Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/21/1983 - Minutes PCPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Orange Orange, California November 21, 1983 Monday, 7:30 p.m. The regular meeting of the Orange City Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Hart at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez STAFF Jere P. Murphy, Administrator of Current Planning and Commission Secretary; PRESENT: Jack McGee, Associate Planner; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; Gene Minshew, Assistant City Attorney; and Doris Ofsthun, Recording Secretary. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17, 1983 ANG NOVEMBER 7, 1983 Moved by Commissioner Mason, seconded by Commissioner Master, to approve the minutes of October 17, 1983, as transmitted. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Mason, Master NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez ABSTAIN: Commissioner Greek MOTION CARP,IED Commissioner Greek asked for two corrections to be made to the minutes of November 7, 1983: page 3, second paragraph, fifth sentence: "... concrete drop transmission..." should be corrected to read: "transition". page 14, sixth paragraph, eighth sentence down, "...if they accepted ..." should be corrected to read: "excepted". Moved by Commissioner Mason, seconded by Commissioner Greek, to approve the minutes of November 7, 1983, as corrected. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez ABSTAIN: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED OR WITHDRA4IN: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - LAND USE ELEMENT 2-83A, ZOPIE CHANGE 1009 - MR. JESS FROST: A proposal to change land use designations from Open Space and Low Density Residential (2-6 units per acre) to High Density Residential (15-24 units per acre) and rezone from R-1-7 (Single Family Residential, 7,000 square foot minimum lot), FP-1 and FP-2 (Flood Plain Combining) Districts to RM-7 (Residential Multiple Family) and FP-2 (Flood Plain Combininq~) Districts to accommodate an estimated 420 unit apartment complex on 26_ acres located Planning Commission riinutes November 21, 1983 Page Two ~ on the west side Street). NOTE: for this project. 1983. ) of Tustin Street at La Veta Avenue (580 South Tustin Draft Environmental Impact Report 838 has been prepared (This item is continued from the meeting of November 7, Mr. Murphy explained that the applicant for this item has requested a continuance to the next regular meeting on December 5th. However, since the Commission is scheduled to hear a major public hearing on the Loma Street/Imperial Highway extension and there are already three itdms scheduled for hearing on December 19th, Mr. Murphy suggested that this matter be con- tinued to a special meeting on December 12th. Moved by Commissioner Greek, seconded by Commissioner Mason, to continue General Plan Amendment - Land Use Element 2-83A, Zone Change 1009 to a special meeting on Monday, December 12, 7983. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED IN RE: CONTINUED HEARINGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1318, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 83-768 - SANTA FE LAND IMPROVEMENT COh1PANY: A request to permit a 14,400 square foot addition to an existing 3,100 square foot building (former depot) for office and office/industrial use in the industrial zone and permit compact parking spaces in excess of 40 percent on property located at the northwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Atchison Street (184-186 North Atchison Street). NOTE: Negative Declaration 874 has been prepared in lieu of an Environmental Impact Report. (This item is continued from the meeting of November 7, 1983. t~1r. h1urphy explained to the Commission that this item was continued to basically answer two questions which came up at the last hearing, that is (1) how the property was zoned and (2) to clarify Condition #3 of the Tentative Parcel Map. He then addressed the zone qu estion, stating that the staff has researched the zoning on the property and found that the original zoning maps of 1946 show this parcel to be zoned C-2 and M-1, which is identical to the zoning across the street on Atchison to the east. Therefore, the Commission could safely assume that the property is zoned for commercial/industrial use at the present time. He then explained that Condition #3 has been expanded into three parts in order to further clarify it. Chairman Hart referred to the zoning map of 1946, asking for an interpreta- tion of where the boundary would be for the C-2 zone. Mr. Murphy explained this in further detail. Planning Commission Minutes November 21, 1983 Page Three ~ Mr. Johnson then expanded upon Condition #3, first reading the original condition and pointing out that this is a standard condition required for all new development. He then read the second part regarding the Chapman Avenue railroad crossing, stating that this would be the north side of that since the railroad owns the property on both sides and there would only be a need for improvement on the north side since the property on the south is not owned by them. He then read the third section regarding the removal of all poles and create underground utilities on Atchison Street and Chapman Avenue. He explained that they are talking about the distribution poles which are along Atchison Street on the west side. The ones on Chapman Avenue will be removed as a part of a previously approved underground district. He thought there should be clarifying language to the effect that this would be carried out regardless of whether this project goes forward or not. He then explained that the last portion of the condition states that those poles shall be removed within the boundaries, as well as removing those parallel to the railroad tracks crossing Chapman. He pointed out that it is intended to underground the communications lines that are over by the railroad right-of-way. He further explained that the only undergrounding that is being requested is that across Chapman Avenue from the north side to the south side, which will coincide with the previously approved Underground District #8. Mr. Murphy then explained that the plan on the board below that prepared by the applicant was prepared by Jeff Purcell and shows an attempt by some members of the historical society to retain the park and still have parking immediately adjacent to Atchison Street. He then briefly presented this plan to the Commission, explaining that this plan shows parking adjacent to Atchison and also shows a new building to the right of the depot. The intent is to retain as many of the trees as possible, along with the park's atmosphere. There is a provision of only one row of parking immediately adjacent to Atchison, which would require both entering the parking spaces and backing out into the public street, which is not a desirable element. Mr. Murphy stated that if there is a desire to retain the park, then the Staff and applicant should be directed to look into alternatives that might retain more of the grass and the park area. The staff feels that there is a better alternative than the one presented by the opponents to the proposed devel opment. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Dan Heinfeld, representing the applicant, stated that they had nothing to add to what had already been said and that they could live with the conditions as stated this evening. Paul Clark, Orange, addressed the Commission, presenting a copy of the plan which had just been presented by Mr. Murphy, to be placed in the official record as Exhibit A. He explained that what they are attempting to show is that there are alternatives to the proposal which has been presented by the applicant. He pointed out that while there are much more beautiful areas in the city, this park has added to the west end of Orange for many generations. Planning Commission P~linutes November 21, 1983 Page Four ,~ He stated that this proposed alterna tive plan was put together by Mr. Crusell and himself, Mr. Crusell being the former Chairman of the Historic Advisory Committee, which put together the old house survey for the city. Mr. Clark explained that they are willing to compromise if the developers are willing to compromise. He also spoke to the zoning question, asking what the official zoning map is for the city - the antiquated one of 1946 or the zoning map which is handed to the public at the counter. Chairman Hart explained that the information from the old map apparently had not been transferred to the new map. However, the area is actually designated as was explained by Mr. P-lurphy. Dan Heinfeld, 44 Plaza Square, Orange, representing the architectural firm planning this project, addressed the opponent's plan, stating that there are a couple of obvious problems with it. He explained that they had gone to great lengths to devise a parking lot which would save the majority of the trees. He then pointed out the problems with the parking which had been proposed in-the opponent's plan, He said that he appreciated the opponents' wishes to try and retain the park, However, the real intent of the park is as a softening of the edge of Chapman Avenue .and he felt that their proposal maintains that soft edge. Philip Brigandi, 2630 Hamilton, Orange, addressed the Commission, stating that he has seen Mr. Crusell°s plan and feels it is another in a long list of compromises. He pointed out that they are asked to give up a portion of the depot, which has been proposed as a national historic landmark. He also pointed out the differences between the new buildings being proposed as compared to the depot's architecture. He felt that there is an uncompromising attitude and lack of sensitivity on the part of the developers, both as to the historic value of the park and what the citizens of Orange might like to see there. He felt that giving up the park is a high price to pay to develop that area. Jeffrey Gwynne, Santa Fe Improvement Co., 5200 E. Sheila, Los Angeles, addressed the Commission, reiterating that they had two reasons to develop this property: 1. To move their offices to this area, and 2. To develop a viable and economically feasible plan for the Santa Fe Improvement Company. He felt that they have compromised from their original plan. The original plan would not have kept all of the historical trees. But they have now provided a plan whereby all but one of the trees will be preserved and that one is diseased and must be taken down because of liability problems. Also, according to their experts, they are providing enough soil area around the trees so that they might continue to grow and thrive. They are also pro- viding a setback in front of the development and will provide two park benches in that area, which will help create a parklike atmosphere, more pleasing than what is there now. Planning Commission Minutes November 21, 1983 Page Five Mr. Gwynne said that they will not locate their offices or recommend that spec space be built in that area if the park stays. At this time it attracts a poor element of people and they will not allow their staff to walk past that park. The area is at best marginal and they will do nothing but improve the area. They cannot believe that there is opposition to this. There being no one else to speak for or against this application, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Commissioner Master explained that even though he was not in attendance at the last meeting, he has read the minutes and studied the property in great detail, therefore feeling qualified to vote on this application. Commissioner Greek asked Mr. Johnson if he had approved the entrances to the parking lot, as shown on the applicant's proposal. Mr. Johnson responded that he would have to defer to Mr. Murphy on this question because they have only seen this once a t the staff meeting and at that time it did not show the 30 foot buffer. Mr. Murphy said it was his understanding that the traffic engineer has reviewed the revised plan and has found it to be acceptable regarding the distance for that location. Moved by Commissioner Greek, seconded by Commissioner Master, to accept the findings of the Environrnental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 874. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master Commissioners none Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED AYES: NOES: ABSENT IN RE: Moved by Commissioner Greek, seconded by Commissioner Master, to approve Conditional Use Permit 1318 and Tentative Parcel Pap 83-768, subject to the conditions as indicated in the Staff Report, with the revisions made to Condition #3 of the Tentative Parcel Map. Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master Commissioners none Commissioner Vasquez NEW HEARINGS: MOTION CARRIED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1320 - FIRST SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH: A request to expand a church in the RM-7 zone and to construct a two-story building within 70 feet of an R-1 zone on the west side of Shattuck Place, south of Collins Avenue. NOTE: Negative Declaration 875 has been prepared for this project. Planning Commission Minutes November 21, 1983 Page Six Jack McGee presented this application to the Commission, stating tha t this parcel contains 1.48 acres of land on the west side of Shattuck Place, south of Collins Avenue. The parcel has approximately 500 feet of frontage on Shattuck Place and the site is currently occupied by two church buildings, two temporary office structu4es and two parking areas. Mr. McGee explained that the applicant is requesting to add to the existing church facility in the RM-7 zone, and to develop a two-story building within 70 feet of an R-1 zone and use. The applicant proposes to construct an 11,543 square foot building. The first floor will contain a 3,848 square foot gymnasium and 3,848 square feet of classroom space. The second floor will also contain 3,848 square feet of classroom space. The building is proposed to be located where the temporary structures and southerly parking area are at present. The temporary buildings will be removed from the site and a new parking area will be developed south of the proposed building. Mr. McGee pointed out that the proposed two-story building is to be 35 feet from the single family residential properties to the west and the zoning ordinance places a maximum height of one story or 20 feet within 70 feet of an R-1 zoned property. There will be no windows on the west side of the building. However, an exterior doorway, landing and stairway are located on the west elevation. P~1r. McGee explained that most other structures in the general area are one- story in height. He also explained that the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation for the area. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 875. Staff also recommends that Conditional Use Permit 1320 be approved, as it is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and compatible with surrounding land use and zoning. Conditional Use Permit is recommended to be approved, subject to 12 conditions listed in the Staff Report. Commissioner Greek referred to page 3 of the Staff Report, where the applicant's statement refers to an "outdoor volleyball gymnasium ..." asking for clarification on this. Mr. McGee thought that this might be a typographical error,. since the proposal calls for a completely roofed building. Commissioner Mason asked for more clarification on a stairway which was mentioned in the report, stating that she saw no recommendations in this regard. i~ Mr. McGee explained that this is only one of two ways out of the building and is considered a secondary exit - not the primary exit, It would not be used most of the time, probably only in an emergency. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing, Planning Commission Minutes November 21, 1983 Page Seven ~ Bob Christoff, the designer of this project, addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He clarified that the gymnasium is completely indoor, not outdoor. The stairway is a secondary exit and the primary exit is fully enclosed and within the building. He then explained further the design of the building, pointing out how the people would use the primary exit between this building and the church itself. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mrs. Coat, 760 N. Shattuck, Orange, addressed the Commission, stating that she lives to the south of the property. She asked where the proposed parking for the new building will be located and wondered if there will be any windows or doors on the south side of the property. She also wondered if a concrete wall would be erected between this property and the adjoining residential property. Mr. Christoff explained that the gymnasium will have no windows at all. There will be two pairs of doors on the south side and on the east side off of Shattuck. All parking will be on the south side between the gymnasium and the adjoining property. He further explained that a concrete wall will be constructed between their property and the adjoining neighbors, the wall being six feet high and properly landscaped. He pointed out that all of the lighting will be directed toward the gymnasium. They have directional lighting which shines away from the adjoining properties. There being no one else to speak for or against this proposal, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Greek, to accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 875. Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master Commissioners none Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED AYES: NOES: ABSENT Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Mason, to approve Conditional Use Permit 1320, for the reasons as stated by Staff and subject to the conditions as listed in the Staff Report. Commissioners Hart, Greek, Mason, Master Commissioners none Commissioner Vasquez MOTION CARRIED IN RE: ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m., to be reconvened to a regular meeting on Monday, December 6, 1983, at 7:30 p.m., at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California, and thence to a special meeting on Monday, December 12, 1983, at 7:30 p.m., at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California.