Loading...
2001 - March 19 (~~:~)-~............. C,,?}" /?J . &-.,l. 3 MINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange March 19, 2001 Monday - 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: INRE: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Smith Commissioner Romero Karen Sully, Planning Manager, Gary Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney, and Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer l '__: ~ /.-, 1. Approval of the Minutes from the Meeting of March 5, 2001. CONSENT CALENDAR -Y:<::\'~') ::J - MOTION Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to approve the Minutes of March 5, 2001. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: INRE: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Smith None Commissioner Romero MOTION CARRIED NEW HEARINGS 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2366-01 - COURAGEOUS LIVING A proposal to allow the establishment of an adult education facility in an industrial district, and to allow the shared use of parking facilities within an existing offlcel1ndustrtal development, pursuant to OMC Sections 17.20.030 and 17.34.100. NOTE: This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. The public hearing was opened. Pastor Cliff Self 1110 West Taft Avenue. represented Courageous Living, a non-profit corporation. They propose to operate an educational facility that provides training for adults that need successtul living skills so they can become productive citizens in the community. They also request the shared parking use of parking facilities. There are over 193 parking spaces provided on the site, which exceeds the parking requirement of the current zoning ordinance and mitigates any potential parking overflow problems. The publiC hearing was closed. 1 Planning Commission Minutes March 19, 2001 MOTION Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to approve Conditional Use Permit 2366-01 with conditions 1 through 5 as listed in the staff report, adding condition 6, relative to the facility conducting classes on the weekends and during off-hours on weekdays, after 6:00 p.m. And, add condition 7 that Courageous Living inform all of the participants of the parking rules. The Commission finds that the conditional use permit is granted upon sound principles of land use and in response to services required by the community. It will not cause deterioration of bordering land uses or create special problems in the area in which it is located. It has been considered in relationship to its effect on the community for the area in which it Is located and it is granted subject to those conditions necessary to preserve the general welfare, not the individual welfare of the applicant. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Carnon, Pruett, Smith None Commissioner Romero MOTION CARRIED INRE: MISCELLANEOUS 3. REVIEW OF PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS (PLAN) FOR CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY, DATED JANUARY 23, 2001 The Parking Management Plan, as mitigation, is a requirement of the Major Site Plan Review approval of a four-story, 350 bed dormitory building to be constructed at Chapman University located east of Grand Street, and north of Walnut Avenue (Resolution No. PC 31-00, approved by the Planning Commission on April 17, 2000.) Ms. Sully explained that Chapman University had submitted an application for a 4-story, 350 bed dormitory building on property located in the existing parking area east of Grand Street, north of Walnut Avenue. That item was brought to the Planning Commission in April, and the Commission adopted a resolution approving a site plan and a Negative Declaration. Part of the approval included two mitigation measures to reduce the impacts of the dormitory project. Those mitigation measures are detailed in the staff report. In an effort to address the Commission's concems, Chapman University prepared the Parking Management Recommendations document, dated January 23, 2001. This plan has been in process for many months and there has been quite a bit of effort on the part of the applicant to coordinate with City staff on the development of this document. Staff noted a few comments, which are outlined in the staff report. Sr. Planner, Dan Ryan, said that the stakeholder involvement included neighborhood and resident workshops with Chapman University staff and faculty. The study focuses on examining the existing parking environment at Chapman University by identifying parking related constraints and opportunities, and developing a matrix of recommendations to address real and perceived parking problems and deficiencies. There were 20 preliminary recommendations reviewed by Chapman University and Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers. Eleven recommendations were then selected as the final recommendations in the report. Mr. Ryan read staff's findings on two mitigation measures on Page 5 of the staff report. John Blocs Proiect Manacer for Chaoman Universitv. responded to staff's requests for clarification. On Page 11, the Orange Street parking structure should be deleted. They have not encouraged the dormitory students to park in the structure; only the commuter students. But, they should have added the chapel, and would like to amend the report. The 79 surplus parking spaces in the dormitory area will be assigned to faculty or staff and that would be dedicated to daytime parking only. The parking spaces would revert back to resident student parking after evening hours. The Presbyterian Church parking lot would be assigned to facuny and staff. by permit only. The procedures and communications that are in place now address special functions. They believe that it is working well and do not recommend any changes. Security officers, under the direction of Milt 2 Planning Commission Minutes March 19, 2001 Galbraith (Chief of Office Safety) and the Activities Director, Judy Harper, at Chapman University, coordinates the Parking Management Plan with the City. Garv Braum. Executive Vice President of Chaoman Universitv, addressed the issue of dormitory students moving in and out. They adopted a new program this year where the Chief of Office Safety informs the City's Parking Control Office that they will have certain days for move in/move out of students. The students are assigned staggered hours and are issued color-coded parking passes. They, are given flexibility in using the placard. The Director of Residents Life is responsible for coordinating and monitoring this program and issuing the parking passes to the students. Chair Smith would like this position specified in the Plan so that everyone knows that the Director of Residents Life is the University's representative. Commissioner Pruett wanted to know if there was consideration given to a parking location for Freshmen. Mr. Braum said based on the parking counts, the parking structure Is being used and the use is up significantly. Therefore, they have not pursued a parking program for Freshmen. Commissioner Pruett also asked about the disincentives or penalties for unauthorized use of the University's parking permit. Mr. Braum explained it is the University's goal for students to park in their designated parking areas. If students are parking on the street, they will receive a ticket. Paul Wilkinson with Linscott. Law & Greensoan Enaineers. made a few comments about the document and the data collection of actual counts of parked cars in and around the University. Wrth the construction of the new residence hall, it caused them to lose 100 parking spaces. Between the Spring and Fall traffic counts that were conducted, the utilization of the parking structure went up by 170 spaces. And, there are still a lot of parking spaces lett in the garage. They have found that there are parking spaces in the residents parking area that are not being used on a regular basis. With respect to the Presbyterian parking lot, they are not sure about the status of the lot. It takes the enforcement of the permit program to encourage good behavior. The University does not have any law enforcement authority and they rely on the Orange Police Department to enforce parking on publiC streets. To the best of his knowledge, Freshmen are not discouraged from bringing cars to school. If they can facilitate the Freshmen and bring them into the program, it is better than leaving them alone to find parking on their own. Chair Smith commended the University for their hard work in preparing the Parking Management Plan. But, from her viewpoint, it is not quite as solid as she would like to see it. The City has been working with "flexible" and "fluid" for a long time and now it is time to get specific. There are 11 parking management action plans that she would like to firm up. The City would like to see the University help monitor the parking on the street. As common courtesy, that could be a good faith effort on the University's part to show their desire to make the streets available to residents. Its also an excellent point that the problem isn1 giving out too many on-campus permits; it's those people who get the neighborhood parking permits that shouldn't have them. In Looking at Table 8, Page 38, Item 2(a) - Make Chapman parking permit mandatory. Chapman University Is asked that on an annual basis they indicate to the City where that is included In the campus literature. The price of $50 is reasonable. It might even be good if students had to sign the Parking Rules and Regulations Agreement so that they are aware of it. Item 9(a) needs to be more specijic. State in the document who the contact person will be to coordinate with the City prior to special major events and student move In/move out days. Item 11 (a) - The University has indicated that the parking structure is deleted as a near-term project, but the All Faiths Chapel needs to be listed as a near-term project. 3 Planning Commission Minutes March 19, 2001 Items 12(a) and 13(a) are concerns because it places the responsibility with the City with regard to the parking permit program. The Commission would like to see what t.he University's part will be in assisting the City. Will they meet with the City to talk about the NPPP? Item 15(a) - the Commission has not heard of any disincentives or penalties for unauthorized usage of the City parking permits, and it needs to be addressed. Items 16(a) and 17(a) - the burden is on the City to establish better and more stringent controlf'checks" for the parking permits. That Is four items of the 11 that are on the City's shoulders, which leaves only seven for the University. Chapman University needs to be tied into the process on Items 12(a), 13(a), 16(a) and 17(a). 2 oeoole sooke on this matter Anne Siebert, 340 South Olive. Joan Crawford, 394 South Orange. Most of the speakers' questions have been asked, but they wanted to know how often the plan will be revisited to make sure that what is happening now Is going to continue to happen once the dormitories are finished. On future expansions, what triggers a new parking study? The plan that has been presented is very good and it shows a lot of work. They would also like to see a periodic review of their plan. There should be something mentioned in the plan for guest parking. Mr. Biggs responded to the monitoring and guest parking issues. The University has a guest pass program, In which passes are provided to them to park in a designated parking area. They have provided a parking analysis to the Planning Department on an annual basis. Commissioner Pruett would like to see the All Faiths Chapel added to the document and how that is anticipated to be managed. It needs to be understood that by including the Chapel in the plan, it does not approve the parking for that project. That would need to occur when the project comes betore the City. The Commission presented all of their concerns to Chapman University, including staff's clarification on Page 4 of the staff report. They requested an amended plan, showing the revisions and changes that were discussed at this meeting from the University. Someone at the University needs to implement and monitor the Parking Management Plan so that it will work. Mr. Braum explained that the University had an honor code, or code of conduct for students, and they would be willing to amend the Parking Management Plan to include that a student Is required to comply with the parking regulations and it would be an honor code violation not to do so. He chairs the Parking Committee and parking Is an important issue at the University. They meet a couple times a semester. He would be glad to oversee the Parking Management Plan. The fact that Chapman University has a Parking Committee needs to be added to the Parking Management Plan. One of the executive vice-presidents of Chapman University is the chair of this committee. The Commission trusts that monitoring of the Plan will be delegated out to responsible people. The Commission, staff and applicant discussed a continuance of the Parking Management Plan. The study deals with availability of parking and that has been done to satisfy the requirements for the dormitory. The Parking Management Plan is needed to deal with the issues of how to manage parking and who is going to have responsibility for it. There needs to be something in the plan as to how it will be re-visited. Chapman University will administer the Parking Management Plan and the City will be evaluating the plan. The All Faiths Chapel will probably not change the Parking Management Plan that much, but what is going to change is the demand. The Chapel will be a separate project, but needs to be addressed in the Plan. 4 Planning Commission Minutes March 19, 2001 Commissioner Pruett did not believe that items 12(a) through 17(a), which fall on the City, needed to be included in the Management Plan because it is not something that the University is going to carry out. Unless, there is the issue of coordination. He wondered if the City was prepared to make changes to the Municipal Code and devise new mechanisms to enforce the parking permit program. From his point of view, the only reason that the five items would be in the University's Parking Management Plan is because the University has a responsibility in terms of helping to manage the Plan. Commissioner Carlton thought the Plan could be worded in such a way as to encourage the City to change the Municipal Code. She asked what would trigger a new study? And, do they need to set a periodic review of the parking plan? It would be good to have a recommendation from the staff and the University -- maybe every other year, provided there is no project forthcoming, which would automatically trigger a review. Chair Smith was disappointed that there was no representative from the Police Department. They seem to be an integral part of making this plan work. The University has stated that they do not have the right to monitor legal and illegal parking on the street. Enforcement Is with the Pollee Department. On the other hand, the University has a responsibility to go to the Police Department and resolve these issues and to coordinate activities. She would like to have the University come back to the Commission with a Parking Management Plan. Ms. Sully said that staff could meet with the University. Mr. Hohnbaum also informed the Commission that the Police Department is responding to problems as they are made aware of them. The Plan is attempting to resolve those problems by encouraging on-campus parking rather than on- street off-campus parking. He suggested if problems continue, they could be brought to the Parking Committee's attention. Chair Smith noted on Page 3 of the staff report it does indicate at the bottom that an administrative traffic sergeant has been assigned as the contact person with the University. That would be Sgt. Jackie Gomez. And, Sgt. Whitely is the one responsible for coordinating with the University on these issues. She wanted to know the problem with the street sweeper and if there were any possible solutions. Mr. Hohnbaum responded that street sweeping typically follows the trash collection day. Ifs done specifically for the City's national pollution discharge permits. The street is posted and anyon-street parki ng should not occur during street sweeping days. That should be less of a problem if there is more legal parking on campus. He said the Plan is to encourage people not to illegally park. Citing does occur because they need to clean the streets on a weekly basis. Staff can research ~ street sweeping and trash pick up days could be staggered, such as Tuesdays and Wednesdays. The Commission asked that the Plan include the fact that the University will report to the City as to whether or not the Plan in place is working; coordinate a meeting with the City to discuss whether or not the Parking Management Plan is working. In this Initial review, the Plan needs to be looked at in six (6) months; and then every 12 months after that, with a review by staff -- not necessarily coming back to the Planning Commission. Any new project will trigger another look at the Parking Management Plan to make sure there is enough parking being provided if new construction were to take place. The five (5) items on Page 4 need to be addressed. A definite dormitory student move in and move out day plan with a specific contact person named by position shall be included in the Plan. A par1icular person shall be named to address the special events and coordination for parking. The All Faiths Chapel needs to be listed as a near-term project, and the Orange Street parking structure deleted as a near-term project. But, both should be mentioned in the Parking Management Plan. The dormitory parking needs to be addressed, and the plan for faculty and staff, to use that lot in the day, with residents being able to use it at night. The parking at the PreSbyterian Church parking lot needs to be addressed, and indicate in the Plan whether or not that parking lot is available by lease (or whether proper arrangements have been made with the Church or properly owner of the parking 5 Planning Commission Minutes March 19, 2001 lot). On Page 39, it mentions that the City coordinate with the University. The contacts need to be mentioned from the City's side and from the University's side, and how often they will meet for the most successful implementation of the Parking Management Plan. Additionally, there is some language that needs to be cleaned up, which is indicated in the memo to Karen Sully from the Manager of Transportation Services. There needs to be a clear definition of the boundaries of the study area, with a thick line clearly indicating the boundary of the study area and it needs to be added to the map. The $400 application fee would be waived for the Neighborhood Parking Permit within the boundary area. There are some errors with the parking sign inventory map. Those are indicated in the staff report and Sr. Planner Ryan can work with the University to correct the errors. Commissioner Pruett suggested dropping Items 12 through 17; however, Chair Smith would like to see them addressed in a way to show cooperation and coordination between both parties so the essence is not lost of what they address. It is essential for the success of the Plan. Item 2(a) - Indicate how the University is making the Parking Permit mandatory and how they are communicating that to students, faculty and staff. Also include literature that expresses the Parking Permit Program. Item 3(a) - the University will emphasize the worth of having paid for a permit. Items 6(a) and 8(a) . Include items In Plan. Item 9(a) - has already been addressed with coordinating special events and resident student move in and move out days. Item 11(a) - has already been addressed. There needs to be some kind of indication or sign off that the Police Department has worked with the University on the Parking Management Plan. Staff shall implement this process. Please mention in the Parking Management Plan the existence of the Parking Committee - it's members and it's chair, how often they meet, the scope of the work. Include the honor code of the University for students to comply with the Parking Management Plan. It is also a good place to indicate what the University's parking permit is, what it looks like, and where it is to be posted. Guest parking passes and how that works needs to be mentioned. Part of the intention of this Plan is to set up contacts to make sure that the Plan is implemented .- City staff, University staff and law enforcement personnel. Upon Mr. Hohnbaum's researching the street sweeping situation, Sr. Planner Ryan can facilitate that discussion to see if anything needs to be stated in the Parking Management Plan about the street sweeping schedule. The theme of the Parking Management Plan should emphasize that there is a supply of parking spaces available, but people need to use them. And, that is the responsibility of the University. Handicap parking should also be called out to make sure there are enough spaces to accommodate the need for accessibility. Staff should include wording that makes it clear that any new project that the University brings forward would trigger a look at the Parking Management Plan, if not revision. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to continue Chapman University's Parking Management Plan to the meeting of May 21, 2001. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: INRE: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Smith None Commissioner Romero MOTION CARRIED ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to adjoum to a joint study session with the City Council, on Monday, April 9, 2001, at 5:00 p.m. in the Weimer Room to discuss the City's 7-year Capital Improvement Plan. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Smith None Commissioner Romero MOTION CARRIED /s1d 6