2001 - August 6
c,,{' S-t1tl. G- ..<. .)
(v/
.
MINUTES
Planning Commission
City of Orange
August 6, 200 I
Monday - 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
STAFF
PRESENT:
Commissioners Carlton, Pruett Romero, Smith
.-..,
CC-,
C',:)
:>
:;;"..
)-l
-<
." :0
''''-:1
l--~C:;
P-i~,J
:-n~.-~"
,'--
None
',,;'
1".."
C":J
Karen Sully, Planning Manager,
Gary Sheatz, Assistant City Attomey
Jerry Bailey, Design Manage - Public Works
Elaine Steinhardt, Recording Secretary
w
co
..,..
,.-'-, --;;,-
~, )
;-',.,
A Planning Commission resolution was presented to John Godlewski, Principal Planner commemorating
his 13 year service to the City of Orange. In the presentation each Commissioner read a portion of the
resolution. John thanked the Commission and noted how much he enjoyed working in the City of Orange
and spoke of the many different positions he had held in the Planning Division. Now he was taking the
position as Development Services Director in the City of Los A1amitos.
INRE:
INRE:
ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN - None
CONSENT CALENDAR - None
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF JUNE 18, 2001
AND JULY 16, 2001.
Due to Commissioner Carlton's absence from the meeting of June 18"', the minutes were approved on two
separate motions.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Romero to approve the Minutes of June
18,2001.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
Commissioner Carlton
None
MOTION CARRIED
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Romero and seconded by Commissioner Pruett to approve the Minutes of July
16,2001
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioner Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6,2001
INRE:
CONTINUED HEARINGS - None
INRE:
NEW HEARINGS
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2375 - WAL-MART
A proposal to allow the sale of beer and wine (Type "20" License) for the purpose of off-site
consumption. Additionally, the Commission is asked to make a finding of Public Convenience or
Necessity. The site is located at 2300 North Tustin Street. The subject site is zoned C- TR (Commercial
Tustin Redevelopment Project Area
NOTE:
This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I. Adopt resolution PC 22-01 approving Conditional Use Permit 2375.
2. Make a finding of Public Convenience or Necessity for the sale of alcoholic
beverages
Chair Smith asked if anyone opposed the application and with no response, a full reading of the report
was waived.
Ms. Sully briefly introduced the proposal
Margaret Taylor, 6381 Hollywood Boulevard. #648. Hollywood, CA, representing Wal-Mart Inc.,
explained WaI-Mart's desire to offer the sale of beer and wine to their customers as an amenity along with
the other food products and general merchandise they offer. She stated the intent was not to attempt to
increase their customer base with the offering of alcoholic beverages, but to enhance their variety of
merchandise for their existing customers. She explained the store area to be devoted to the sale of beer
and wine would be limited to only 5% of the retail square footage.
Ms. Taylor noted there would be no change in their hours and the proposal had the Police Department's
approval. She went on to explain their operational guidelines and how in areas where there needed to be a
finding of Convenience or Necessity, it was good planning policy to make that finding under the
conditions that prevail at WaI-Mart being that they provide extensive education to those who sell alcohol
in their store. They have their own carefully monitored policies and programs in place to avoid selling
alcoholic beverages to underage people. She believed it was to WaI-mart's advantage to protect their
interest by the manner in which they trained their people and monitored the sale of alcohol in their store,
thereby also being an advantage to the public.
Commissioner Pruett asked Ms. Taylor if she felt that an approval ofWal-Mart's proposal would indicate
that all stores similar to Wal-Mart in similar shopping centers should be allowed to sell alcohol.
Ms. Taylor explained that the current ABC requirement to make a finding of Public Convenience or
Necessity for the sale of alcohol beverages was born out of the civil unrest in Los Angeles a number of
years ago. In doing so, the State gave the right to cities to weigh the attributes of making a finding of
Public Convenience or Necessity when there is an over-concentration of businesses selling alcoholic
beverages in a particular census tract.
Commissioner Pruett asked ifWaI-Mart provided a unique circumstance so that other centers do not have
the right to ask for the same findings to allow them to sell alcoholic beverages.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
Ms. Taylor responded that it was good planning process that made WaI-Mart unique.
Responding to Commissioner Carlton's inquiry as to whether Wal-Mart also trained their part-time sales
force and their holiday employees as well as their full-time people and if the computer training was done
individually by the employee at the employee's home, Ms Taylor explained they provide extensive
training to everyone selling alcoholic beverages using a comprehensive computer program in the store
setting. She also noted that the training program was devised to protect the public.
Responding to Chair Smith's question concerning the type of alcoholic beverages WaI-Mart would be
selling, Ms. Taylor explained it would be only beer and wine. She added that other Wal-Marts would
have a similar programs in about 6 months.
Chair Smith asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against the proposal. There being
none, she closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Pruett questioned staff as to why a similar Police report was not included in this staff
report for Wal-Mart's proposal as was included in the report for the next ABC request on the agenda. He
also wished to know if there was a written report from the Police Department on this request.
Planning Manager Karen Sully stated there was no written report but there had been a verbal response
from the Police of the condition that was incorporated into the report.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Romero and seconded by Commissioner Smith to adopt resolution PC 22-01
approving Conditional Use Permit 2375-01 including Conditions of Approval 1 through 5, with a finding
made for Public Convenience or Necessity for the sale of alcoholic beverages.
During the discussion following the motion, Commissioner Pruett expressed his opposition to the motion
until the Police Department produced a written memo supporting the proposal. He could not support the
motion without the written memo.
Commissioner Pruett responded that he would need a written memo before he could support the motion
when Chair Smith asked him if he would be willing to support the motion if staff would assure him a
memo would be forthcoming.
Commissioner Carlton pointed out that the next request for an ABC license was somewhat different in
that they were asking, in addition to the ABC Type "20" license, for a license to serve alcohol on site and
perhaps that made a difference.
Chair Smith suggested that a condition could be added to the effect that the approval would only be valid
with the addition of a written Police report.
Commissioner Pruett noted that although the next request was somewhat different, as Commissioner
Carlton had pointed out, both businesses were requesting ABC licenses in areas of over-concentration and
he felt, due to the lack of a written Police memo, a continuation of the request was in order until they
received such a memo.
Planning Manager Sully assured the Commission that Police approval was given and she promised to
track it down.
Chair Smith agreed with Commissioner Pruett that there should be consistency in the reports and perhaps
the Commission should wait for the written Police memo.
3
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6,2001
Commissioner Carlton was in favor of adding a condition making the approval subject to receipt of a
written memo.
Assistant City Attorney Gary Sheatz said there could be danger in adding a condition like that because if
the Police Department then decided to add another requirement(s), it would be a problem.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Chair Smith to continue Wal-Mart's request to a date
determined by staff and until such time that the Commission is in possession of a written Police memo
approving the request.
There was a discussion between Commissioner Pruett and the Assistant City Attorney concerning which
motion should be voted on first with Mr. Sheatz of the opinion that the first motion must be voted on first.
The following is the vote on the first motion:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners Carlton and Romero
Commissioners Pruett and Smith
None
Being that the vote was tied, it failed to pass.
The following vote was on the substitute motion:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Pruett, Romero and Smith
Commissioner Carlton
Ms. Sully said the request would be continued to the August 20, 2001 Planning Commission meeting if
everyone was in agreement, which they were.
3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2376 - BEVERAGES & MORE!
A proposal to allow the off-site sale of alcoholic beverages (Type "2 I" ABC License), and the on-site sale
(tasting) of beer and wine (Type "42" ABC License) at a proposed new 14,100 sq. ft. specialty retail store
that sells beer, wine, spirits, gourmet food and related items such as glassware and accessories.
Additionally, the Commission is asked to make a finding of Public Convenience or Necessity. The site is
located at 2000 North Tustin Street.
NOTE:
This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the Califomia Environmental
Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines Section 153101 (Existing Facilities).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Adopt resolution PC 23-01 approving Conditional Use Permit 2376.
2. Make finding of Public Convenience and Necessity for sale of alcoholic
beverages - off-sale (Type "20") and on-sale (Type "42").
Since no one was present in opposition to the application, Chair Smith waived full reading of the report.
Ms. Sully briefly reviewed the request.
Planning Aide Mario Chavez-Marquez, project planner, presented the high points of the request as written
in the report. He gave the proposed hours of operation as follows: Monday through Saturday open at 10
4
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
a.m. and close at 9 a.m. Sunday, 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. Additionally, during the holiday season they intend to
extend their hours of operation from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m.
There being no questions, Chair Smith invited the applicant to present his proposal.
Steve McLaren, 76 Lvnwood Place, one of the founders of Beverage & More, announced they operate 21
stores in the State. They have opened one in Irvine and this store in Orange will be their second store in
Orange County. He stated that customer service was a very important part of their business, which he
declared was unlike any other store operating in the community.
He described their store and their operation as being unusual and different explaining they offered 3,000
wines, 800 kinds of beer, over 1,200 spirits, 500 food items including cheeses, and cigars from around the
world. He noted that many of the items carried in their stores were not carried in any other store in the
community. He also emphasized what they did not sell and he felt that was key information about their
operation. The fact that they do not sell cigarettes, lotto tickets, porno material, to list a few, nor do they
have pinball machines or similar amusements available, makes their operation very different from other
stores selling beer, wine and liquor. He believes that because they close earlier than other liquor stores,
crime connected with their stores is low. He found in speaking with the Vice Unit of the Police
Department, that most crimes come from alcohol sold after 10 p.m. He also noted that no competing
business in proximity of their stores has ever gone out of business due to the opening of Beverages &
More. He described their stores as well lit with 50% of their customers being female. He does not
consider their operation to be a liquor store.
In response to Commissioner Romero's inquiry concerning Mr. McLaren's review of the conditions, Mr.
McLaren reported that he had gone over each condition with the Police Department and he agreed to
them. He said condition # 20 conceming education is new to him but it is not a problem.
He noted the hours were slightly different than mentioned in the report being that they intended to open
one hour earlier on Saturday, making the hours on Saturday from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. He asked that
condition # 16 be clarified. He stated that no wine tasting would begin on any day before 10 a.m. He
also agreed that wine tasting would not be as outlined in Condition #16.
Commissioner Pruett wished to modifY Condition #16 to include that no wine tasting shall occur during
the hour before closing on any day - that wine tasting should cease one hour before closing. Mr.
McLaren agreed to that modification.
Chair Smith opened the public hearing.
Mr. Bob Bennvhoff. 10642 Moreland Drive, spoke in favor of the request.
Since no one else wished to speak.
Commissioner Pruett reiterated his desire the modifY condition # 16 to make sure that all tasting ceases
one hour before closing each day.
Chair Smith reminded the applicant that the Police Department conditions were incorporated in the
Planning Commission resolution. She referred to condition #5 and asked where and what kind of tasting
area would be provided.
Mr. McLaren reported that no one under age 21 would be allowed in the tasting area, which will be a
small confined space that ABC will inspect on a regular basis. He added that only this designated area
will be licensed for tasting.
5
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
Chair Smith closed the public hearing.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to adopt resolution PC 23-01
approving Conditional Use Permit 2376-01 based on the findings in the resolution and subject to
conditions of approval I tlrrough 26 with modification to condition #16 as follows:
16. All wine tasting shall occur during open business hours, including 10:00 A.M. to one hour before
closing or 9:00 P.M., whichever is earlier. MSRa:i7' threygh Saturaay, aRa I():()() A.M. te 7:()g P.M.
en SYIlGay There shall be no consumption of alcoholic beverages on the premises after closing or
prior to opening.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioner Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2332, ADMINISTRATIVE ADmSTMENT 00-14, AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1641 - ORANGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPOR-ATION
AND ORANGE ROTARY.
A proposal to construct a 6-unit senior apartment building. Two of the six units are proposed to be
restricted to low-income senior households. The proposal includes a request for a waiver of one
development standard and a request to reduce the street-site setback (along La Veta Avenue) to 8' from
10' and the minimum dimensions for required open space area to 18' from 20'. The site is located at the
north side of La Veta Avenue between Olive and Lemon Streets. The subject site is zoned R-4 (MuItipIe-
Family Residential) and designated "MDR" (Medium Density Residential, 15 to 24 dwelling units per
acre).
NOTE:
Mitigated Negative Declaration 164 I has been prepared for this project in accordance
with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15070 et seq. The public review period for the Mitigated Negative
Declaration is July 16 through August 6.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt resolution PC 24-01 approving conditional Use Permit 2332, Administrative
Adjustment 00-14, and Mitigated Negative Declaration 1641.
Before the start of the public hearing on this request, Commissioner Carlton explained that she has been
an active member of Orange Housing Development Corporation for the last 10 or II years, but it has been
determined there is no conflict of interest because she does not have a financial or any other interest
dependent on the outcome of this hearing.
Chair Smith asked if anyone opposed the application and with no response, a full reading of the report
was waived.
Ms. Sully gave a brief introduction to the application pointing out they were entitled to one development
standard waiver and they have chosen to waive the standard requiring installation of an elevator in
building two or more stories because such an installation would be cost prohibitive. She also explained
the administrative adjustment portion of the application. She turned the staff presentation over to
Economic Development Department Director Linda Boone to be followed by Senior Planner Chris
Carnes.
6
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
Ms. Boone explained her department was responsible for creating affordable housing in the City of
Orange and that 20% of the revenue must be used for creating affordable housing.
She stated that this project will have several layers of monitoring. Because the Economic Development
Department has funds invested in the project they will be watching it along 15 members ofOHDC and
200 Rotarians who have a great interest in it.
Ms. Boone noted there has not been a lot of success in the last 10 years in establishing affordable housing
due to the lack of available land. The Rotarians initiated this application because they wanted to assist
seniors and the City of Orange with much needed housing. She explained the difficulties they had finding
a site. They teamed with Orange Housing Development Corporation (OHDC), who has built many
beautiful projects in Orange, to accomplish their goal. Ms. Boone expressed her belief that the proposed
project will be beautiful, will enhance the neighborhood plus providing affordable housing for seniors.
Chair Smith expressed her concern with the number of administrative adjustments being requested for the
project. She pointed out there were four different items in the requested administrative adjustment. She
believed that since the ordinary citizen is discouraged from asking for administrative adjustments, this is
not being fair to all.
Ms. Boone clarified that there is no legal connection between OHDC and the City. That OHDC is an
independent nonprofit organization.
Ms. Boone offered two points to be considered:
1. It is mandated by State law to give special consideration to building low-cost housing and it
has been a goal of the Department of Community Development for a number of years;
2. Nothing is being given up because it will be a beautiful development that the City will be
proud of and would not set a precedent for housing built for the open market.
Chair Smith noted that the conditions of approval require only 2 units be kept for very low-cost senior
housing, but the developers are offering to maintain all 6 units for affordable housing.
Ms. Boone remarked that the developers are voluntarily restricting rents of all the new dwelling units to
very-low income senior housing because it is their goal to provide affordable housing and when more that
50% of the units are restricted by condition, it would trigger a State law requiring a mandatory vote by the
citizens of the City of Orange, which would be costly and time consuming.
Chair Smith brought up for discussion the request for waiver of the development standard that requires
installation of an elevator for development of two or more stories. She inquired if it would be possible to
install an elevator in the 4 unit building.
Ms. Boone stated the question would be more appropriate posed to the developer or architect.
Chair Smith asked the applicant to make their presentation.
Applicant Warren Perschon. member of the Orange Rotary Club and representing Orange Housing
Development Corporation (OHDC) explained how the project came to be and the extreme need for the
housing this project will provide. He also stated that the project architect, Richard Hanson, landscape
architect, Bill Cathcart, Keith Regan of the Senior Center and Eunice Bobert of OHDC were present at
the meeting.
7
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
Eunice Bobert, Chief Executive Officer for OHDC, 414 E. Chapman Avenue reviewed the previous
presentations made to the Planning Commission and recalled they asked for and received a continuation
to redesign the project incorporating the many suggestions they had received. He was sure they now have
a much better project and the Mediterranean Revival architecture is suited to the site. He stated they had
dealt with the City Traffic Engineer to provide better traffic circulation, parking and improve the open
space. The open space in the first presentation was not truly usable without entering the public right-of-
way. The traffic circulation has improved with one-way traffic through the parking lot entering on
Lemon Street and exiting on La Veta, and the parking is adequate.
Responding to Commissioner Romero's question concerning the adjoining property at 48 I South Lemon
Street, Mr. Bobert said the common driveway will also be used by the tenants of the adjoining property.
OHDC owns this adjoining property.
Commissioner Pruett questioned the traffic circulation and the applicant stated that if the Planning
Commission does not approve his suggestion, they will not allow the neighboring tenant to use the
driveway. Commissioner Pruett stated that it is not as it was presented and to change it now would
interfere with the project dynamics. He requested the developers stay with what had been presented.
Responding to Chair Smith's inquiry conceming installation of an elevator, the applicant said that it
would be cost prohibitive since the elevator installation would cost about $70,000. Chair Smith wished to
know how the ADA Handicap Requirements were being met. The applicant stated the first floor units are
handicap accessible. He also added that all the units would be rented to seniors who were able to live
unassisted, but because the corporation has access to so many senior living units they would be able to
relocate anyone unable to deal with the conditions of thi~ particular project.
Bill Cathcart, landscape architect for the proiect reported that he backs the project. He responded
affirmatively to Chair Smith question about the plant material being fairly tidy. He said it was dealt with
in the Design Review Committee.
Keith Regan, Executive Director of Orange Senior Center, I 70 South Olive Street, reported that over the
last 9 nine years that he has been the Executive Director, the issue of seniors in dire need of low-cost
housing has come up often. He said he is contacted frequently because his e-mail address is listed on the
Senior Center Web Page, and 90% of the seniors who contact him are concerned with the housing issue.
He stressed the need for more senior housing.
Bill Cathcart said he and Keith Regan sit on the Board of Directors for Triangle Terrace, where there are
74 units and the waiting list there is inordinately long. He felt the need for senior housing must be
addressed.
Ms. Sully pointed out that the project was in compliance with the City's General Plan and specifically
meets Goals#3 and #5 of the Housing Element.
Christopher Carnes, Senior Planner and proiect planner clarified the administrative adjustment. He
explained that the 20% reduction in the street-side set back reduced the setback from 10' to 8' and the
dimensional requirements of a minimum of 20' by 20' for outdoor area will be 19' by 28' instead. He
stated that the only waiver asked for is for the elevator requirement. He reiterated that all three ground
floor units will be accessible for handicapped people. He pointed out that all other Development
Standards would be met such as building height, parking, and Old Town design standards. He also noted
that final action includes 11 conditions of approval and that all units will be reserved for very low-cost
senior housing.
8
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
Anne Siebert. 340 South Olive Street, which is two blocks from the proposed proiect, said she was very
happy to see this development proposal. She felt it would enhance the neighborhood. She pointed out
that there was a row of houses on the north side that looked like they should be demolished and she
inquired if demolition was planned. She believed the parking and circulation was much improved with
the new modified plan.
Chair Smith asked the applicant for a closing statement and to address Ms. Siebert's inquiry.
Mr. Eunice Bobert said the housing on the north property was not slated for demolition but that they
planned to move the fence 5 feet back. He asked that the Planning Commission consider approval of the
project.
Chair Smith asked for Planning Commission comments.
Commissioner Carlton commented on the rare opportunity of finding land in the City of Orange to build
on. She believed this project was important for the City of Orange and said she was very much in favor
of approving it.
Commissioner Romero noted the narrowness of the site and he didn't think it looked like a good site for
the proposed project. He preferred to see a park developed on the land instead but he said he would not
oppose the project.
Commissioner Pruett said it was a good fit for an unusual property. Because the OHCD has so many
units, he did not think the lack of an elevator would be a major obstacle.
Chair Smith feels the City should find land and talked about the need for private/public partnership(s).
She agreed there is a dire need for the proposed housing but the site is too narrow and too close to La
Veta Street traffic to be desirable for housing. She recalled that because La Veta Street wasn't widened,
the subject site, which is too narrow, became available. She voiced her fear that approval of this project
would set a precedent for other undersized sites.
Chair Smith also did not think that a $70,000 cost for an elevator was insurmountable. She felt sorry the
developers moved forward with this plan for a substandard site.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to adopt Resolution PC 24-01
approving mitigated Negative Declaration 1641-00 that allows action to be taken on Conditional Use
Permit 2332-00, which approves construction of multi-family housing restricted to senior citizens.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Romero to adopt resolution PC 24-01
approving Administrative Adjustment 00-14 to reduce the required street-side setback area by 20% and
the minimum dimension for calculating outdoor living area by 5%, supported by the findings in the
resolution.
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
9
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
ABSTAIN None
Chair Smith declared a ten-minute recess with public hearing to resume at 8:50 p.m.
5. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1673, ZONE CHANGE 1209, AND MAJOR SITE
PLAN REVIEW 0193 - ST. JOHN'S LUTHERAN CHURCH.
A request for approval of a zone change from Office Professional (OP) and Duplex Residential (RO-2-6)
to Specific Plan (SP) to accommodate a four-phase master plan for an existing church and school campus
in the Old Towne Historic District. The proposed zone change would allow for a floor area ratio of .55
for the St. John's campus. Major components of the master plan requiring Major Site Plan approval
include: demolition of an existing office building and construction of a new two-story, 55,500 square
foot building at 450 East Chapman Avenue, demolition of an existing non-historic nursery center located
at 15 I South Center Street and expansion of the adjacent historic preschool building located at 141 South
Center Street and parking lot improvements. St. John's Lutheran Church is located at 154 South Shaffer
Street.
NOTE:
Mitigated Negative Declaration 16773 has been prepared for this project in accordance
with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15070 et seq. The public review period for the Mitigated negative
Declaration is July 18 through August 6, 200 I
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution PC 25-01 recommending to the City Council approval of:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration 1673;
2. Zone Change 1209; and,
3. Major Site Plan Review 0193.
Chair Smith asked if anyone opposed the application and with no response, stated that she still wanted a
full reading of the staff report.
Ms. Sully gave a synopsis of the proposal, explained its various components and pointed out the public
review period on the Negative Declaration ran from July 18th through tonight's meeting. She noted the
project will not significantly impact the environment. She touched on the background of the proposed
project, explained Staff review and noted their comments were incorporated into the conditions of
approval. The Design Review Committee, who had met twice with the Planning Commission,
recommended project approval and their comments are included in the staff report. She explained the
proposed project has gone through very many reviews beginning in April. She pointed out that Randy
Bosch, representing the applicant, St. Johns Lutheran Church, was present at the meeting tonight along
with Architect Daryl Hebenstreit, the landscape architect, traffic consultant and other project
representatives.
Anna Pehoushek, Senior Planner, further presented the proposal and explained the FAR requirements
would be established at 55% for the proposed project. She said as the project is proposed today, the
parking has been improved along with the aesthetic quality of the buildings. The four-phase master plan
will be accommodated by the mitigated negative declaration, zone change and major site plan review.
She stated there were 5 components to the development being proposed. They are as follows: demolition
of the existing office building and construction of a new, two-story building on Chapman Avenue;
demolition of an existing non-historic nursery center and expansion of the adjacent historic preschool
building; a new Master Sign Program; parking lot improvements; and removal of two of the existing
temporary modular classrooms.
10
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
She explained that the improved parking and traffic includes an additional 36 spaces provided in a new
covered parking lot, through modification of existing parking spaces and through space gained with the
demolition of the modular classrooms. Traffic will be improved due to the institution of a Traffic
Demand Management Program. She also noted that conditions of approval #15, # 16, and #17 were
included to help improve the traffic.
In summary, she said the project is appropriate and will improve the property while it remains compatible
with the surrounding area by reducing the number of existing problem conditions.
Responding to Commissioner Pruett's question concerning the public review period for the Negative
Declaration, Planning Manager Sully explained that the review period ended today but would include
comments from tonight's meeting.
Randy Bosch, 154 S. Shaffer Street, Chairman and President of the congregation of St Johns Lutheran
Church, stated that for over 20 years they have been making minor changes to meet the changing needs of
the church and it was evident that they now required a permanent solution to the church and school needs,
which this request will provide. He reviewed the existing buildings, pointing out the architecture varies
widely being different in each case. He said they respected the Old Town Historic District and the
various architectural styles and they wished to preserve the residential character of the block east of
Shaffer Street. He stated they would be reducing the impacts of the church on the area with the additions.
He complimented the project architect, Daryl Hebenstreit for working with their democratic process since
the entire congregation participated in the formulation of the project because majority rules in the
congregation.
Mr. Bosch introduced the following people as the team responsible for the project: Joe Foust, of Austin-
Foust Associates, traffic consultants; Gary Byer, School Principal; and members of the project
management team, Bill Gower and Jim Beam, both long time members of the congregation. He noted
that Robert Chattel, retained by the congregation to help them understand the full historic ramifications of
the project, was also present tonight.
Daryl Hebenstreit. partner in Architects Orange, 144 North Orange Street, summarized the changes to the
preschool made since the last joint study session and the follow-up meetings with the Design Review
Committee. He noted that the landscape drawings will be completed within the next 2 to 3 weeks. He
showed the elevation renderings pointing out that the north and west elevations had received eyebrow
enhancements that the Design Review Committee approved. He pointed out on the renderings the various
modifications that had been incorporated into the plans. He reviewed in detail, the architectural changes
made on the entire project. He noted modification on the renderings for the preschool included the
addition of gables along with window modifications. He referred to the awnings and noted the different
building base material and explained the attic was incorporated to make the buildings more residential in
character. He also explained that the parking lot side roof was made to look more residential.
He reviewed modification to the roof elements at the rear of the preschool building showing that it was no
longer flat. They modified the roof line and lowered the parapets making the existing historic building
stand out. He pointed out the flat roof at the joining point of the new and existing buildings. He said they
have scaled down the monument sign in front on Shaffer Street but retained the same size monument sign
on Chapman, which he said was acceptable and recommended by the Design Review Committee.
Commissioner Carlton said she was happy with the changes to the preschool and that now it had more of
an old town flavor, but she was disturbed by the concrete base and the roofline that cuts off. She would
like to see the new section base material and roof more in line with the existing building.
11
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
Mr. Hebenstreit described the base material as exterior plaster, not raw concrete. He stated they did not
wish to try to match the existing base but planned a more contemporary finish that would blend. He also
explained that the roofline of the new building was too far forward to fit into the existing building and
they had made a deliberate attempt to make the existing building stand on its own.
Commissioner Carlton said she appreciated Mr. Hebenstreit's comments but to her, the attempt to make
the new section, not a copy of the existing, created a look more foreign. She felt the wrought iron gates
were inconsistent with the architecture and that she preferred brick across the base.
Mr. Hebenstreit responded that he preferred plaster but with architecture, there was always more than one
answer. He stated he would gladly comply with her wishes if it would move the project forward.
Commissioner Carlton said she was bothered by the incompatibility of the base and preferred brick. She
thanked them for the other changes they had included in the plans.
Mr.Hebenstreit, responding to Chair Smith's concern with the Transportation Management Plan and the
parking, said they prepared a detailed mitigation plan for the morning arrival and afternoon departure
peak period. He explained there would be three large dedicated drop-off zones: one for early childhood
school; one for middle school drop-off; and one for grades 2 through 5. He further explained the drop-off
zones and said they planned to stagger times by designating 7:30 a.m., 8:00 a.m. times and 2:30 p.m.,
3:30 p.m. as pick up times. He explained staff would arrive earlier than the students and preschool would
be starting later than other grades. He said they will meet with staff who is helping them move their plans
forward.
He said they are balancing drop-off zones with parking on the street and in the parking area. It is planned
that staff will arrive before peak student arrival time. Responding to Chair Smith's question as to who
would park in the structure, Mr. Hebenstreit said that maybe it would be staff, people participating in
fellowship activities and parents. He said parking in the structure would be available to congregation on
Sunday with a path leading to the sanctuary. He explained the Almond Street lot would be used
exclusively for staff and one-half of the staff would park in the preschool parking lot. Therefore, one-
third of the covered lot would be used by staff and the remainder would be open parking. Responding to
Chair Smith's question about Sunday church parking, he offered that all parking will be available on
Sundays. Chair Smith said she had suggestions to include later in the hearing.
Mr. Robert Chattel addressed different infill buildings and the preschool building. He explained they
used materials that followed the form and pattern of the existing buildings. He said the new base was
consistent with existing buildings, just a little more contemporary. He thought the plaster links the new
addition to other additions to the site and felt the subtle differences were successful.
He also explained it was a common architectural solution to use a smaller, more subtle hyphen resembling
a trellis, rather than extend rooflines of new and existing buildings.
Chair Smith opened the public hearing.
Adrienne J. Gladson, 700 East Lake Drive, #97 spoke in favor of the project, stating she couldn't be
against anything that consolidated a lot of changes that needed to be done. She approved of the
architecture, which she felt was compatible especially with the Ainsworth House. She referred to the
parking problems, pointing out that the church and the congregation are aware of the conditions and
needs. It was her belief that when a new master plan is being developed, a lot should be accomplished
toward alleviating the parking problems. She also expressed the fact that the church uses City parking
sites on Sunday should be formalized. She felt the deficit in parking was significant and the church being
good neighbors should examine the problem at a later date. She asked that use of Center Street should be
12
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
redesigned and the Canary Island Pines [Palms] be protected. She also wanted signs for direction to
church parking lots.
Jeff Frankel, 384 South Orange Street, representing Old Town Preservation Association, complimented
St. Johns on their fine project. He felt the new buildings were a good fit in the neighborhood and they
possibly may have satisfied everyone. He thanked St. Johns on behalf of OTP A and the OTP A Board for
including them in the project planning.
Thomas H. Gent, 236 South Shaffer Street, said he talked with Anna Pehoushek and John Godlewski
about City codes being met by St. Johns. He believes the project should be built to code_ He also felt
there was a massive parking problem and it was getting worse, causing safety problems. He gave his
estimation concerning the number of parking spaces the church required. He said 3,000 cars per year
park next to his property. He said people will not know where to park without the church putting up
parking signs. He gave his interpretation of the parking codes. In his estimation, there is not enough
classroom parking and he did not want to operate a parking lot around his property. He asked that
crossing guards be assigned to the area.
Since no one else from the public wished to speak, Chair Smith asked that representative of the church
make their closing remarks and respond to Mr. Gent.
Randy Bosch said he would refer the technical questions to other members of the team and Mr. Gent's
code questions concerning parking to staff. He felt St. Johns had answered every call by scheduling
meetings so the neighbors could become familiar with the plans. Because not everyone could attend
every meeting, they offered multiple opportunities for the neighbors to have their questions answered. He
explained the church was concerned with the impacts but they can't solve impacts that were not
addressed. He stated they have tried to exceed requirements and felt that with the help of staff they have
done that. He was grateful for community input, in particular the Old Town Preservation Association
who helped them make their design more compatible with the community; the consultants and staff were
helpful in moving the project ahead. He offered to meet with Mr. Gent. He referred the technical
information closing to Mr. Chattel, Mr. Hebenstreit and Joe Foust. He thanked the Commission for their
advise and expressed his gratitude to the consultants and City staff.
Mr. Bosch responded to Commissioner Pruett's question about the student population saying there would
actually be three additional classrooms now because of the modular classrooms they would be losing. He
said they were planning to ultimately have three classrooms per grade and they aim for 25 students per
classroom but it varies from year to year. He said the three additional classrooms will give third
classrooms to 6th, 7th and 8th grades. He expected this reconfiguration to reduce traffic across the street.
Mr. Hebenstreit said the parking issue was being worked on by trying to provide as much parking as
possible on the campus without destroying the numerous historical buildings on their campus. He said
they are trying to achieve a balance without destroying the fabric of Shaffer Street by widening it and
there is also no way to widen Center Street. He reported hey had done an Easter break traffic count
finding there were 2,500 trips when school was in session 2,400 trips when school was closed. He felt the
count indicated traffic was not being significantly affected by the school, but he admitted to problems
with the drop-off system, which they continue to work on.
Mr. Hebenstreit said they were considering starting a Saturday evening service and spacing out the
Sunday services so they don't overlap. They have proposed temporary parking on the basketball field on
Sunday. Great effort is being expended to meet parking needs. He stated the palms on Shaffer would
remain and will be protected during construction. They were trying to be good neighbors through
scheduling neighborhood meetings and adjusting their plans to meet neighbors' concerns. He said the
13
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 200 I
crosswalks will be marked and adult supervision will be present. They are working with the church,
classroom staff and parents to establish crosswalk procedures.
He reiterated that there will be three new classrooms and a modular classroom would be added to house
the third 7"' grade classroom. The new drop-off plan will be in effect at the beginning of the new school
year and they are being proactive in their efforts to solve problems.
Chair Smith inquired about the Canary Island Pines and Mr. Hebenstreit clarified they were palms and
would be protected. Chair Smith said she thought the trees are in the parkway, and as such they are the
City's responsibility. She will seek clarification.
In response to Chair Smith's question about the zone change, Ms Sully said that the zone change is
necessary in order to implement the Specific Plan and that the Specific Plan addresses the change in code.
She referred to pages 5-5 and 5-6 of the staff report, stating the Specific Plan will establish new
development standards that will be abided by, which is the full intent of the Specific Plan.
Commissioner Romero questioned the code brought up by Mr. Gent and Mr. Hebenstreit said the
proposed project is meeting the requirements. He said they do use the City parking on Sundays and they
would like to enter into an agreement with the City concerning the parking. He said they are also trying
to solve the school parking problems but they cannot do anything about the large parking deficit related to
church use.
Chair Smith closed the public hearing. She also asked the public to discuss other concerns with staff and
she suggested that Mr. Gent meet with staff later to discuss his problems since it is complicated process to
compute the parking numbers.
Chair Smith referred to the three actions that need to be addressed: Mitigated Negative Declaration 1673;
Zone Change 1209; and Major Site Plan Review 0193.
Commissioner Carlton said she thought overall it is a good plan but she feels very strongly about the base
of the new preschool addition. She felt that if an owner of a residence in the area proposed a plaster base,
it would not be granted. She felt it was not similar to brick and she requested that a condition be added to
require brick be used where plaster is designated.
Commissioner Pruett complimented the applicant on the work that was done. He stated he was impressed
with the manner in which the applicant listened to the community and responded. He was pleased with
the project and did not share Commissioner Carlton's concern with the preschool base. He felt that
technically it is an addition to the existing building but the approach is that they are two separate
structures. He is very impressed with the treatment to the building front. He believes the difference is
good, it was a well thought-out concept and it addresses the issues that were presented.
Commissioner Romero stated he was pleased with the project and he complimented the applicant
concerning the project changes that were instituted, their willingness to listen to and the efforts they made
to appease the neighbors and the varying factions of the community that have a large interest in what is
being done.
Chair Smith said she felt it was a wonderful plan. She noted the church community worked hard and
spared no expense on the project. She said it was a wonderful collaboration.
Chair Smith also explained that she lives on Shaffer and has for the past twenty-five years although not
close enough to the church for there to be a conflict of interest. She explained that she had some parking
suggestions that perhaps could be included in the Traffic Management Plan: first, do not drive in the area
14
Planning Commission Minutes
August 6, 2001
during peak traffic times, and she asked people to park close to the curb especially those with large
vehicles; secondly she asked that people be watchful when they pull out of a parking space; third she
thought crossing guards wearing very large white gloves for giving directions would be a good
improvement; and fourth, she suggested added incentives be offered to those who use the parking
structure. She also made the comment that all activities have been set up with the idea of avoiding the
south side of Almond Street. She said that she and many people in the community appreciated their effort
to not disturb the residential area. She knows St. Johns has the means to purchase that property for a
parking lot. Although she is not a proponent of parking structures, she agreed with the one on the campus
because it is preserving the residential neighborhood. She noted that Shaffer and Center Streets were very
busy and she thought sometimes people used those streets as short cuts.
Chair Smith also suggested that other churches in the area have staggered hours and worked hard to
mitigate the traffic. She thought perhaps it might benefit St Johns to meet with them to find out what the
other churches are doing to make their systems work. Chair Smith asked staff to meet with Mr. Gent to
explain the codes.
Chair Smith mentioned that trash is always a problem in Old Town and she urged the community to put
out inconspicuous trash containers if possible. She reiterated her feelings that the project was beautiful
and called for last comments from the Planning Commissioners.
Commissioner Pruett added that he thought the traffic issue on Shaffer was a small problem and maybe it
is beneficial in that the ability to drive fast on Shaffer is not really desirable.
Chair Smith said that opening car doors on the street side is a dangerous thing and she asked that people
use the sidewalk side of the car to enter and exit.
Commissioner Carlton said she would not withhold approval of the project, because she disagreed with
Mr. Chattel's opinion about the brick base, which she felt would look better than the plaster. She stated
for the record that she feels the project is outstanding.
MOTION
Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Chair Smith to adopt Resolution PC 25-0 I
recommending to City Council approval of: 1) Mitigated Negative Declaration 1673; 2) Zone Change
1209; and 3) Major Site Plan Review 0193 with the findings supporting the motion stated in the
resolution and conditions of approval #1 through #24.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
CARRIED
Chair Smith thanked the audience for their patience.
agenda matters, but there was none.
Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
MOTION
She called for public comment pertaining to non-
IN RE: ADJOURMENT
Moved by Commissioner Pruett and seconded by Commissioner Carlton to adjourn to a Joint Design
Review Committee Meeting/Planning Commission Study Session on Wednesday, August 8, 2001 at 5:30
p.m. The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners Carlton, Pruett, Romero, Smith
None
None
MOTION CARRIED
15