Minutes 1976-12-02MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE CYPRESS PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD
December 2, 1976
The regular meeting of the Cypress Planning Commission was
called to order at 6:10 p.m. on Thursday, December 2, 1976
in the Cypress City Council Chambers, 5275 Orange Avenue,
Cypress, California, Chairman Gerald Mullen presiding.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Friedmann, Partin, Van Allen
& Mullen
Commissioner Greenwood
Also present were Brian Hawley, Planning Director, Art Schatzeder,
Public Works Director, Bob Kastenbaum, Assistant Planner,
Elizabeth Strauss, Deputy City Attorney, and Sandy Pegueros,
Business License /Zoning Inspector.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Van Allen led the pledge
to the flag.
At the Planning Director's request, Chairman Mullen added
Item #8 to the agenda under Administrative Matters regarding
the Ball /Bloomfield shopping center.
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS:
1. Request for Zoning Ordinance Interpretation Re: Refur-
bishing of Gasoline Tanks in the ML- 10,000 Zone.
The Planning Director presented a memorandum dated November
30 which transmitted an evaluation of the proposed use by the
Orange County Fire Marshal's Office and a response from the
Public Works Director. The Fire Marshal's communication indi-
cated they felt this type of operation is generally recognized
as being very dangerous and requires a great deal of expertise
to perform safely. They recommended several conditions if the
use is to be permitted. The Public Works Director recommended
that the refurbishing and storage of gasoline tanks not be a
permitted use in the ML Zone because of the possible hazards
to life and property. The Planning Director reported that since
the last meeting, staff contacted similar uses in other cities
and came to the conclusion that the potential dangers and adverse
effects of such a use appear inappropriate in an urbanized
area. Staff recommended denial of the request and that the
Commission determine that the use is not an appropriate use
in any industrial zone.
Chief Simms, Orange County Fire Marshal's Office, stated he
had nothing further to add to the staff report.
Chairman Mullen asked if the applicant wished to speak.
Mr. Michael Ruplinger, 9112 Hyde Park, Huntington Beach,
stated when he made his application it was with the understanding
that it had the approval of the Fire Department. He stated
he would not pursue the application.
Commissioner Van Allen asked if the restriction on gasoline
tanks would apply to any other type of tank. Chief Simms
suggested that the restriction apply to any "flammable liquid"
tank which would include the entire field. Commissioner
Van Allen indicated he did not want this restriction to pre-
clude a desirable use in conjunction with future commercial
development.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
Chairman Mullen stated there may be a location in the City
which provides a good buffer to make the refurbishing of gas
tanks a reasonable use but stated that the proposed location
at the north end of Watson Street was unsuitable for this use.
Commissioner Friedmann stated she could not make the determina-
tion that the proposed use is similar to other permitted uses
in industrial zones.
The Planning Director suggested that during the annual review
of the Zoning Ordinance, the Commission could consider whether
it wishes to include in the Zoning Ordinance the storage of
tanks as a permitted use in the ML Zone subject to a conditional
use permit.
It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen, seconded by Commis-
sioner Partin and unanimously carried that the Planning'Com-
mission determine that the storage and refurbishing of flammable
fuel tanks is not a conditioned or permitted use within the
City of Cypress.
Mr. Ruplinger stated this action might be an unfair prohibition
to future uses which might be located at an appropriate site.
He stated he did not intend to refurbish the tanks as indicated
in the staff report, only that he would repaint the tanks.
Chairman Mullen stated this matter can be considered during
the annual review of the Zoning Ordinance.
MINUTES: November 18, 1976
It was moved by Commissioner Friedmann, seconded by Commis-
sioner Van Allen and unanimously carried to approve the minutes
of November 18 as corrected.
2. Design Review - Industrial Building - Southeast Corner
of Philo and Electric.
The Planning Director presented a memorandum dated November 29
describing a proposed industrial building to be located at the
southeast corner of Philo and Electric Street in the ML- 10,000
Zone. He presented the elevations of the building and a
colored rendering along with the plot plans. The 9500 square
foot building is proposed to be constructed of prefabricated
steel and a 20' by 20' office building will be constructed of
colored block to match the steel building. The building
is proposed to be used for the assembly of camper shells which
is an expansion of the Camp Tel manufacturing facility located
on the west side of Walker, north of Lincoln. Staff indicated
they had no objections to the proposed encroachments into the
normal street setback areas, however, staff recommended that
the proposed sidewalk along Philo Street be eliminated and the
area incorporated into the landscaping program. Staff also
recommended that the proposed ten - foot -wide sidewalk along
Electric Street be reduced to five -feet in width with the re-
maining five feet to be incorporated into the landscaped area.
Mr. Bob Decker, 5652 Lincoln, the applicant, inquired about
the landscaping conditions and the condition requiring fire
hydrants. Staff stated that the Fire Marshal's Office would
have to review the development to determine how many, if any,
fire hydrants would be required for the property. Mr. Decker
also inquired about Condition #21 which requires a cash deposit
to guarantee the installation of one -half of the alley which
adjoins the development on the east. He reported that one
property owner was opposed to vacation of the alley. The
staff suggested that Mr. Decker submit a letter to the City
Council requesting vacation of the alley. Vacation would be
subject to a public hearing. The Public Works Director stated
2.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
the condition for the cash deposit could be waived until the
Council makes a determination on the possible vacation. Staff
felt the earliest date for a public hearing on the matter
would be January 24, 1977. Mr. Decker stated he would like to
give further consideration to his request for vacation.
In response to Commissioner Van Allen, Mr. Decker stated this
would be a wholesale facility with no direct sales and that
there would be about 10 employees at the peak season. He
stated the steel building will have a baked -on enamel finish
and will be yellow as shown on the rendering. The Planning
Director reported no roof - mounted equipment was shown on the
plans but he suggested a condition that roof - mounted equipment
shall be screened and color coordinated to staff's specifica-
tions. He reported that the contractor and applicant discussed
with the Building Department sound attenuation measures and
5/8" sheet rock will be used on the interior of the building.
The Commission agreed to add the condition regarding the screening
of roof mounted equipment.
It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen, seconded by Commis-
sioner Friedmann and unanimously carried to approve the design
review for the industrial building at the southeast corner of
Philo Street and Electric Street subject to the following
conditions:
1. Drainage fees shall be paid in accordance with the
Master Plan of Drainage.
2. Drainage shall be solved to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. A grading plan shall be submitted for
approval.
3. All secondary and primary utility services shall be
underground.
4. Street lights shall be installed per City standards.
5. Advance street light energy charges shall be paid.
6. Philo Street shall be fully improved with curb, gutter,
paving, etc., in accordance with the Master Plan of
Streets and Highways.
7. Electric Street shall be fully improved with curb, gutter,
five and one -half foot (5 1/2') wide sidewalk, driveway,
paving, etc., in accordance with the Master Plan of
Streets and Highways. New improvements shall connect
with existing curb, gutter, etc.
8. Street trees (15 gallon) forty feet (40') on center shall
be installed along streets in conformance with the street
tree policy of the Public Works Department. The type
of trees shall be as required under the Townscape and
Urban Design Element of the General Plan.
9. Soil in planting areas, including trees, shall be tested
by a qualified agricultural laboratory to determine the
organic and chemical amendments for optimum growth for
the plants specified. The test results shall include
concentration of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, pH,
salinity, sodium status and boron saturation extract.
Results of these tests with recommendations of the
agricultural laboratory shall be furnished to the
Public Works Department for approval at least 30 days
prior to planting date.
3.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
10. Necessary fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance
with Fire Department requirements and City standards.
11. Plan checking and inspection fees shall be paid in accor-
dance with City of Cypress Resolution #1713.
12. Developer shall conform to all applicable provisions .
of the City Code.
13. The sanitary sewer connection fee shall be paid by the
developer in accordance with Orange County Sanitation
District #3, Resolution #303.
14. A retaining wall per City of Cypress standards shall be
constructed at the property line where the grade
difference is greater than twelve inches (12 ").
15. A bond shall be posted by the applicant to guarantee
maintenance of the irrigation system so that it operates
in a manner for which it was designed, and to guarantee
maintenance of all plant materials in a healthy, growing
condition, free of weeds and litter, for a period of
not less than twelve (12) months, to the specifications
of the City staff.
16. A topograph of the area surrounding this development shall
be made to establish existing drainage flow patterns.
If the existing natural flow of any adjoining parcel is
across the land of this development, a drainage easement
shall be granted and drainage facilities provided for
that property to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
17. Any on -site security lighting shall be arranged so that
direct rays will not shine on adjacent properties or
produce glare for street traffic.
18. The corner cutoff at Philo Street and Electric Street
shall be dedicated to the City of Cypress for roadway
purposes.
19. Wheelchair and handicap access facilities shall be
installed on -site and off -site in accordance with State
of California and City of Cypress Building Department
standards.
20. The street in front of this development shall be capped
from curb to curb if it is necessary to open cut the
street in more than one place. Any open cut shall be
backfilled per City of Cypress Standard #110.
21. A cash deposit shall be posted with the City to guarantee
the installation of one -half (1/2) of the alley which
adjoins this development on the east.
22. The developer shall construct the concrete drive approach
at the intersection of the alley with Philo Street per
City of Cypress Standard #207.
23. The drive approach on Electric Street shall be constructed
per City of Cypress Standard #207.
24. The property owner shall maintain and irrigate al park-
way areas on Philo Street and Electric Street.
25. Any roof - mounted equipment shall be screened from view
from adjacent public rights -of -way and adjacent properties
to the specifications of the City staff.
4.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
3. Report on Status of Planning Department Actions Relative
to Cypress Farms - Frank Gallo.
The Zoning Inspector read a memorandum dated December 2 which
indicated that Mr. Gallo, owner of Cypress Farms produce stand
at the northwest corner of Walker and Cerritos, intends to
eliminate the signing on the property or revert to the signing
program approved by the Commission on May 6, 1976. Mr. Gallo
indicated that he is unable to use the trash enclosure on the
property because of the distance between the store and the
trash area and that he proposes to construct a trash area
adjacent to the building which will be more convenient to use.
Mr. Gallo also agreed to clean up the property. The Zoning
Inspector reported that Mr. Gallo was never issued a certifi-
cate of occupancy for the use because of his non - compliance
with the conditions of approval.
The Deputy City Attorney stated that the owner is in violation
of the City Code by occupying the building without a certifi-
cate of occupancy which is a potential misdemeanor. The
Commission recommended that Mr. Gallo be notified of his status
by the City Attorney's office.
Commissioner Van Allen suggested that the Planning Commission
consider giving the business owner 30 days in which to present
plans to solve the problems on the property in order to meet
the conditions necessary for the granting of a certificate of
occupancy. Commissioner Partin suggested that the owner be
given 60 or 90 days since this is the holiday season and the
owner may not have sufficient time to complete the improvements.
Commissioner Van Allen stated the problem has been dragging on
for several months and he noted that withholding the certificate
of occupancy is not threatening the businessman.
It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen, seconded by Chairman
Mullen and unanimously carried to give the owner of Cypress
Farms 30 days in which to submit plans to bring the business
into conformance with the design review approval in May, 1976
and that the plans be submitted for the January 6, 1977 meeting.
The Commission also requested that staff advise Mr. Gallo of
the legal consequences of his lack of cooperation.
4. Report on Signs - Happiness Foundation.
The Zoning Inspector presented a memorandum dated December 2
which indicated that the Happiness Foundation at the southwest
corner of Lincoln and Grindlay proposed to install the permanent
signing program which the Commission approved on June 3, 1976.
However, they anticipated a 90 day delay with its installation.
The Happiness Foundation requested that they be allowed to
display the banner sign, which has been relocated and is closer
to the ground and more secure. Staff recommended that the
banner sign be permitted, subject to conditions, until the
permanent sign is installed.
It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen, seconded by Commissioner
Partin and unanimously carried that the Happiness Foundation
be permitted to display the banner sign until the permanent
sign is installed or until April 1, 1977, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The sign shall remain in its present location.
2. The sign shall be well maintained.
Commissioner Van Allen asked that the staff advise the appli-
cant that the Commission would not wish to consider a further
extension for the banner sign.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: VARIANCE #76 -3 - CHARLES BELL:
Chairman Mullen announced that this was the time and place for
the continuation of the public hearing to consider a proposal
to construct a two -story addition onto the rear of an existing
single - family dwelling, portions of which addition will encroach
to within six feet of the rear property line on property situated
at 5984 Fiji Street, Cypress. Chairman Mullen declared the
hearing open.
RECESS: Chairman Mullen called a recess at 7:30 p.m. The
meeting was called back to order at 7:40 p.m. with Commissioner
Greenwood absent.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Chairman Mullen asked if anyone wished
to speak in regard to any matter not on the agenda.
Mr. Gerald Krieger, 5994 Fiji Street, inquired about his lia-
bility when children climb the wall adjacent to his property.
He reported on his side of the property the wall is 6 feet
in height and on the other side the wall is 8 feet in height.
He stated he has warned the children and has notified their
parents but they continue to climb the wall.
The attorney stated that if the wall is on private property
then the children who climb it would be trespassing. She stated
that since the wall is a visible dangerous condition the property
owner would have no liability especially since he has warned
the children and their parents.
Mr. Raul Mora, 5963 Fiji Street, stated the wall may be located
on City property.
Mrs. Krieger, 5994 Fiji Street, expressed concern that very
young children could get seriously hurt by falling off the wall
and asked what they could do to prevent them from climbing.
The staff stated they would investigate whether the wall is
located on City property.
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (Continued):
5. Consideration of Request for an Amendment to the Approved
Development Plan, Midwood Manor, Northeast Corner of
Cerritos and Bloomfield.
The Planning Director presented a memorandum dated December 1
and reported that no communication was received from Complete
Property Management, manager of Midwood Manor, since the Novem-
ber 4 meeting regarding the maintenance of the open area at
the northeast corner of the development as a parking area.
Complete Property Management was to have contacted the adjacent
property owners to work out a solution to the problem. They
were advised that this matter was on tonight's agenda and re-
quested to send a representative.
Mr. Powell, 10401 Santa Elise, Cypress, asked that the matter
be referred to the City Attorney's office for action since
Midwood Manor has taken no action to remedy the problem since
it first came before the Commission in April, 1976.
The Planning Director stated staff agreed with the suggestion
to refer the matter to the City Attorney's office.
It was moved by Chairman Mullen, seconded by Commissioner
Van Allen and unanimously carried to request the City Attorney's
office to direct the appropriate communication to Complete
6.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
Property Management requesting compliance with the approved
development plan and that this matter be placed on the January
6, 1977 agenda at which time formal action can be taken by the
Planning Commission.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: VARIANCE #76 -3 - CHARLES BELL:
Chairman Mullen asked for the staff's report.
The Planning Director reported he discussed the application
with the applicant who indicated he wished to submit an alter-
native proposal for the room addition. No alternate plan was
submitted to staff. He stated he transmitted to the Commission
a communication from a neighbor, Mrs. Doris Nobles.
Mr. Charles Bell, 5984 Fiji Street, presented plans for an
alternate addition which would be located on the first floor
of the dwelling. He stated he was attempting to compromise and
the first floor addition would encroach to within 8 feet of
the property line, rather than 6 feet as originally requested.
Mr. Bell reported that he would plant landscaping to protect
the privacy of the neighbor who opposed the addition at the
last meeting and that this neighbor felt this was satisfactory
and supported the addition. Mr. Bell asked if the Commission
would take a straw vote on his alternate proposal.
Chairman Mullen polled the Commissioners and Commissioners
Van Allen, Friedmann and Mullen indicated they did not approve
of the alternate plan.
Chairman Mullen stated he felt the issue was not the encroach-
ment but the invasion of privacy of the neighbors. Mr. Bell
asked the Commission for suggestions and the Commission indi-
cated it was not their function to design the addition.
The Planning Director described the alternate plan submitted by
the applicant and stated the encroachment into the rear yard
setback would be in conformance with the adjustment section of
the Zoning Ordinance. The adjacent property owners would have
to concur with the adjustment. He reviewed the adjustment
provisions of the Ordinance. Staff transmitted copies of the
alternate plan to persons in the audience and suggested that
this hearing be continued until they have a chance to review
the plans.
Chairman Mullen continued the hearing.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
#76 -18 - THE WARMINGTON COMPANY: Chairman Mullen announced
that this was the time and place for the public hearing to
consider a proposal to establish an 80 -unit condominium
project to the rear of a proposed commercial development.
The condominium portion of this project will consist of 80
two and three bedroom units situated on approximately 6.2
acres and will include areas for off - street parking, recrea-
tional uses and landscaped, open areas. The commercial portions
of the project will be established on approximately 2.6 acres
and will include a restaurant with provision for the on -site
sale of beer and wine, other retail commercial stores, off -
street parking areas and open, landscaped areas. The Chair
declared the hearing open and asked for staff's report.
The Planning Director read Staff Report PC #76 -42 dated November
22 and presented the plot plans, elevations and a colored plot
plan of the proposed development.
Chairman Mullen asked if the applicant wished to speak.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
Mr. Jim Christensen, 1208 Deer Park, Fullerton, representing
the Warmington Company, stated the applicant eliminated four
more units from the plan so 80 units are now proposed. He
stated the applicant was remiss in that the final plot plan
was not reviewed by the adjacent property owners. He stated
the applicant agreed with all conditions of approval and would
follow through with the previous stipulations they made. Mr.
Christensen described changes between the final plot plan and
the conceptual development plan which was presented to the
adjacent property owners. He asked that the Planning Commission
approve the plan as presented with the exception that the Commission
withhold approval of the plans for the carport area at the
southeasterly corner of the project. He stated the applicant
would like to review the plans for this area with the adjacent
property owners to eliminate their concerns. Mr. Christensen
stated the applicant was amenable to making minor changes in
the plans. He reported the project will be an all adult community.
In response to questions from the Commission, Mr. Christensen
stated there will be no pedestrian or vehicular access to the
streets to the south of the project and there will be emergency
access only to Camp Street. He stated the landscaping plans
will show the pedestrian walkways which connect the residential
portion with the commercial development.
Mr. Walt Corson, representing the Warmington Company, reported
there will be several elevation styles but the applicant has
not yet designated the styles for the buildings. The Planning
Director stated the plans showed the general elevation styles
and that the precise elevation plans submitted for design review
will coordinate each building with a particular design.
Mr. Mike Kay, project landscaper, agreed that a right -turn lane
at the easterly driveway would be beneficial as suggested by
the Commission and that a median divider in the easterly drive-
way would aid traffic making a left -turn off of Lincoln. The
Planning Director recommended that the easterly driveway be
redesigned. Commissioner Van Allen suggested that cars entering
this driveway will require a longer storage area so that cars
turning off Lincoln are not stuck in the middle of the street.
Mr. Kay discussed pedestrian access between the commercial
buildings and the restaurant. The Commission suggested that
a condition be added that two parking spaces be eliminated to
provide for a pedestrian walkway between the two commercial
buildings. The Commission also suggested an additional condi-
tion that the easterly driveway be redesigned to provide for
a landscaped median, right -turn lane, and left -turn ingress
storage for west -bound Lincoln traffic.
Chairman Mullen asked if anyone wished to speak in favor.
Captain John DeLoge, 9144 Ethel Street, expressed concern
that the final plot plan differed from the plan shown the
property owners and that the applicant was not abiding by the
stipulation to provide a buffer zone between the project and
single- family homes to the south. He stated the units shown
on the final plot plan were further south than as shown on the
plan reviewed by the homeowners.
The Planning Director stated there was no mention of setbacks
in the written stipulations submitted by the applicant and
staff felt the plot plan submitted by the applicant was in
conformance with the stipulations the developer made since the
stipulations were incorporated into the General Plan amendment
and zone change. The Planning Director stated that since a
plot plan was not submitted in conjunction with the stipulations,
the staff assumed the plans conformed with the stipulations
made between the developer and property owner.
8.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
Mr. Christensen stated the plan shown the property owners was
a concept plan but agreed that the developer was remiss in not
showing the final plan to the property owners. He stated there
were mitigating circumstances which required changes in the plan
such as having to meet Fire Department requirements for emer-
gency vehicle circulation.
C- mmissioners Van Allen and Mullen stated they did not remember
any stipulations relating to the setbacks.
Mr. William Shaper, 9173 Ethel Street, discussed the setbacks
and stated the inadequate setbacks for the condominiums at
Moody and Lincoln present noise problems for the adjacent
property owners. Mr. Shaper stated the additional eight feet
was to revert to the property owners to the south at the time
the subject property is developed so this dedication was not
offered by Warmington. Mr. Shaper reported that the homeowners
to the south had problems when the former dairy drained towards
their property. He suggested that the Commission listen to
the recording of the City Council meeting to determine what
stipulations were made.
The Public Works Director stated conditions require a drainage
plan to be submitted and that drainage must be solved to staff's
satisfaction. Staff felt the property should drain towards
Lincoln but if portions drain towards the south, underground
drainage may required.
Mr. John Smolinski, 9143 Ethel Street, stated he opposed the
plot plan which is not the same one to which the property owners
agreed.
Mr. Christensen indicated that the final plot plan was the
result of a refining process which the applicant went through
in attempting to meet all conditions and requirements of devel-
opment. He reported that setbacks were not stipulated at the
City Council meeting and that the setbacks from the southerly
property line range from 58 feet to 90 feet, whereas on the
concept plan some setbacks were only 25 feet. Mr. Christensen
felt the property owners basically approved of the plan and
wished the developer to proceed. He asked that it be approved
and that the developer be able to work out the problems with
the homeowners.
The Commission reviewed the development plan and the applicant
described the carport design and location, and facilities pro-
posed for the recreation plaza. The applicant reported no
meeting room is proposed for a homeowners' association, different
sign plans will be submitted for the restaurant, and the CC &R's
will be submitted for the City Attorney's approval. The appli-
cant stated that five parking spaces within a garage are attached
to each building and the carports, which are proposed away
from the buildings, are for additional parking.
Captain John DeLoge, 9144 Ethel Street, asked that the property
owners be able to negotiate with the developer about the carports,
and stated the homeowners may not even want them.
Commissioner Van Allen suggested that the hearing be continued
so that the property owners'concerns may be resolved and to
allow the developer to redesign the easterly entrance. He
expressed concern over the circulation in the parking lot
and asked why parking had to be situated in front of the com-
mercial buildings especially since the City is concerned over
the beautification of Lincoln Avenue. Commissioner Van Allen
pointed out that in the plot plan submitted by the applicant
the open green areas were situated towards the center of the
9.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
project affording privacy to the condominium residents at the
expense of the adjacent homeowners. In the concept plan the
green areas were situated around the exterior of the units
with the units clustered towards the center. He felt the green
open areas should be more equalized, taking into consideration
the requests for a setback by the property owners to the south
and fact that future development may occur to the east and
west of the subject property. He asked that the proposed
recreation facilities be shown in the plans.
Mr. Christensen agreed to a two week continuance and felt this
would be adequate for the developer to resolve the problems with
the homeowners and prepare revised plans for the easterly drive-
way entrance.
It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen, seconded by Commis-
sioner Friedmann and unanimously carried to continue the public
hearing regarding Conditional Use Permit #76 -18 to the December
16 meeting.
RECESS: Chairman Mullen called a recess at 10:25 p.m. The
meeting was called back to order at 10:35 p.m. with Commis-
sioner Greenwood absent.
PUBLIC HEARING RE: VARIANCE #76 -3 (CONTINUED): Chairman Mullen
asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the revised plan.
The following persons spoke in support of the revised plan
and indicated they had no objections to the addition as proposed:
Mr. Gerald Krieger, 5994 Fiji Street
Mr. Raul Mora, 5963 Fiji Street
Chairman Mullen asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
The following speakers expressed opposition to the revised plan
and were concerned that the plans submitted by the applicant
did not indicate the design or construction materials of the
proposed addition:
Mr. Thomas Easterday, 5946 Suva Street
Mrs. Martha Sudweeks, 5965 Suva Street
Mrs. Glenda Store, 5975 Suva Street
Mr. Bell stated the proposed addition would match the dwelling
structurally and in building material.
Mrs. Doris Nobles, 5973 Fiji Street, stated she transmitted
a letter previously to the Commission.
Chairman Mullen stated he was in favor of the revised plan and
felt it was in the best interests of the applicant, neighbors
and City. He asked that precise development plans be submitted
for review and approval by the Commission.
Chairman Mullen moved to approve the revised building plan,
and Variance #76 -3 subject to the conditions recommended by
staff and the added condition that precise development plans
be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Partin felt an addition made by a homeowner to
a tract house would destroy the appearance of the dwelling and
he recommended that the applicant consult a professional archi-
tect to preserve the integrity of the dwelling, since the
neighbors were concerned about changing the style of the building.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
Commissioner Friedmann expressed concern that the applicant
could have received approval from the Planning Director for the
revised plan under the adjustment section of the Zoning Ord-
inance if he had not applied for the variance. The Planning
Director stated he could have approved the addition if the
required conditions were met and if the adjacent property owners
signed a statement that they had no objections.
Mr. Raul Mora, 5963 Fiji Street, stated the adjacent property
owners were notified of the hearing and he felt it could be
assumed that they had no objections since they did not attend
the hearing.
Mr. Easterday, 5946 Suva Street, stated the property owners
not in attendance had other obligations and it should not be
assumed that they have no objections.
Chairman Mullen moved to approve Variance #76 -3 and the revised
building plan subject to the conditions recommended by staff
and that precise plans be submitted. The motion died for lack
of a second.
It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen and seconded by Com-
missioner Partin to deny Variance #76 -3 which includes the
original plan submitted November 18 and the revised plan sub-
mitted December 2 by the applicant. The motion carried by
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3 COMMISSIONERS: Friedmann, Partin Ej Van Allen
1 COMMISSIONERS: Mullen
1 COMMISSIONERS: Greenwood
Chairman Mullen closed the hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING RE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT #76 -4 - SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF VALLEY VIEW AND ORANGE: Chairman Mullen announced
that this was the time and place for the public hearing to
consider a proposal to change the designation of the approxi-
mately six -acre parcel of land situated at the southwesterly
corner of Valley View Street and Orange Avenue from its current
classification of all commercial to a classification of single -
family, medium - density residential and commercial. The
proposal calls for the retention of approximately 2.25 acres
of commercial land along the Valley View Street frontage for
commercial uses with the westerly 3.75 acres of land being
proposed for single - family residential development. Chairman
Mullen opened the public hearing and asked for staff's report.
The Planning Director read Staff Report #76 -43 dated November
24 describing the application and zoning history of the property.
He reported that the applicant submitted a draft environmental
impact report with the application which staff found to be
acceptable and in conformance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act. Staff recommended that
additional comment be made in the final EIR regarding traffic
circulation and drainage of the property and stated staff would
require that a covered, underground drainage system be estab-
lished along the southerly boundary of the property.
The Commission reviewed the environmental impact report in
detail and made several recommendations which were noted by
staff to be included in the final EIR.
Chairman Mullen asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of
or in opposition to the draft EIR. There was no one wishing
to speak.
11.
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
It was moved by Chairman Mullen, seconded by Commissioner
Van Allen and unanimously carried to approve the draft envir-
onmental impact report as adequate.
Chairman Mullen asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of
General Plan Amendment #76 -4.
Mr. Jerome Reynolds, 250 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach,
the applicant, stated that when the application was first
presented to the City Council, the Council expressed concern
about the lack of information on the intended use of the prop-
erty, with the applicant indicating they felt discussion of a
precise development plan was inappropriate at the time of
application. He stated the EIR comments in detail on reasons
they are requesting the amendment and the primary purpose is to
allow them to develop residential use on the rear portion of the
property. Mr. Reynolds asked that the Commission not be too
concerned with the preliminary development plan since it was
submitted in response to the Council to try to demonstrate how
much commercial is feasible and how much residential is necessary
to maintain the integrity of the total plan. He stated the plan
represents the maximum commercial development that can be con-
structed considering the requirements of the zone. The residential
portion represents the minimum size of property needed to create
a single- family neighborhood with minimum 6000 square foot lots.
Mr. Reynolds stated the applicant has made a strong effort over
a long period of time to develop the property commercially
and has found an insufficient demand for six acres. They also
felt commercial development was not feasible within the next
five years. The applicant felt there was a market for single -
family homes and that single - family homes on the subject property
would be compatible with the adjacent residents. Mr. Reynolds
stated if the commercial portion is enlarged it would infringe
on the integrity of the residential portion. Also if additional
landscaping is proposed between the commercial and residential
portions, it would push the commercial buildings towards the
street and reduce the size of the commercial area. Mr. Reynolds
stated the applicant did not feel multiple - family residential
would be supported by the City and adjacent residents and the
applicant did not want to get involved with the obstacles in
seeking multiple - family development. He stated the applicant
realized the limited demand for commercial on the property
and they felt that, even if the commercial area was expanded,
having the same number of commercial buildings would not result
in a greater benefit to the City. They felt if the entire
property remained commercial and was only partially developed,
this would result in an unusable, residual commercially -zoned
strip similar to the 660 foot deep strip at the southwest corner
of Ball and Valley View. Mr. Reynolds stated the applicant
agreed at the Council meeting to a requirement that they will
not develop the residential without the commercial area and
this requirement was addressed in the EIR because the applicant
made that commitment. He stated the applicant is interested
in developing the entire property and will agree to stipulate
that the homes will not be built until ground is broken for
the commercial area. He reported the applicant has no plans
to acquire the adjacent service station property.
Mr. E. A. Dilley, 5132 Canterbury, stated he appreciated hearing
a developer state he will build the commercial simultaneously
with the residential development.
Commissioner Van Allen felt it was not feasible for a major
restaurant to be located so close to a high school and unrealistic
to expect a major tenant to locate near a school with its attendant
problems. He felt a small commercial center which can cater to
the neighborhood and school would be better. Chairman Mullen
Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 1976
asked if the developer could develop the residential portion
without a conditional use permit if the zone change is approved.
The Planning Director stated staff recommended a retention
of the Civic Center Overlay Zone for the property which requires
a conditional use permit for any use. A valid condition
which could be imposed under the permit could require the
commercial portion to be developed prior to any residential
development.
It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen and seconded by.Commis-
sioner Partin to recommend to the City Council approval of General
Plan Amendment #76 -4 on the southwest corner of Valley View and
Orange with the easterly 2.25 acres retaining a commercial desig-
nation and the westerly 3.75 acres being reclassified to a resi-
dential designation with the entire property remaining in the
Civic Center Overlay Zone. The motion unanimously carried by
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4 COMMISSIONERS:
0 COMMISSIONERS:
1 COMMISSIONERS:
Friedmann,, Partin, Van Allen
F Mullen
None
Greenwood
Chairman Mullen closed the public hearing.
The Commission agreed to continue Item #7 under Administrative
Matters, Consideration of Tentative Tract Map #9624, the Warming -
ton Company, to the December 16 meeting.,
Regarding Item #6, Report from City Attorney Re: Status of
American Pool, Patio & Nursery, the deputy city attorney reported
that Mr. Jack James appeared at the arraignment on November 22
without his attorney and asked that the arraignment be continued
until his attorney could be present. The arraignment was continued
to January 10, 1977. The Planning Director reported that the
City became aware that there has been a change of ownership of
the property.
Regarding Item #8, Consideration of Ball /Bloomfield Shopping
Center, the Planning Director reported that the Commission approved
the plot plan for the new stores subject to a condition that the
driveway entrance on Ball be redesigned and referred back for
Commission review and approval. He reported that joint financing
by the owner and applicant failed, the applicant had to get his
own financing and was now ready to proceed with the development.
Staff reported that one driveway on Ball was closed and the
second driveway was widened and relocated further easterly to
eliminate potential conflicts by having two driveways and to
provide the safest and best circulation in the parking lot.
Staff also approved the relocation of the Photo Mat store further
east and reported the sight distance problem at the alley exiting
onto Via Largo was resolved.
Hearing no objections, Chairman Mullen received and filed the
matter.
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairman Mullen adjourned the meeting at 12:35 a.m.
CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SECRE ARY 0 HE PL•NNING CO MISSION