2002 - September 16
MINUTES
APPROVED
Planning Commission
City of Orange
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
STAFF
PRESENT:
INRE:
IN RE:
September 16, 2002
Monday - 7:00 p.m.
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
Jeffry Rice, Planning Manager/Secretary
Gary Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney
Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer
Khanh A. Le, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC P ARTICIP A TION: None
ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN:
(4) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 8119, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION NO. 1691-02 - CITY OF ORANGE WATER DMSION (WATER
WELL #27)
A proposal to construct a new water well and related pipelines at Water Well Site No. 27.
The General Plan land use designation is Industrial <no The zoning of the site is Light
Manufacturing (M-1). The site is located at 2443 N. Batavia Street, east side of Batavia
Street, approximately 200 feet south of Fletcher Avenue.
NOTE:
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1691-02 has been prepared for this
project in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15072
et seq. The public review period for the Mitigated Negative
Declaration is August 7, 2002 through September 5, 2002.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1691-02.
This item was withdrawn because it is not the Planning Commission's jurisdiction. No action
was required.
IN RE: CONSENT CALENDAR:
(1) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 4, 2002.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Brandman, and seconded by Commissioner Pruett to approve the
Minutes from the September 4, 2002 meeting as submitted.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Smith
Commissioner Romero
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
Planning Conunission Minutes
APPROVED
September 16, 2002
(2) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2337-00 - TIME EXTENSION MICKELSON
GALLERY (ROBERT & JANICE MICKELSON)
A request for a one-year time extension for Conditional Use Permit 2337-00 which
allowed a mixed-use (residential and commercial) development at 220 W. Almond
Avenue.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Romero, and seconded by Commissioner Bonina to consent the
Conditional Use Permit 2337-00 as submitted.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
IN RE: CONTINUED HEARINGS:
(3) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2416-02 AND VARIANCE 2110-02 - NONA &
GERALD SANDBERG
A proposal to construct a new 883 sq. ft. Accessory Workshop with full interior
bathroom plumbing facilities above a new 826 sq. ft. garage on property that contains
an existing single-family residence. The General Plan land use designation is ESTR
(Estate Low Density Residential, 0 to 2 dwelling units per acre). The zoning of the site is
R1-40 (Single-Family Residential District - one acre minimum lot size). The site is
located at 7425 Saddlehill Trail located in Orange Park Acres. This item was continued
from the August 5, 2002 meeting.
NOTE:
This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section
15303 (Class 3 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt resolution PC 28-02 approving Conditional Use Permit 2416-02
and Variance 2110-02.
Chair Smith inquired if there were anyone present who was in opposition to this project. Since
there were none, a full reading of the staff report was waived.
Mr. Rice read staff report as above to introduce the project.
Chair Smith invited the applicant to approach the podium to speak on her own behalf.
Ms. Nona Sandberg stated that the staff report has done a good job of expressing everything she
wanted to express. She added that she has read the report and understand all the conditions.
Chair Smith asked Ms. Sandberg if she has is agreeable to all the conditions in the staff report, in
which Ms. Sandberg replied in the affirmative.
Commissioner Brandman asked of Ms. Sandberg whether she has had a chance to contact the
board of association and received approval before she requested for the project. Ms. Sandberg
2
APPROVED
Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 2002
replied that she has contacted both the board of association and the neighbors and have received
approval from both.
Chair Smith asked for public comments and there were none.
During the commissioners' discussion, Commissioner Romero requested for a clarification on the
original continuance and the rewrite of the workshop versus residence.
Mr. Sheatz explained that originally, the request included a kitchen facility, which makes it
classified as a secondary accessory dwelling unit under code. A secondary accessory dwelling
unit is defined as a dwelling unit that is 640 sq. ft. or smaller. The first time the application was
submitted, there was an application for variance from that definition. By law, you can not get a
variance from a definition, only from a building standard. The project was continued. The
kitchen unit was dropped and the project and was brought back with the classification of a
workshop, which does allow a variance from a development standard.
Commissioner Romero acknowledged the explanation.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Romero, and seconded by Commissioner Brandman to approve
Conditional Use Permit 2416-02 and Variance 2110-02, with the conditions set forth in the staff.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
IN RE: NEW HEARINGS
(5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2402-02 - SPRINT PCS (C/O NOVAK &
ASSOCIATES, INe.) EL MODENA PARK
The proposed project is to mount a total of three panel antennas on a new 80' 0" baseball
field light standard, which will replace the existing light standard, add a 7' 6" by 25' 1"
equipment room (a total of 188 square feet in area) next to the existing restroom facility,
add associated radio equipment inside the enclosure, and install new underground
electrical and telephone utilities from the equipment to the public utilities point of service
(antenna). The total height of the wireless communication antennas will be 60' 0" on the
80' 0" light standard. The General Plan land use designation for the site is Open Space
Park (OS-P). The zoning of the site is Single Family Residential (Rl-8). The site is
located at 555 South Hewes Street.
NOTE:
This project is categorically exempt from the proVIsIons of the
California Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15311 (Class 11 - Accessory Structures).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt resolution PC 26-02 approving Conditional Use Permit 2402-02
Mr. Rice explained that because project number five (5) and six (6) are similar in nature and take
place on the same property, they will be addressed at the same time, although they would still
require two (2) separate actions.
3
APPROVED
Planning Commission Minutes
September 16, 2002
Chair Smith asked if there were any opposition to the projects; since there were none, a full
reading of the staff report was waived.
Mr. Mario Chavez-Marquez read the staff report as above to introduce the project. Mr. Chavez-
Marquez explained there is an added memorandum concerning frequency and aesthetic.
Commissioner Brandman asked how many flags will be On the post, in which Mr. Chavez-
Marquez replied there would be one (1) flag but three (3) antennas within the pole.
Chair Smith inquired ofMr. Chavez-Marquez regarding who receive the rent from these projects,
in which Mr. Chavez-Marquez replied that the City of Orange would collect the rent.
Chair Smith also asked whether both companies, Sprint and Cingular, will be splitting the costs
since the same amenities are being offered by both parties, as indicated On the staff report. Mr.
Chavez-Marquez replied in the affirmative. Mr. Rice commented that the decision before the
commission today is whether the land use is allowed or not, that the economic package is not a
part of the decision. Chair Smith clarified that the amenities contribute to the land use, which is
why she asked the question.
Chair Smith invited the representative from Sprint to come to the podium.
Mr. Paul Novak (132 N. Maryland Ave., Glendale, CA 91206) of Novak Associates is the
representative for Sprint PCS. He stated that Sprint has spent a lot oftime to find coverage in
area and have found this location will best suit their needs. He added that he has read the staff
report and understands the conditions set forth and do not have any objections to any of the
conditions.
Commissioner Romero engaged in a discussion with Mr. Novak in which these issues were
covered:
1) The appearance of Sprint's antenna is not as noticeable as some existing ones; it does
seem to be noticeable compared to Cingular's. Mr. Novak acknowledged that this is
correct, but the configuration was done based on needs and this was the optimal
configuration.
2) The antenna has been made as small as possible within the parameters of the technical
requirements.
3) The antennas cover 360 degree, with some limitations dictated by topography and
obstructions.
4) The size of your pole is twenty (24") inches at the base and tapers to nineteen (19")
inches at the top.
Chair Smith asked for public comments and there were none.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Romero, and seconded by Commissioner Pruett to approve Conditional
Use Permit 2402-02 with the conditions set forth in the staff.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
4
Planning Commission Minutes
APPROVED
September 16, 2002
(6) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2412-02 - CINGULAR WIRELESS
The proposed project is to remove the existing flagpole and install a new flagpole, 65 feet
tall bearing the American Flag, add a 6' 5" by 26' 8" equipment room (a total of 174
square feet in area) next to the existing restroom facility, add associated radio equipment
inside the enclosure, and install new underground electrical and telephone utilities from
the equipment to the public utilities point of service (antenna). The new flagpole will
house six antennas that are concealed within the pole so as to not be visible to the public.
The General Plan land use designation for the site is Open Space Park (OS-P). The
zoning of the site is Single Family Residential (RI-8). The site is located at 555 South
Hewes Street.
NOTE:
This project is categorically exempt from the provISIons of the
California Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15311 (Class 11 - Accessory Structures).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt resolution PC 27-02 approving Conditional Use Permit 2412 -02.
The staff report for this project was read by Mr. Mario at the same time as agenda item number 5
for Sprint PCS.
Chair Smith asked the representative for Cingular to speak on the applicant's behalf.
Ms. Shannon McDonald (1225 W. 190th St., Gardena) stated she is the representative for Cingular
and she has read the staff report and concede to all the conditions within. She did not have
anything to add other than making herself available to answer any questions the commission may
have.
Chair Smith asked if she understands all the conditions and is agreeable to complying with them.
She answered in the affirmative.
Commissioner Romero had a couple of questions for Ms. Mc Donald, in which the following
answers were gIven:
1) The diameter of the pole is twenty (24") inches all the way up.
2) The antennas are not visible and that is the reason why the pole is a little larger than
normal.
3) This antenna is not optimal for Cingular's needs, but it serves its purpose and the
limitations are not detrimental.
Chair Smith asked for public comments and there were none.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Romero, and seconded by Commissioner Brandman to approve
Conditional Use Permit 2412-02 with the conditions set forth in the staff.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
5
APPROVED
Planning Commission Minutes
September 16, 2002
(7) VARIANCE 2111-02 - BARB RESIDENCE
Proposal to construct a new 1-1/2 story addition to the rear of an existing 1,664 square
foot, 1906 Bungalow. New construction includes 358 sq. ft. on the first floor and 557 sq.
ft. of living space within the half-story attic area of the single-family residence.
Applicants are requesting a parking variance to avoid the demolition of a detached one-car
garage that is classified as contributing secondary historic resource. The 6,600 sq. ft. lot is
located within the Old Towne Orange Historic District. The General Plan land use
designation for the site is Medium Density Residential (MDR). The zoning of the site is
Multi-Family Residential (R-3). The site is located at 246 N. Orange Street.
NOTE:
This project is categorically exempt from the provIsIons of the
California Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15301 (Class 1 - Existing Facilities).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt resolution PC 31-02 approving Variance 2111-02.
Since there was no opposition to the project, a full reading of the staff report was waived.
Mr. Rice reads staff report as above.
Chair Smith invited applicant to come forward and speak on her behalf.
Ms. Deanne Harb (246 N. Orange St.) stated that she is adamant about having a single car garage.
The reason is that it is more fitting to the neighborhood and the historic era.
Chair Smith asked if the garage has been remodeled and she ask this because the detailing on the
garage is different from the house. Ms. Harb replied that the garage has new roof and the inside
has been redone, but there has not been any structural changes that she is aware of.
Chair Smith asked where Ms. Harb proposes to park a second car if she only has a single car
garage; in which Ms. Harb replied that she and her husband has two cars and they have always
parked one in the garage and the other in the driveway.
Commissioner Brandman commented that from her observation, Ms. Harb could get about five
(5) parking spaces in her driveway. Ms. Harb confirmed that she has actually gotten seven (7).
Mr. Robert Imboden (45 Plaza Square, Orange) of Secoy Architect is the architect for Ms. Harb
addressed the commission concerning the following issues:
1) The detailing of garage is different from the house because the house was built in 1906,
when the craftsman style has not been developed. Later, the house was updated to a
craftsman style, but the garage was not. That is why there is a difference the detailing of
garage and of the house.
2) The addition to the house does not mean they are adding more residence, so there would
be a need for more parking spaces.
3) The addition to the house will still allow enough room for a two (2) car garage to be built
in the future, if necessary.
The commission and Mr. Imboden discussed the features of the garage that would warrant it
being saved as a historic garage and the following were agreed upon:
1) The structure of the garage is in its original state.
2) The doors and windows are unique in design.
6
APPROVED
Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 2002
3) The wood can be assumed that it is the original wood based on its warped and old
appearance.
4) The unique size of the garage. The norm for this period is that garages are single car
garaged, but this garage is more of a one a half, which served as a garage and a shop at
the same time.
Mr. Imoden and the commission then went on to discuss the process in which the garage was
established as being structurally sound and labeled as "fair" condition.
Mr. Imoden stated that his field observation, as an architect, and the staff's observation
determined that the garage is structurally sound.
Chair Smith wanted to reiterate that she wants to ensure the longevity of the garage, so she
wanted to explore enhancements that may be needed to ensure its preservation.
Commissioner Pruett stated that he feels the commission need to address whether the garage is
safe or unsafe, not whether it is in fair or good/excellent condition.
Commissioner Bonina asked if a study of the structure has been performed to see if it is safe.
Mr. Daniel Ryan, the responsible staff for this project stated:
1) The garage has been assessed to be in "fair" condition, based on the observations that the
garage has been well maintained, the rafters are sufficient to carry the roof, and there are
no trees or fences obstructing the area.
2) The wood is straight on the outside and there are no structural deviations that he can
observe. Although there are some drainage problems, it is typical.
3) The garage is being used.
Chair Smith asked for public comments and there were none.
For the record, Chair Smith commented that the staff report did not address the state of the
structure of the garage and she suggested that be added in the future for clarification. Mr. Ryan
noted the suggestion.
Commissioner Pruett commented that the Planning Commission has been addressing the parking
issues in their current workshop meetings and this project brings up a good point. He stated he
agrees with Ms. Harb and supports the single car garage theme for the neighborhood because it
fits the historic era better than a two (2) car garage.
Chair Smith suggested the following conditions be added in the motion for approval:
I) The fence be adapted so the garage door can be opened easily;
2) The garage floor be enhanced to address the drainage problem;
3) The garage be committed to be used to park a car instead of storage or other uses.
Commissioner Pruett stated he does not agree with Chair Smith's suggestions. A discussion
among the commissioners began and the following conclusions were agreed upon:
I) The issue the commission must deal with is whether the commission will grant the
variance for Ms. Harb to maintain a one car garage instead of a two (2) car garage as the
code dictates.
2) If the variance is granted and the structural condition of the garage requires her to
demolish or rebuild a new garage, she will be allowed to build another one car garage if
she wished; or she may forfeit the variance and build a two car garage.
3) The commission should set up a standard to address the state of the garages that may be
saved or should be demolished or modified.
7
APPROVED
Planning Commission Minutes
September 16, 2002
4) The decision today will only allow Ms. Harb a variance to the type of garage, if ever she
desires to made any structural or design changes to the garage, she will be required to
submit another application, separate from this one all together, to the Planning
Commission.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Brandman, and seconded by Commissioner Pruett to approve Variance
2111-02 as submitted.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
NOES:
ABSENT:
INRE:
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Pruett, seconded by Commissioner Bonina to adjourn to the Planning
Commission regular meeting on Monday, September 23,2002 at 6:30 p.m.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Bonina, Brandman, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
The meeting adjourned at 8:15pm.
8