2006 - November 6
~5DO. Gr..;>-3
Minutes
Planning Commission
City of Orange
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
STAFF
PRESENT:
INRE:
INRE:
INRE:
6 November 2006
Monday - 7:00 p.m.
Commissioners Bonina, Imboden, Steiner
Commissioner Bilodeau
Ed Knight, Assistant Planning Director
Gary Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney
Mari Burke, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None.
ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
(1) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETING OF
OCTOBER 16, 2006.
Chair Bonina made a motion to approve the consent calendar.
SECOND:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Commissioner Imboden
Commissioners Bonina, Imboden, Steiner
None
None
Commissioner Bilodeau
MOTION CARRIED.
IN RE: CONTINUED HEARINGS:
(2) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2608-06 AND DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE NO. 4133-06 - THE LAZY DOG CAFE (LDC III, INC.)
A proposal to allow the on-site general sale of alcohol in a new, bona-fide public eating
establishment (Alcoholic Beverage Control Type 47 license). The applicant is also
proposing to remodel the existing tenant space for the new restaurant including exterior
alterations and signage. The site is located at 1623 West Katella Avenue, Space 212.
This item was continued from the October 16, 2006 meeting.
NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines 15301 (Class I -
Planning Commission Minutes
6 November 2006
Existing Facilities).
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. PC 46-06 approving Conditional
Use Permit No. 2608-06 and Design Review Committee No. 4133-06.
A project overview was provided by Contract Staff Planner Anne Fox.
The applicant expressed his appreciation to Staff for investing time to research what
restrictions are currently imposed on the other establishments in the area. Chair Bonina
asked the applicant ifhe therefore was amendable to the enforcement of Condition #13 as
indicated by Staff. The applicant responded affirn1atively.
Chair Bonina asked the applicant if he would explain "empty chair" as referenced in
Condition #15. The applicant responded that it would be a person ordering two drinks,
one for him/herself and the other for a friend that was still in the parking lot. Further the
applicant stated that they were quite familiar with this terminology as it is an ABC rule.
Commissioner Steiner asked for confirmation that their employees are trained to
recognize when a patron is consuming alcohol excessively and they would have the
ability to refuse to continue serving the patron. The applicant responded, "absolutely, it
all comes down to really our respect for the safety of our guests and then obviously on to
liability insurance and it really makes sound business sense if a person is going a little bit
further then they should be. We train all of our staff already in our Westminster store
and actually since going through and preparing our program for Orange, have updated
our Westminster store's program making it more thorough. We don't accept that kind of
behavior at the restaurant and want to be sure everyone is being responsible."
No public comment was provided on this item.
Sergeant Bird indicated he met with his Chief and Captain as well as Staff and then
talked with the Lazy Dog Cafe owner, Mr. Simms. Sergeant Bird advised the
Commission that Mr. Simms agreed the revised conditions would be decent conditions
for the operation of his restaurant.
Commissioner Steiner asked if the wording in Condition #15, "there should be no time
when alcoholic beverages are sold at a ratio of two for one" was intended to discourage
steep discounts on alcoholic beverages that would encourage significant consumptions.
Sergeant Bird responded affirmatively and clarified that the type of license sought by the
applicant translates to sales of approximately 80% food, 20% food.
Commissioner Steiner asked if the particular area where the restaurants are located have
proven to be a significant problem for patrol. Sergeant Bird responded "no, it has not; it
is mainly a family gathering location." Commissioner Steiner added "and this is in an
area where there are no happy hour restrictions on three of the restaurants in the
immediate vicinity." Sergeant Bird responded affirmatively.
Page 2 of 5 Pages
Planning Commission Minutes
6 November 2006
Chair Bonina asked Miss Fox to elaborate on the statement she had made referencing
consistency in terms of restrictions on happy hours for the last 5 years. Miss Fox
responded this information was derived in talking with Sergeant Bird and his
predecessor.
Recognizing this project is categorically exempt from the provIsIOns of CEQA,
Commissioner Steiner made a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2608-06 ___
The Lazy Dog Cafe (LDC III, INC.) subject to the words in parentheses in Condition #15
being clarified for the benefit of anyone not familiar with the terminology.
Commissioner Imboden asked Staff to clarify the necessity to include the reference to
Design Review Committee No. 4133-06 in the motion as it appears in the agenda. Miss
Fox responded it had already been approved at the last meeting. Assistant City Attorney
Gary Sheatz interjected that it wouldn't be necessary to add it to this motion as it had
already been approved (as indicated by Miss Fox); however, it is lumped together in the
Resolution for convenience.
SECOND:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Commissioner Imboden
Commissioners Bonina, Imboden, Steiner
None
None
Commissioner Bilodeau
(3) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2595-06 - ROYAL STREET
COMMUNICATIONS AT FIRST ASSEMBLY OF GOD
A request to co-locate three new antennas onto an existing non-stealth wireless
communication facility support structure (monopole) including the installation of new
above ground support equipment. The site is located at 2910 North Santiago Boulevard.
NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines 15303 (Class 3 - New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures).
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. PC 37-06 approving Conditional
Use Permit No. 2595-06.
A project overview was provided by Contract Staff Planner Anne Fox during which she
highlighted that the applicant had done additional research and met with the pole owner
and has concluded that conversion of the existing monopole into a stealth wireless facility
is not feasible.
Page 3 of 5 Pages
Planning Commission Minutes
6 November 2006
The applicant's representative, Jason Hadley stated:
. They met with T- Mobile and were informed T-Mobile has no interest in contributing to
the cost of approximately $200,000.00 required to be spent on the site for the conversion.
. T-Mobile has agreed to let Royal Street Communications install the coax cable inside
the pole.
. Royal Street Communications will be doing aesthetic improvements to the ground area
around the existing facility, which will mitigate the visual blight of the equipment area.
. Royal Street Communications is requesting approval to install 3 panel antennas to the
existing monopole, which the applicant believes is in full compliance with the City's
Wireless Communication Code and associated requirements.
. Requiring the applicant to bear the expense to do a conversion would kill the site for
them.
Chair Bonina asked the applicant if the study they had conducted relates to neighboring
residents that have view homes that could potentially be impacted and ifhe could share
the findings ofthe study with the Commission. The applicant responded that although he
had not personally seen the study, from what he had been told, after time the residents
don't notice the poles.
Commissioner Steiner noted that the coax cable installation on the exterior is still
referenced on the drawings (Page A-2). The applicant stated that the document had not
been redone since the last meeting; however, one of the Conditions of Approval specifies
the coax cable must be installed on the inside.
Commission Steiner asked for clarification ofthe thickness and placement of the
antennas. The applicant responded:
. they are 8" - 10" thick,
. per Staff request they will use 3 antennas instead of 6, which is what they initially
intended,
. they will be flush mounted to the pole,
. they will be painted to match,
. they are 4-1/2' long and will be placed 45' up from the ground.
Chair Bonina asked how wide they are. The applicant responded they are approximately
6" ~ 8" wide.
No public comment was provided on this item.
Commissioner Steiner stated that although he agreed the aesthetic nature of this pole was
not appealing, he felt that it is a diminutive change and the applicant has done everything
in his power to try to address the Commission's legitimate concerns. Further, if the City
is going to encourage co-locations, this plan is the most ideal way to do so. It is not
obtrusive and the fact remains the pole is already in existence and the proposal as
presented will improve the ground aesthetics tremendously.
Page 4 of 5 Pages
Planning Commission Minutes
6 November 2006
Commissioner Steiner made a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2595-06.
Commissioner Imboden stated his opinion on this project has not changed. He agreed the
applicant has looked at alternatives for this particular site; however, they have not come
any closer to addressing his initial concerns. He added that by granting a Conditional
Use Permit on this equipment it would potentially prolong the use of the pole, which he is
not in favor of as it currently exists. His opinion was this is perhaps not the appropriate
site, there are other sites that could be looked at but the way it is being proposed he could
not support the project.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Chair Bonina stated there is a another resolution drafted that addresses denial ofthe
application and the Commissioners were directed to Resolution #PC 37-06 which
suggests denial. Chair Bonina proposed denial of the application.
SECOND:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Commissioner Imboden
Commissioners Bonina, Imboden
Commissioner Steiner
None
Commissioner Bilodeau
In light of the approval of the denial of the project Chair Bonina informed the applicant
he could speak with Miss Fox or Mr. Knight regarding the appeal process.
INRE:
NEW BUSINESS: None
ADJOURNMENT:
Chair Bonina made a motion to adjourn the meeting to the next regular meeting on
Monday, November 20,2006.
SECOND:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Commissioner Imboden
Commissioners Bonina, Imboden, Steiner
None
None
Commissioner Bilodeau
MOTION CARRIED.
MEETING ADJOURNED @ 7:40 p.m.
Page 5 of 5 Pages