Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/19/1982 - Minutes PCPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Orange Orange, California Apri 1 19 , 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, Ilart, Coontz, Vasquez ABSENT: Commissioner Master STAFF Jere P. Murphy, Administrator of Current Planning and Commission PRESENT: Secretary; Norvin Lanz, Associate Planner; Gene Minshew, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, Ci t,}~ .Engineer; and Doris Ofsthun, Recording Secretary. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF April 5, 1982 Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner P~ickelson to approve the minutes of April 5, 1982, as transmitted. AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioner Master ABSTAIN: Commissioners Coontz, Vasquez MOTION FAILED Commissioners Coontz and Vasquez abstained from voting for the approval of the minutes for April 5, 1982, since they had been absent for that meeting. Since there was no way to have a majority vote on this item, it was decided that approval of these minutes be held over to the next meeting of the Planning Commission. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1201, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 82-758 - CENTURY AMERICAN CORPORATION: A request to allow construction of a three building, four unit industrial condominium in the M-1 (Light Manufacturing) district on land located on the east side of Batavia Street, approximately 292± feet south of the centerline of Fletcher Avenue .(2425 North Batavia Street). (NOTE: Negative Declaration 761 has been prepared in lieu of an Environmental Impact Report.) It was the consensus of the Commissioners to dispense with the presentation. Chairman Mickelson opened the public hearing. Barry Cottle, representing the applicant, Century American Corporation, addressed the Commission, stating that he had nothing to add to the Staff Report and making himself available for questions from the Commissi oners . Commissioner Coontz asked whether this project is where a truck stop used to be and Mr. Cottle replied that it was. Commissioner Hart asked if they were familiar with the rule that trucks which serve the faci 1 i ty not exceed 25 feet and i f this woul d be a problem. Mr. Cottle responded that he was familiar with this condition and it woul d not be a problem. There being no one else to speak for or against this application, the Chairman closed the public hearing, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Planning Commission Minutes April 19, 1982 Page Two Chairman Nickelson expressed a concern over the condition which had just been brought up, that trucks/vehicles in excess of 25 ft. in length be prohibited from using the loading bays, stating that he wondered if this really mattered, looking at the site plan, if occasionally a truck came into that area which was over 25 ft. long. Mr. Murphy responded that the Staff's only concern was that larger vehicles using that area could displace the parking in that area and force it out onto the public street. He pointed out that this rule will be difficult to administer. However, Staff thought that the effort to try and restri ct the size of the vehi cl es using those loading areas would be an attempt to not i ncure any addi ti onal parking problems. Moved by Commissioner Coontz, seconded by Commissioner Hart, to accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 761. AYES: Commissioners Nickelson, Hart, Coontz, Vasquez NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioner Master MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Coontz, to approve Conditional Use Permit 1201 and Tentative Parcel Map 82-758, subject to the 26 condi ti ons as set forth i n the Staff Report, with the first condition referri ng to the CC&Rs specifically, to be followed by the applicant, i n that Items a through din Condi tion #1 are to be incorporated in the CC&R's; and also subject to the condi tions listed i n the Engineer's Plan Check Sheet. AYES: Commissioners NOES: Commissioners ABSENT: Commissioner Nickelson, Hart, Coontz, Vasquez none Master MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Master presented himsel f at the meeti ng at this time. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1202, VARIANCE 1682 - HE LIVES FAITH CENTER: A request to permi t a church use i n an existi ng building i n the M-2 (Industrial) district and permit 1 ess than the required on-site parking on a parcel located on the north side of Alvarez Avenue, approximately 232.99± feet east of the centerline of Plain Street (1233 Alvarez Avenue) . (NOTE: Negative Declarati on 762 has been prepared in ]ieu of an Environmental Impact Report.) It was the consensus of the Commissioners to dispense with the presentation. Chairman Mi ckelson opened the public heari ng. Tom Barkley, 9342 Downi ng, Westmi nster , representi ng the applicant, addressed the Commission, stating that he had no additional comments over what was stated i rr the Staff Report. Commissioner Vasquez questioned P1r. Barkley regarding page 2 of the Staff Report, describing the proposed parking. He asked if they had gone anywhere beyond the written agreements pending on the spaces described in "c". Mr. Barkley explained that the written agreements pending were pending an insurance policy and at 5:00 p.m. today he had pi cked up a certi fi cate of insurance to show that they are worki ng with the State Farm Insurance Company. This shows that they will be covering all of these lots with a one million dollar liability. Commissioner Vasquez then asked if they are a currently established church and was told that they are currently established and are now meeting i n a Seventh Day Adventist church . Commissioner Vasquez asked how many people are attendi ng services, wonderi ngwhat their growth potential woul d be. Mr. Barkley responded that they presently have 150-160 people presently attendi ng each of their two services . P1 anni ng Commission Mi nutes April 19, 1982 Page Three ~-. Commissioner Coontz told that that it is looking for land to home. asked i f thi s wi 11 be a temporary use and was intended to be temporary and they will begin purchase and then to build a permanent church There being no one else to speak for or against this application, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Vasquez, to accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board to file Negative Declaration 762. AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Coontz, seconded by Commissioner Vasquez, to approve Conditional Use Permit 1202, Variance 1682. for the reasons stated by Staff and subject to both the special and standard condi tions as set forth i n the Staff Report. AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED AMENDMENT 3-82 -CITY OF ORANGE Proposed amendment to the present and revised zoning ordinance to extend the time of val i di ty from ei ghteen months to twenty-four months for approved Condi ti onal Use Permi is and Variances . Mr. Murphy expl ai ned that this i s basically to coi nci de with the State law wi th regard to the Subdivision Map Act as of January 1 , 1982, wherein all tentative tract maps are approved automati cal ly for two years. This change, therefore, is to conform with that State legislation. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission members to dispense with the presentation. Chairman ~1ickelson asked i f thi s was a retroacti ve provision to the Subdivision Map Act and Mr. Murphy explained that all those tentative tract maps approved between January 1st and today will be approved for two years . Commissioner Master asked i f i t i s the intent of the Staff to inform those who have applied that they have an extension of time. Mr. Murphy responded that there is a process whereby the Staff noti fies the applicants at the end of the normal time period to allow them to request extensions of time. That will automatically tell people when thei r time period is up. It was the consensus of the Commissioners that the Staff research the feasibility of noti fyi ng all applicants of this time extension and report back at the next regular Planning Commission meeting. 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 Hart, seconded by Commissioner Master, to approve Amendment 3-82. AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Minutes Apri 1 19 , 1982 Page Four IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1114, VARIANCE 1639 - A & C PROPERTIES: Request for finding that revised plans for a proposed medical office on the south side of La Veta Avenue, at Lemon, is acceptable under Conditional Use Permit 1114. Chairman Mickelson stated a conflict of interest on this item and asked Commissioner Hart to take over this portion of the meeting. Mr. Murphy presented this application to the Commission, pointing out that on May 4, 1981 , Condi ti onal Use Permit 1114 was approved by the Pl anni ng Commission for a profess Tonal office bui 1 di ng at 302 West La Veta. On October 19, 1981 , revised plans for a medi cal office building were approved by the Commission for the same site under the original Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Murphy then explained that plans for a second revised plan for the property i n questi on have been submitted and are before the Commission for revi ew at this time. The major changes i n the plan include an increase of 3,000 square feet in building size, creation of semi-subterranean parki ng and movi ng of the structure toward the south and the west. Setback between the building and south property line is proposed at 16' and 20' along the west boundary which is adjacent to multi-family residences. The present approved plan shows the building setbacks of 118' and 45' for south and west sides. The present building has been moved to the south edge of the property. Mr. Murphy pointed out that the height of the building is proposed at the same 32' as the original plans, even though semi-subterranean parking i s now proposed. Mr. Murphy noted that the circulation system has changed. Previously there was an access drive along the west edge of the property and there were reciprocals .attained with the church to the east. The present plan is to move the driveway opposite Lemon Street, which is an improvement to its location for access to the property. The re- ciprocals would take place at the north end of the property and the trash enclosure previously shown i n the southwest corner is relocated to the front of the property, which is also an improvement over the original plan. Mr. Murphy said that it is his understanding that the applicant is '~ s ti 11 negoti ati ng with the church to the east regarding the reci procal access and parking and Staff strongly urges the Commission to include in the approval reciprocal access and parking agreements for any revised plans, because of the isolated nature of this industrially zoned parcel , the church and residential uses surroundi ng the property on all sides. The Staff also has encouraged the applicant to work out a common. drive arrangement wi th the church, so that there woul d not be two driveways in close proximity to one another. Mr. Murphy pointed out that there are three alternative actions available to the Commission: 1. Require a new Conditional Use Permit for the revised plan because of the significance of changes from the original proposal. 2. Require a public hearing utilizing existing Conditional Use Permit as the vehicle . 3. Approve revised plans i n present or amended form wi th the provision of evidence by the applicant that the property owners have reviewed and accepted the revised plan. Planning Commission Mi nutes Apri 1 19, 1982 Page Five Commissioner Coontz asked for an outline of the buildings, as she found it rather difficult to see what was being proposed. The applicant then passed out a renders ng of the original plan and the plan now being proposed for comparison. Commissioner Hart asked if the increase in square footage and the fact that the building is moved closer to the residential area is a problem. Mr. Murphy explained that the Commission must basically review the plan, no matter what the changes are. However, he ex- pressed concern by the Staff of the second story being so close to the residential area. Vi ce-Chairman Hart opened the public heari ng. Jack Selman, 144 N. Orange, Orange, the architect for the applicant, addressed the Commission i n favor of this application. He explained to the Commission that the original plan called for a variance to the front setback, which they no longer need with the revised plan. He also pointed out that the trash enclosure has been moved in accordance with Staff's concerns. The building design is similar to the previous plan i n that i t is bui 1 t to 1 ook residential and be compatibl e wi th the surrounding area . Li ni ng the bui 1 di ng up wi th Tustin Avenue had not been discussed before but i t appears to improve the circulation and s ti 11 al 1 ows them to have their reci procal parking . He explained the reason for the additional 3,000 square feet, stating that they have the. same number of doctors who will own this buil di ng and they wil l have the same number of patients as stated previously. He then read a paragraph from a letter which had been submitted to the City this morning, stating that the larger building does not represent space for more doctors or increased patient flow, but is a result of a study done by space planning speci al fists to provide the most functional fl oor plan for the special type of medi cal care proposed for this faci 1 i ty. The extra square footage basically makes amore efficient facility. Mr. Selman explained further that they have sent a letter to the sur- rounds ng residents and have had only one response. They have had no objections to this new proposal. They are asking for approval of the revised plan under Conditional Use Permit 1114. He pointed out that funds are presently available to start the project and if they get approval, they will go ahead immediately. They feel that they have brought the same intensity of use to this revised plan. They are meeting the parking requirements,havethe same height on the building as before, etc., but they are bringing in an improved plan for the ~ building as far as they are concerned. Commissioner Coontz asked if the parking requirements are met and Mr. Murphy explained that they are, with the subterranean parking. He pointed out that the medi cal offs ce parks ng wi thin the Ci ty code is mi nimal and this is one reason why the Staff is concerned about the reci procal parks ng agreement wi th the church . Commissioner Coontz then asked if they use this Conditional Use Permit requiring anew public hearing, what would be the earliest date that could occur. Mr. Murphy replied that if the applicant can get the revised list of property owners for notification purposes, they could probably work for the May 17th meets ng. There being no one else to speak for or against this application, the Vice-Chairman closed the public heari ng. Commissioner Master felt that the change is probably for a better use, but he thought that it is a significant footprint change. Since the bui 1 di ng wi 11 be sitting on the 1 of differently, he thought that perhaps comments from surrounds ng residents would be from different residents than before. Planning Commission Minutes April 19, 1982 Page Six Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Vasquez, that a new Conditional Use Permit be required for the revised plan because of the significance of changes from the original proposal, with a public hearing on May 17, 1982. Mr. Selman commented that he thought that the second alternative would allow quicker timing in this situation. Mr. Murphy thought that as long as they get the list of property owners to the Staff within a week's time they can get to the May 17th date on either Alternative #1 or #2. He pointed out that Alternative #1 will require new fees. However, the applicant stated that this would be no problem. Commissioner Coontz asked the applicant if Alternative #1 would be acceptable for May 17th and he replied that they would like a May 3rd date. Mr. Murphy explained that this could not be done. He said that if the Commission makes an administrative decision, the timing could be quicker. However, if the Commission wants a public hearing in order to get input from the neighbors, the earliest date would be May 17th. AYES: Commissioners Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioners none ABSTAIN: Commissioner Mickelson MOTION CARRIED UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT N0. 8 - WEST CHAPMAN AVENUE - CITY OF ORANGE Public Works Department report on the proposed removal of utility poles along Chapman Avenue between Main Street and the Plaza. Gary Johnson presented this item to the Commission, stating that on April 13, 1982, the City Council acted on a request to hold a public hearing. to establish Underground Utility District No. 8. This hearing set for May 11, 1982, will consider the removal of all utility poles along Chapman Avenue between Main Street and the Plaza. The District is being coordinated with .the approved Federal Aid project to widen Chapman Avenue between Main Street and Clark Street, for which construction funds are expected in October of 1983. fhe under- ground utility work will precede the street construction by several months with actual removal of all poles during the summer of 1983. Southern California Edison estimates that the proposed districts will cost some $600,000; with the city's anticipated 1983 State PUC allocation, sufficient funds will be available. Commissioner Vasques asked, of all of the increases which the PUC has gotten or is going to get, if there is a basic formula as to how that is broken down in terms of this kind of funding. Mr. Johnson explained that the PUC, by directive, has required the Edison Company to set a certain amount of money aside for underground purposes, per service. In the past, this has always been related to total number of services, but they just recently changed the formula to relate to overhead services. He was recently told that the City of Orange gets approximately $200,000 per year set aside by the Edison Company. This has been increasing every year by approximately $10,000. Commissioner Coontz asked if this money was to be used up by a certain time period or be lost by the City. Mr. Johnson explained that there is no time limit on this money. The City can borrow ahead but once there is a sizable amount of money in this account they want the City to go ahead with the project. He went on to say that the next project they plan on will be in the heart of Old Towne. Planning Commission Minutes ' April 19, 1982 Page Seven Commissioner Hart remarked that the concept has been approved for South Glassell Street and wondered if it was the City's intention to go ahead right away. Mr. Johnson answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Hart wondered if we could incorporate the same street- scapes on West Chapman, the part fitting into the 8-block area. Mr. Johnson explained that the only portion that is in the 8-block area is from Olive to Lemon and it will incorporate that underground concept and as soon as the district is formed then the City can proceed to incorporate it into their design. He thought that the design would take place sometime late this year. Commissioner Hart hoped that the projects would coincide with one another so that all of the tearing up of streets would be done at the same time. Mr. Johnson pointed out that this project will have to occur similary to what is happening on East Chapman right now. By necessity, everything must be underground before they can go ahead with the widening of the street. He also pointed out that this will not include improvement of fronts of buildings. However, this could be done simultaneously with the Old Towne improvements. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that this is just information for them. There is no action needed on this. He pointed out that there will be a public hearing on May 11th before the City Council on this subject. It was also explained that some of the money for underground utilities comes from the business people along the street to be improved. Com- missioner Hart asked what heppens to the people who cannot pay for this. Mr. Johnson replied that this has not yet happened. He explained that as many properties as could be served from the rear would be served in that way. From that point, it would be determined who would have to go underground and who could be served aerially. He pointed out that this information is available to the public at this time. In- dividual conversion costs were running from $300-$2000. Commissioner Vasquez wondered if this underground conversion require- ment has been tested in the courts and Mr. Johnson replied that he thought it has. Mr. Minshew said that he could give a report to the Planning if they wished to have it. Commissioner Master asked for clarification of the statement regarding the 1982 State PUC allocation and the cost of $600,000 which had been mentioned. Mr. Johnson explained that the $600,000 would come from Edison Company underground funds set aside for the City of Orange. The city would be drawing on next year's allocation in order to make this whole thing work. Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Coontz, to receive and file this report. AYES: Commissioners Mickelson, Hart, Coontz, Master, Vasquez NOES: Commissioners none ABSENT: Commissioners none MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Coontz spoke with regard to the housing element subject to be discussed at the upcoming study session on April 26th, stating that she would like to see a meeting held in a place other than Conference Room 'C', with notes or minutes being taken, since public input is being encouraged. She asked that this session be recorded. Mr. Murphy explained that the meeting could be moved into the Council chambers where it could be recorded on tape, since there will be no Recording Secretary in attendance on that evening. Commissioner Vasquez for the reason for recording a work session and Commissioner Coontz explanied that there would be questions asked and answeres, together with concerns voiced by the public. It has been done before for projects which they felt were very important. Commissioner Vasquez' concern was that in a work session he would feel restrained if there were minutes to be taken. Commissioner Coontz explained that recording is helpful in situations like this to Planning Commission Minutes April 19, 1982 Page Ei gh t have notes to refer back to at a later date. There will be no public hearing in connection with this session. Mr. Murphy also explained that the Housing Committee wi 11 have a meeting on Apri 1 28th and will be making a statement to the City Council . The consensus was that the study session for April 26th be recorded. Commissioner Vasquez announced that Orange County has implemented its 911 system, effective today, April 19th. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. to be reconvened to a study session on Monday, April 26, 1982 at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California, and thence to a regular meeting on Monday, May 3, 1982 at 7:30 p.m. at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California. EXCERPT FROM THE MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORANGE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON APRIL 19, 1982. 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 Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Vasquez that this meeting adjourn at 8:45 p.m, on P1onday, Apri 1 19 , 1982 to re- convene at 7:30 p.m. Monday, April 26, 1982 at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California. I, Jere P. Murphy, Secretary to the Orange Planning Commission, Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of that portion of the minutes of a regular meeti ng of the Pl anni ng Commission held on Monday, April 19, 1982. Dated this 20th day of Apri 1 , 1982 at 2:00 p.m. Je e N. Murphy, (;i ty NI a nor and Se rotary to the Pl anni n Comrni ssi on of the Ci ty of Orange. 0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING ORDER SS . OF ADJOURNPIENT COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Jere P. Murphy, bei ng first duly sworn, deposes and says That I am the duly chosen, qualified and acti ng secretary of the Pl anni ng Commission of the City of Orange; that the regular ~, meeting of the P1 anni ng Commission of the City of Orange was hel d on April 19, 1982; said meeting was ordered and adjourned to the time and place specified in the order of adjournment attached hereto; that on April 20, 1982, at the hour of 2:00 p.m., I posted a copy of said order at a conspicuous place on or near the door of the place at which said meeting of Apri 1 19 , 1982 was held. 0