Loading...
_05212018-343Planning Commission May 21, 2018 1 Final Minutes Planning Commission May 21, 2018 City of Orange Monday 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners, Glasgow, Gladson, Willits. Correa and Simpson STAFF PRESENT: Gary Sheatz, Senior Assistant City Attorney Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director Robert Garcia, Senior Planner Monique Schwartz, Associate Planner Simonne Fannin, Recording Secretary REGULAR SESSION 1.1 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Glasgow called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1.2 FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Simpson led the flag salute. 1.3 ROLL CALL: All Commissioners present. 1.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None 1.5 CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN ITEMS: None 1.6 PLANNING MANAGER REPORTS: None 2. CONSENT CALENDAR: 2.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF MAY 7, 2018. Motion was made to approve the minutes as written: MOTION: Commissioner Willits SECOND: Commissioner Correa AYES: Commissioners Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson, Correa and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED. Planning Commission May 21, 2018 2 3. NEW HEARING: 3.1 APPEAL NO. 0552-18 OF DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4836-15 AND FINAL DETERMINATION ON MINOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 0842-15 & ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0249-17 - ORANGE ART OF DENTISTRY An appeal of the Design Review Committee denial of Design Review No. 4836-15 for the demolition of an existing 2,000 square foot office building and related site improvements to construct a new 2,565 square foot dental office building including related site improvements. The application also requires a final determination on Minor Site Plan Review No. 0842-15 and Administrative Adjustment No. 0249-17. LOCATION: 2006 W. Chapman Avenue NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. The project consists of construction of a new 2,565 square foot dental office building, and is eligible for this exemption due to its small size. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Affirm, reverse or modify, in whole or in part Design Review Committee denial of the project. The Planning Commission shall make a final determination on the requested Minor Site Plan Review and Administrative Adjustment accordingly. Commissioner Simpson disclosed that he had met with the applicant to discuss the project. Robert Garcia, Senior Planner provided an explanation of the appeal consistent with the staff report. Commissioner Gladson asked Mr. Garcia to walk through the Zoning Administrator's actions on the administrative adjustment. She asked if the Code has any loading dock provisions for commercial office uses that don't operate like a retail store. Mr. Garcia explained that through the Minor Site Plan Review process approval can be granted to allow parking spaces to double as a loading area during off hours. Commissioner Correa asked how many times the applicant met with the Design Review Committee and Mr. Garcia responded three times. Commissioner Correa asked Mr. Garcia to address the applicant’s assertion that the DRC was being contradictory. Mr. Garcia stated the staff and the applicant worked extensively to resolve the issues and concerns that were expressed by the DRC. As the project was evolving, it may have led to other Planning Commission May 21, 2018 3 design issues that were created and seemed contradictory to the appellant. Commissioner Simpson disclosed he met with the applicant. He asked staff if there were any concerns from the community. Mr. Garcia indicated that there were not, however there are no notification requirements for DRC meetings. Commissioner Gladson asked staff to clarify the new language for Condition of Approval #3. Mr. Garcia stated it was staff's hope that the additional comments from the DRC, the Planning Commission's review, and the refinement of the plans would enable approval of the project. Chair Glasgow asked if the DRC has seen the revised drawings that have been submitted in the Planning Commission packet and Mr. Garcia stated they had not seen them. Chair Glasgow invited the applicant to approach for comments. James Lee, architect for the project, explained that they had been going through the plans with the DRC for the past two years. He provided a few examples of changes they were asked to make by the DRC, only to have them deemed unacceptable. They had worked very hard with the Planning Department and made corrections according to the Code and standards. Commissioner Willits asked Mr. Lee to comment on the DRC's comment about the building being disproportionate, illogical and lacking in character or style as presented in the DRC minutes, and how it doesn't meet the community standards. Mr. Lee stated they changed their original design based on the DRC's recommendations, but the DRC continued to find it disproportionate. His staff disagrees. The Commission had several questions on the submitted plans; Mr. Garcia stated these plans were conceptual drawings and the refined construction drawings will be given to the Building Department. Chair Glasgow opened the public hearing. Dr. Patrick Lee, owner of the building provided a history of his purchase and architectural changes that have been made on the plans and some of the challenges he has had with this vacant building. He asked the Planning Commission for approval of the project. Commissioner Gladson asked him if he would be willing to reduce the size of his building in order to avoid the administrative adjustment and loading area concerns. Dr. Lee stated they already reduce the size of the building from 3,000 sq. ft. to 2,500 sq. ft. Chair Glasgow opened the public hearing. Tyler Diep approached and stated he is a patient of Dr. Lee and spoke in support of the project. Planning Commission May 21, 2018 4 No other speakers approached; therefore Chair Glasgow closed the public hearing. Commissioner Correa commented that even though the DRC has minor concerns, the applicant has vigorously worked with the City to make changes, and he was in support of the project. Commissioner Simpson echoed Commissioner Correa's comments and supported the project. Commissioner Willits stated he would feel more comfortable if the DRC could review the plans one more time; however he agreed with his fellow Commissioners. Commissioner Gladson stated she did not agree with her fellow Commissioners and was not comfortable with making the factual finding that is required for the internal consistency of the design from an architectural standpoint. A well-executed plan set is missing and that is probably what DRC was trying to obtain. She could not support the appeal. Chair Glasgow stated that area has a hodgepodge of buildings, there is no set design and feels the project is consistent with all the designs in the area and will it bring everything together. The drawings were only conceptual and would be taken care of with submittal of their construction drawings; the Planning Department, inspectors and plan checkers will ensure a good project. A motion was to approve resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Orange approving Design Review Number 4836 – 15, and minor Site Plan Review No. 0842 – 15 and Administrative Adjustment No. 0249 – 17 allowing for the demolition of an existing 2,000 ft.² office building and related site improvements to construct a new 2,565 ft.² dental office building including related site improvements, located at 2006 West Chapman Avenue (CEQA exempt) including the revised wording on page 3 as read by Mr. Garcia. MOTION: Commissioner Correa SECOND: Commissioner Simpson AYES: Commissioners Glasgow, Simpson, Correa and Willits NOES: Gladson ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED. A RECESS WAS TAKEN: 8:09 - 8:17 3.2 Conditional Use Permit No. 3056-17, Major Site Plan Review No. 0921-17 and Design Review No.4929-17, ActivCare Assisted Living A proposal to construct a new 72 bed assisted memory care facility on an existing vacant lot in the Public Institutional (P-I) zoning district. LOCATION: 2629 E. Chapman Avenue Planning Commission May 21, 2018 5 NOTE: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines 15332 (Class 32 – In-fill Development Projects) because the project meets the following criteria: a. The project is consistent with the existing General Plan designation, General Plan policies and, applicable zoning designations and regulations in that the intended assisted living facility use is a listed permitted use consistent with the intent of the land use designation. b. The project is in the City on a site less than five acres and is substantially surrounded by urban uses. c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threaten species in that the site is void of any vegetation or landforms, and was previously developed with a building. d. The project has been evaluated for significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, and water quality and no significant effects have been identified. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 15-18 a Resolution of the Planning Commission approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3056-17, Major Site Plan Review No. 0921-17, and Design Review No. 4929-17 for the construction of a new 72 bed assisted memory care facility with 27 parking spaces at 2629 E. Chapman Avenue Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director provided an overview of the project consistent with the staff report. Commissioner Correa asked staff how employees and visitors will be guided on avoiding illegal U-turns into the property. Ms. Pehoushek responded that as staff is hired and individuals move into the facility, the y will be given proper direction. Commissioner Simpson asked staff if a different care use facility was to move into that location in the future, would it need a different state license. Gary Sheatz, Senior Assistant City Attorney stated the use has to be similar; a different type of facility would require a new conditional use permit. In response to Commissioner Gladson's request Jackie Scott, the City's Traffic Engineer Planning Commission May 21, 2018 6 explained the traffic circulation on Chapman Avenue. The Traffic Division will work with the Police Department to monitor the area to make sure appropriate enforcement is applied in regard to the illegal U-turn. They will work with the facility on ways to educate the visitors, deliveries and employees. Ms. Scott stated she conducted an accident history at Wheeler and there had only been one accident in the last five years. Chair Glasgow asked if the Traffic Division would consider removing the center divider in order to provide a left-hand turn onto Loretta. Ms. Scott stated the median provides channelization in a very intense area and they would have to look at it from a safety standpoint. Chair Glasgow invited the applicant to step forward for comment. Kevin Moriarty, representing ActivCare Living, approached and provided a brief history of the company and stated the following:  They will keep the large mature trees on the east property line.  They will do their best to educate staff, delivery personnel and visitors to avoid the illegal U-turn at Wheeler.  Their license only allows them to provide residential care facility for the elderly.  Many of their employees use public transportation, carpool or are dropped off at the facility. Family members do not frequently visit the residents. Commissioner Gladson asked Mr. Moriarty if they have provisions for additional parking if the demand increases during the holidays or special events. Mr. Moriarty stated they are conditioned to make parking arrangements for special occasions. Commissioner Willits stated he visited the site and found there is a fairly under-utilized parking lot behind the hospital that could perhaps be used. Mr. Moriarty stated he observed the same thing. Chair Glasgow opened the public comment portion of the meeting. Shelle Malm spoke in support of the project. Lauren Cisneros, 190 N. Wheeler Street, stated she lives east of the site and wrote a letter to the Commission regarding her concerns with the traffic. She asked the Traffic Commission to look at the traffic situation on Chapman and Wheeler and the U-turn concerns. She asked that the developer of the project help keep their children safe and suggested they put instructions in the employee handbook so that the employees have to abide by the rules. Planning Commission May 21, 2018 7 Susan Rhodes, 202 N. Wheeler street, stated that her property backs up to the wall. She expressed her concerns about removing the trees in order to avoid any structural impacts to the wall and to keep a buffer from the afternoon sun, wind, and freeway noise. Don Finnegan, N. Wheeler Street resident, stated there have been two near accidents due to the U-turn. Loretta Street is hidden and difficult to see; maybe they could circulate the traffic so that Loretta is used as an exit only and use the hospital as the entrance. John Moore was called to approach but stated his concerns have all been addressed. Chair Glasgow closed the public hearing. Commissioner Correa stated his two major concerns were the illegal U-turn at Loretta and the trees. He felt the applicant had adequately addressed both of the issues, did not anticipate any traffic issues and supports the project. Commissioner Gladson supported the project because it was a good use for this location and feels there are ways to address the traffic and landscaping. Commissioners Simpson and Willits echoed their fellow Commissioner's comments and supported the project. They commended the neighbors for assisting with their comments. Chair Glasgow also supported the project and thanked the residents and asked the applicant to contact the residents and keep them informed and involved. He also recommended that the neighbors ask the Police Department to monitor the illegal U-turns. A motion was to Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 15-18 entitled the Resolution of the Planning Commission approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3056-17, Major Site Plan Review No. 0921-17, and Design Review No. 4929-17 for the construction of a new 72 bed assisted memory care facility with 27 parking spaces at 2629 E. Chapman Avenue and find that the Project is categorically exempt from CEQA. The two conditions provided by Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director will also be part of the resolution. MOTION: Commissioner Gladson SECOND: Commissioner Correa AYES: Commissioners Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson, Correa and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED. A RECESS WAS TAKEN: 9:04 - 9:12 Planning Commission May 21, 2018 8 3.3 Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1855-17, Tentative Tract Map No. 0045-17, Major Site Plan Review No. 0906-17, Design Review No. 4914-17, and Administrative Adjustment No. 0253-17, for a new 727 unit development (653 apartments and 74 townhomes) at 702-1078 West Town and Country Road. A proposal to redevelop an existing office complex with a 727-unit apartment and townhome development (653 apartments and 74 townhomes). The property will be subdivided into three parcels with reciprocal easements linking them for purposes of shared access and open space: Parcel 1 (Building A) and Parcel 2 (Building B) would each include apartment units configured around multi-level parking structures with the following amenities: fitness centers, club rooms, pool and lounge courtyards, and amenity decks located on the top floor of each parking structure. Parcel 3 (Townhomes) will include 74 townhomes with attached two-car garages and surface level parking. Townhome amenities will include a pool and lounge courtyard and passive open courtyards. The applicant is also requesting an Administrative Adjustment for a 132-space reduction in the required parking. LOCATION: 702-1078 West Town and Country Road NOTE: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1855-17 was prepared to evaluate the physical environmental impacts of the project, in conformance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 and in conformance with the Local CEQA Guidelines. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1855-17 finds that the project will have less than significant impacts to the environment, with the implementation of standard conditions and mitigation measures. The 20-day public review period began on March 21, 2018 and ended on April 10, 2018. On March 21, 2018, the City sent a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration to a total of 556 property owners and tenants within a 300 foot radius of the project site, adjacent cities, and other potentially affected public agencies and utility service providers initiating the public review period for the environmental document as described above. This notification was also published in the Orange City News on March 21, 2018, was on file with the Orange County Clerk Recorder, and was posted in four locations at the site. Copies of the document were available for public review at the Orange Public Library & Local History Center, the Taft Branch Library, at City Hall, and on the City’s website. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The following Planning Commission actions are recommended: 1) Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 11-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ORANGE RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 1855-17 AND ASSOCIATED MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 0045-17, Planning Commission May 21, 2018 9 MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 0906-17, AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4914-17, FOR A NEW 727 UNIT (653 APARTMENTS AND 74 TOWNHOMES) MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 702-1078 WEST TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD AND 2) Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ORANGE RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0253-17 TO ALLOW FOR A REDUCTION OF 132 PARKING SPACES IN CONJUNCTION WITH MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 1855-17, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 0045-17, MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 0906-17, AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4914-17 FOR A NEW 727 UNIT (653 APARTMENTS AND 74 TOWNHOMES) MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 702-1078 WEST TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD OR 3) Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ORANGE RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0253-17 TO ALLOW FOR A REDUCTION OF 132 PARKING SPACES IN CONJUNCTION WITH MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 1855-17, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 0045-17, MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 0906-17, AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4914-17 FOR A NEW 727 UNIT (653 APARTMENTS AND 74 TOWNHOMES) MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 702-1078 WEST TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD Commissioners Simpson, Glasgow, Willits and Correa all disclosed that they met with the applicant. Commissioner Gladson disclosed that she also met with the applicant and that as a candidate for the City Council, she has a relationship with one member of the team who made a donation to her campaign under the legal limit. She will not render any decision rendered based on the meeting or the contribution. Commissioner Correa asked the City Attorney if Commissioner Gladson needs to recuse herself from this item. Gary Sheatz, Senior Assistant City Attorney, responded that the responsibility rested with Commission Gladson regarding her ability to vote on this item without any influence. Planning Commission May 21, 2018 10 Monique Schwartz, Associate Planner, provided an overview of the item consistent with the staff report. She noted that staff received a letter from the applicant that morning requesting changes to approximately 20 conditions of approval for the project. Staff discussed the proposed changes with respective City departments and had included suggested red lined revisions in the conditions in the Commission’s Hot File. In addition, wherever application number TTM 0047 – 17 is referenced in the staff report, resolutions or her presentation, it was important to note that the applicant had filed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 18113 for condominium purposes for the project. Commissioner Gladson asked if the staff had any recommendations on potential options or backup options if additional parking is needed in the future because the project does not comply with the parking standards. Ms. Schwartz, Associate Planner responded that since the preliminary review of the project, the revised parking standards had been adopted and the applicant had an opportunity to use tandem parking or parking lifts. Off-site shared parking agreements were also another option, although they may not be practical for the applicant. There is no on-street parking on Town and Country Road and all the adjacent uses are commercial. Commissioner Willits asked if the applicant submitted their project under the old parking regulations and if it was common practice to look at the three separate parcels as one whole project. Ms. Schwartz stated that staff was honoring the prior Code regulations based on the date the application was submitted. She had reviewed the project as a whole; however the townhome portion was completely parked per the Code standards; parcels A and B were both deficiently parked. She was looking the townhomes as a separate part of the project. Commissioner Willits asked if any of the units were contributing to their goals for the workforce housing. Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director, stated there is a provision in the Code that requires staff to discuss potential affordable units with the applicant; the applicants were also asked to prepare a workforce housing study in order to demonstrate the project can serve area employees. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation breaks down the number of housing units that the City is expected to create in different income categories and the proposed units do not hit the levels for the low- and very low-income population. Chair Glasgow invited the applicant to approach. Ed McCoy with Fairfield Residential approached and provided an overview of Fairfield Residential. Tobin Symmank with Architects Orange provided a visual presentation consisting of vehicular circulation. Planning Commission May 21, 2018 11 Chris Hernandez with Dahlin Architecture and Planning, was responsible for the townhome portion of the site. He provided a visual presentation of the landscaping, elevations, architectural style and features, as well as color and material pallets. Mr. McCoy returned to the podium. He stated that Fairfield’s intent was to plan the entire 12 acre parcel, but individualize each parcel to standalone. They were asking for a parking adjustment for parcels 1 and 2 because there is a possibility that these properties could be owned by different owners in the future. He explained that the apartment industry determines parking assessments on a per bedroom basis. This property is parked at 1.25 spaces per bedroom which is a 1/4 space above the normal on a project of similar nature in other cities. This site has rideshare accommodations, bicycle storage throughout the development and tele-commuting facilities which reduce the dependency on motor vehicles. He stated the shared parking condition imposed on them is unattainable and infeasible. Shared parking cannot occur between two separate facilities because that would give rights to one property to go on another property and use it. This situation makes it un- financeable as Fairfield will not be to find a bank or lender that will allow people from one property to go over and park on another. Mr. McCoy requested that Condition #2 in the Resolution of Approval 12-18 be modified to state something to the effect that if a parking issue arises, the owners can meet with City staff and attorneys to discuss options such as lifts, tandem parking or restriping for compacts to provide additional parking. Larry Scott with Fairfield explained the key to solving parking is management of the project so that there is controlled access with assigned resident spaces. The concept of shared parking with two separate garages that serve two legally separately owned parcels is flawed and can't work. It would create a mismanagement between the two parking structures that could end up being standalone communities in the future. Ms. Schwartz clarified that the applicant’s references to each of the parcels being stand- alone is something new, and up to this point in the project review process they were, indeed, not. She explained that the project as a whole only works when taken as a whole in terms of density and parking. When the project components are taken individually, parcels 1 and 2 do not stand alone. Parcel 3, which is the townhome product, does stand alone and meets the parking standards. Parcels 1 and 2 for Buildings A and B are both deficient in parking and exceed the maximum density permitted in the zoning district. When the three parcels are averaged together, the project works as a whole, but the individual parcels do not stand alone except for parcel 3. With the applicant requesting approval of a reduction of 132 spaces, staff had to ensure that parcels A and B, which are both deficient in parking, have adequate parking together. For a binding mechanism, staff included a condition of approval requiring shared access for parking of guest spaces and resident spaces as a way to ensure that both buildings would be adequately parked. Planning Commission May 21, 2018 12 Chair Glasgow asked for confirmation that the applicant had to borrow density from parcel 3 to build parcels 1 and 2. Ms. Schwartz stated that was correct and there was also a condition of approval requiring a recorded covenant for parcel B limiting the development of units on parcel 3 to make the overall density comply with the General Plan and for staff to be able to make the General Plan conformance finding. She reiterated that there was a deficiency of 59 parking spaces on parcel A and 73 spaces on parcel B for a total of 132 combined. Commissioner Gladson asked the architect to discuss the project’s open space plan and pedestrian linkages between all of the pieces and the Santiago Creek Trail. Dane Delle with the applicant’s consultant MJS provided an explanation of the site's connectivity and path of travel. Commissioner Gladson stated she would like to see a pedestrian gate through a walkway via the townhome parcel to access the nearby Santiago Creek Trail and thought this was a missed opportunity given its proximity to the project site. She expressed concern that project residents would be inclined to jaywalk at mid-block locations to access the trail. She also asked if the applicant considered providing more one-bedroom units in the unit mix to reduce the amount of required parking. Mr. Delle stated it would become a property management issue if they did add an access gate. He also stated that a change in the unit mix could become a leasing issue. He explained the way in which parking would be assigned, and that Fairfield had actually engaged a third-party parking company that manages many other apartment communities. The Commissioners, applicant and staff discussed the various options such as lifts, valet parking, tandem and restriping. William Crouch, Community Development Director reminded the Commission that adding lifts on the top floor could be a problem due to the current design for single parking. The top-level would need to have the appropriate load bearing design for the extra weight of tandem or stacked vehicles. Commissioner Correa requested information about the red cladding material on the apartment façade. He inquired about the durability and fade resistance of the material. Mr. Symmank stated the material has a 15 year manufacturer's warranty. Commissioner Correa also stated he would like the applicant to entertain one to two apartments for low income. Chair Glasgow opened the public hearing. Dirk DeWolfe, CEO of Town and Country Manor, a senior living and care facility, stated he was very concerned about the proposed parking deficiency and would be the most Planning Commission May 21, 2018 13 affected by this project. He had already been impacted by the illegal parking from other residential projects in the area. As a care provider, they needed to have complete access to their property There were no other speakers therefore Chair Glasgow close the public hearing. Commissioner Correa stated he visited two similar facilities with the applicant to evaluate parking. One facility was able to adequately accommodate the parking needs; however the second facility seemed to have poor management of parking rather than a lack of it. Commissioner Gladson stated this was a good project, however the Commission is the City Council's expert on land use, planning and parking and the Council would want the Commission’s recommendation. She felt that the Commission was fundamentally wrestling with arriving at a balanced approach to parking and this project needed a tool to address a "just in case" situation should parking prove to be inadquate. She proposed that staff draft a condition that asks the applicant to come up with a parking management plan with a continual review process every year to monitor the situation. Commissioner Simpson also agreed it was a good project and the applicant's very good national experience gave him confidence. He agreed with Commissioner Gladson, and was extremely concerned about Town and Country Manor and wanted the applicant to maintain open communication with them. Commissioner Willits agreed with his co-Commissioners that a mechanism was needed to evaluate how well they were doing with the project’s parking. He was also concerned about Town and Country Manor and wanted to see dialogue between the two parties. Commissioner Correa agreed with his fellow Commissioners and felt that the applicant understood the parking concerns. Chair Glasgow liked the project, but was concerned with the parking and would like to see a parking management plan as part of the resolution. He would like the applicant to look at the loads on the top deck of the parking structure now in order to be prepared in the event that they needed to install parking lifts. He also reiterated that they keep the dialogue open with Town and Country Manor. Gary Sheatz, Senior Assistant City Attorney encouraged the Commission to be specific with what they wanted to see in the parking management plan so that it was clear for the applicant. The Commission provided guidance and recommendations to the applicant and staff for what their expectations were including accommodations for assigned parking, tandem parking and parking lifts. Mr. McCoy stated he thought it was premature to draft a management plan at this time because they don't know what the problems may be the future; he would rather see a Planning Commission May 21, 2018 14 condition of approval that states the applicant shall return with a parking management plan within 30 days if the parking is inadequate. Another option would be to allow Fairfield to come back to the City with a parking management plan prior to issuance of the first building permit. This way they could move forward with the project construction documents. A motion was made to continue the item to the next appropriate date in order to allow the applicant and City staff to review Commission's discussion and concerns and try to identify solutions and return to the Planning Commission with a preliminary parking management plan. MOTION: Commissioner Gladson SECOND: Commissioner Correa AYES: Commissioners Gladson NOES: Commissioners Glasgow, Simpson, Correa and Willits ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None A motion was made to adopt A Resolution of The Planning Commission of The City of Orange Recommending City Council Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1855-17 and Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Approval Of Tentative Tract Map 0045-17, Major Site Plan Review No. 0906- 17, and Design Review No. 4914-17, for a new 727 Unit (653 apartments and 74 townhomes) Multi-Family Residential Development at 702-1078 West Town and Country Road, to include a pedestrian gate between the Townhomes and Building B and to accept the revisions made by staff for conditions of approval. MOTION: Commissioner Glasgow SECOND: Commissioner Willits AYES: Commissioners Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson, Correa and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED. A motion was to adopt resolution of The Planning Commission of the City of Orange recommending City Council approval of Administrative Adjustment No. 0253-17 to allow for a reduction of 132 parking spaces in conjunction with Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1855-17, Tentative Tract Map No. 0045-17, Major Site Plan Review No. 0906-17, and Design Review No. 4914-17 for a new 727 unit (653 apartments and 74 townhomes) multi-family residential development at 702-1078 West Town and Country Road with the adding of a condition that the upper floors will be recalculated for higher votes to accept a lift parking if necessary and that the owners come back with a parking management plan prior to the issuance of building permits and the removal of shared parking between the two buildings in the parking management plan shall return to the Planning Commission for review Planning Commission May 21, 2018 15 MOTION: Commissioner Glasgow SECOND: Commissioner Correa AYES: Commissioners Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson, Correa and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED. 4. ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made to adjourn at 11:06 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled on Wednesday, June 4, 2018, at 7:00 p.m. MOTION: Commissioner Glasgow SECOND: Commissioner Willits AYES: Commissioners Simpson, Correa, Gladson, Glasgow and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 11:08 p.m.