition from staff regarding the screening it would be helpful to him. Chairman Greek asked Mr. Grant if he would be willing to continue the hearing to February 17, 1988. Mr. Grant had a problem with that date and preferred the meeting after that date -- March 7, 1988. Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to March 7, 1988. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Greek added another comment and asked Mr. Meigs to continue with the clean-up operations; anything in violation should be enforced as far as clean-up is concerned. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Mr. McGee noted the request to establish a five o'clock study session February 1, 1988 and the Commission needs to adJourn to that time. 0 . Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1988 - Page 13 Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission adjourn to a study session for a general plan amendment development at 6:00 p.m, on February 1, 1988.. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. /sid G