Loading...
2015 - September 21Planning Commission September 21, 2015 Minutes Planning Commission City of Orange September 21, 2015 Monday 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Correa, Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson, and Willits ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Leslie Roseberry, Planning Manager Gary Sheatz, Senior Assistant City Attorney Robert Garcia, Senior Planner Jennifer Le, Acting Principal Planner Sharon Penttila, Recording Secretary REGULAR SESSION 1.1 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Gladson 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led the flag salute. 1.3 ROLL CALL: All Commissioners were present. 1.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None 1.5 CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN ITEMS: None 1.6 PLANNING MANAGER REPORTS None Chair Gladson announced that she would be giving direction and insight on how the meeting would be run on the first item due to the number of speakers and that there would be a curfew on how long the meeting would last. She explained that the two items on the agenda would be going to City Council and the Planning Commission's decision could be appealed. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR: 2.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 Motion was made to approve the minutes as written: MOTION: Commissioner Willits SECOND: Commissioner Glasgow AYES: Commissioners Correa, Gladson, Glasgow, and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Simpson MOTION CARRIED. Planning Commission September 21, 2015 3. NEW HEARINGS: 3.1 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 0035 -14; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2981- 15; MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 0790 -14; DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE NO. 4764 -14; & ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 1839 -14 — NEW HOME COMPANY (MARYWOOD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) The applicant proposes to construct 40 new detached two -story single family residences at the former Marywood Pastoral Center — Diocese of Orange. LOCATION: 2811 E. VILLAREAL DRIVE NOTE: The City of Orange has determined that an EIR is required to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the project. The Draft EIR has been prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. The City of Orange will consider certification of the EIR prior to taking action on the requested approvals. The public review period began on June 19, 2015 and ended on August 3, 2015. Environmental effects that were evaluated in the Draft EIR include Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology & Soils, Greenhouse Gas, Hazards /Hazardous Materials, Hydrology /Water Quality, Land Use & Planning, Noise, Population & Housing, Public Services, Transportation Traffic, and Utilities & Service Systems. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 29 -15 recommending the City Council (a) certify the adequacy of Final Environmental Impact Report 1839 -14, (b) adopt findings of fact, (c) adopt a statement of overriding considerations, and (d) approve TTM 0035 -14, MJSP 0790 -14, CUP 2981 -15 and DRC 4764 -14 to allow for the construction of 40 new detached two -story single family residences on a 16 acre site at the former Marywood Pastoral Center. Commissioners Gladson, Correa, and Simpson disclosed they had met with the applicant for an informational meeting. Commissioner Glasgow indicated he had a brief phone conversation with the applicant. Discussion: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the staff report. The Commission questioned staff about the on -site crushing operation and the unavoidable impact with the demolition of Marywood and how to weigh that in terms of justification. Mr. Sheatz explained that the Commission could find justification for the 2 Planning Commission September 21, 2015 override which would outweigh the loss of that resource. Mr. Garcia stated that even if the Planning Commission could not find the justification to override the impact and denied the project, it would still move on to City Council. Ms. Roseberry further explained that the Commission would have to find the environmental document adequate first in order to make a recommendation of approval on the project components. The applicants who were present for the project were Doug Woodward, Peter Carlson, Patrick Pagaduan, Jennifer Mermilliod, and Robert Kahn. Mr. Woodward, Vice President with the New Home Company, thanked the City staff who he said was terrific to work with. He gave a history of the New Home Company and the Marywood property, and gave an overview of the proposed development. Mr. Carlson, from VCS Environmental, narrated a PowerPoint presentation. He explained some of the technical aspects of the project including the architectural styles and districts of the proposed homes; landscaping design; setback of the new gates; the geological study, the changing topography, the grading remediation; the cultural aspects of the historic site, requiring a statement of overriding consideration; the reuse of existing materials; creating a monument depicting the history of Marywood; the on -site crushing operation; construction hours; traffic issues and analysis; the underground power lines; the outreach meetings with the public; and the lack of a feasible alternative to avoid the significant impact of the cultural resources. The Commission had additional questions and comments about the geogrid material; drought concerns; earth movement and the need for grading; location of any earthquake faults; the addition of green elements; staging of construction vehicles concerning hours and the traffic management plan; the approach for a salvage plan and memorializing the site; and the unique architectural style of the existing structures. Ms. Mermilliod, project historic consultant, explained HABSI (Historic American Building Survey) which would provide an archival resource for students. Mr. Garcia noted staff had received correspondence today from three different parties. Two were in support of the project and one was in opposition to the project. The correspondence was included in the Commissioners' hot file folder. Public Hearing was opened. The following persons spoke in favor of the Marywood Residential Development citing the proposed development was a great addition to the City and fits into the existing neighborhood; soil condition problems would be mitigated; the appeal of the development being divided into 3 districts; liked the power poles being placed underground; impressed with the applicant's presentation; would provide additional revenue for local businesses; thankful 40 families would be able to enjoy the view; it was time it had a new life with new residences; The New Home Company had been very respectful of the alumni and willing to share their story and history; and excited with the cultural program by keeping the history of the site intact. 3 Planning Commission September 21, 2015 Brian Meskell Ed Gomez Julian Castaneda Jason Neria John Lane Edward Kohlenberger Janet Gonzalez Linda Polk Michael Battaglia The following persons spoke in opposition to the Marywood Residential Development citing traffic concerns; parking and safety issues; the community being gated; flaws in the EIR and traffic issues (the traffic study did not address comments from Caltrans); parking issues in violation of the Municipal Code; concern with the removal of old growth trees on the site impacting the surrounding hills; 10 days of on -site crushing extending to 30 days; traffic impact study of the EIR document was deficient and inaccurate missing two critical intersections; concern with a Child Time north of the development site and heavy trucks competing with parents dropping off their children; requested the property line be pushed back in front of the gate by 12' -15 % higher density than surrounding neighborhoods and requested the density be reduced; two power poles remaining above ground are leaving a visual blight; the failure of the Design Review Committee to apply the City's Infill Residential Design Guidelines; Traffic Impact Study was inaccurate; none of the people in favor of the project live near the site; concern with parking by Child Time Kindergarten; and disapproval of the walls and the gate. Hugh DeVaney Terrie Warner Michael Spix Farhad Zaltash Janelle Young Reid Pieper Michael Lebeau Peter Homer Jared Soleno Public Hearing was closed. Mr. Carlson responded to the public comments regarding the density issue, the old growth trees, parking concerns, the number of days for on -site crushing, the remaining two above ground electrical poles; and the setback of the gate. Robert Kahn, traffic engineer for the project, explained he had worked with City staff in developing an approved scope of work for evaluating the traffic study. He stated that using City of Orange standards, he found no significant impact from this project and suggested a number of design features which were incorporated into the EIR that would 4 Planning Commission September 21, 2015 help traffic in the area. He explained the reason why the Caltrans highway capacity manual was not utilized for this project. The Commission had additional questions for the applicant regarding the traffic study peak hour trips; the number of street parking spaces; the remaining two above ground electrical poles; the queuing of vehicles at the gate; and pedestrian access, suggesting an open gate. The Commission had questions for City staff regarding the proposed stop sign along Villareal. Jacki Scott, City of Orange Traffic Engineer, explained the stop sign was warranted for sight distance purposes. She has reviewed the Caltrans standards for the requirements for a traffic study and the trip generation by the 40 homes was under the Caltrans thresholds. The Commission wanted more information on geotechnology. Frank Sun, Deputy Director /City Engineer, indicated they had reviewed the report and the recommendation was to remove and recompact those areas. The Commission's final comments were that the amount of traffic generated by this development was appropriate for the area; some of them would like an open community by eliminating the gate and others were not opposed to the gated community; understood the tandem parking design; parking requirements had been met; grading issues had been resolved; liked the reuse of cultural items as the Chair is an advocate for historic preservation; appreciated community input and the creation of a website for posting information about the project; glad the geotechnical issues had been resolved; supported pedestrian access; the EIR was adequate and supported the override; and it would be valuable to vet the design of the memorial area back to the Design Review Committee. Chair Gladson stated additional findings with regard to the project. The undergrounding of utilities; that the project is above compliance as it relates to the promotion of the green building code and water efficiency; and is below greenhouse gas (GHG) thresholds established by the State. Mr. Garcia noted a correction to Resolution No. PC 29 -15 on page 4, the third line from the top should read "...the project's impacts on amity cultural resources ... ". Motion was made to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 29 -15 recommending the City Council certify the adequacy of Final Environmental Impact Report 1839 -14, adopt findings of fact, adopt a statement of overriding considerations, and approve TTM 0035 -14, MJSP 0790 -14, CUP 2981 -15 and DRC 4764 -14 to allow for the construction of 40 new detached two -story single family residences on a 16 acre site at the former Marywood Pastoral Center and that the City Council would consider in their action the following: 1. The cultural details for the memorial area be returned to the Design Review Committee. 2. Include provisions fora pedestrian access entry gate. Planning Commission September 21, 2015 MOTION: Commissioner Gladson SECOND: Commissioner Glasgow AYES: Commissioners Correa, Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. 6 Planning Commission September 21, 2015 3.2 ZONE CHANGE 1274 -14; MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 0778 -14; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17758; DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE NO. 4749 -14 & ENVIRONMENTAL NO. 1837 -14 — ORANGE -OLIVE RESIDENTIAL (MBK HOMES) The applicant is requesting approvals to develop a 2.33 -acre site (currently used for recreational vehicle storage) with 25 detached single family residential condominium units. LOCATION: 2025 N. ORANGE -OLIVE ROAD RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 31 -15 recommending to the City Council of the City of Orange their adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration 1837 -14 including adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; approval of Zone Change 1274 -14, a request to approve a zone change from Limited Business (C -1) to Residential Multi- Family Specific Plan (R -3 (SP)) and approval of the associated Orange -Olive Residential Specific Plan; and approval of Tentative Tract Map 17758 (TTM 003 -14), Major Site Plan Review 0778 -14 and Design Review Committee 4749 -14. Motion was made to continue Zone Change 1274 -14; Major Site Plan Review 0778- 14; Tentative Tract Map 17758; Design Review Committee NO. 4749 -14 and Environmental No. 1837 -14 — Orange -Olive Residential (MBK Homes) to October 5,2015: MOTION: Commissioner Gladson SECOND: Commissioner Correa AYES: Commissioners Correa, Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. 7 Planning Commission September 21, 2015 4. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned to the regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, October 5, 2015. MOTION: Commissioner Willits SECOND: Commissioner Glasgow AYES: Commissioners Correa, Gladson, Glasgow, Simpson, and Willits NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 10:13 p.m.