Loading...
Minutes 1975-05-01MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CYPRESS PLANNING COMMISSION HELD May 1, 1975 The regular meeting of the Cypress Planning Commission was called to order at 7:37 p.m. on Thursday, May 1, 1975 in the Cypress City Council Chambers, 5275 Orange Avenue, Cypress, California, Chairman Dennis Hart presiding. PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners Greenwood, Mullen, Van Allen and Hart Commissioner Walsh Also present was Brian Hawley, Planning Director. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Hart led the pledge to the flag. MINUTES: April 10 and April 17, 1975 It was moved by Commissioner Greenwood, seconded by Commis- sioner Mullen and unanimously carried to approve the April 10 minutes as corrected. It was moved by Commissioner Van Allen, seconded by Commis- sioner Mullen and unanimously carried to approve the April 17 minutes. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Chairman Hart asked if anyone wished to speak in regard to any matter not on the agenda. No one wished to speak. Commissioner Greenwood stated that he had contacted several of the Lincoln Avenue property owners following their attend- ance at the April 10 hearing on the Lincoln Avenue Study - Phase II Report who indicated they thought that the meeting was over when the hearing was declared closed by the Chairman. Commissioner Greenwood recommended that at subsequent hearings the Chairman briefly outline the procedures for the conduct of a hearing. PUBLIC HEARING RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #73 -17 - SANDRA PLOTT: Chairman Hart announced that this was the time and place for the public hearing to consider a proposed modifi- cation to Conditional Use Permit #73 -17 which would provide for the temporary use of the vacant lot located on the easterly side of the Parkside Preschool, 4539 Cerritos Avenue, Cypress, as a play yard and for outdoor recreation purposes in conjunction with the operation of the preschool. Chairman Hart asked for the staff's report. The Planning Director presented slides showing the existing preschool, adjacent vacant area, and adjacent uses which are single- family houses to the north and east, a vacant field to the west of the preschool, and Los Alamitos Golf Course to the south. The Planning Director summarized Staff Report PC #75 -7 dated April 25. He indicated that the staff confirmed the adjacent homeowners' concern over the height of the perimeter wall which is barely 5 feet in height and the staff recommended that the wall be increased to a minimum of 6 feet above the final grade and that addi- tional screening be provided through the use of landscaping to assure the homeowners' privacy. Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 1975 The Planning Director indicated that the Commission ap- proved Conditional Use Permit #73 -17 in September, 1973 and also approved a one -year extension which would allow the applicant to construct an addition to the preschool on the property under consideration. He reported that the applicant was unable to proceed with the addition for financial reasons and if the applicant did exercise C.U.P. #73 -17 sometime in the future, all conditions applied to that permit must be complied with. Commissioner Mullen inquired about the type of landscaping recommended for installation. The Planning Director stated he would work with the applicant regarding the type to be installed and that the applicant would submit a landscaping plan for Commission approval. He recommended fast growing shrubs and trees similar to the landscaping at the preschool. Commissioner Greenwood asked if the wall could withstand the addition and the Planning Director felt it could be done and he recommended that decorative block not be used for the addition. Commissioner Mullen recommended that the placement of the play equipment be oriented toward the southwest portion of the lot to avoid noise disturbance to adjacent homeowners. The Planning Director reported that the applicant did not have a specific plan for the placement of the equipment. He agreed that it could be located away from the single - family homes and reported that the applicant did not propose any mounding in the play area. Chairman Hart opened the hearing and asked if the applicant wished to speak. Ms. Sandra Plott, 5211 Vista Hermosa Street, Long Beach, California, stated the mounds at the preschool had been removed. She reported that it was not feasible at this time to add on to the school and that she wished instead to be able to use the vacant lot for activities and that she had no elaborate plans for this area. She reported there would be no increase in the number of students. She stated that if the wall addition proves to be too expensive she would not proceed with her plans. The applicant re- quested that the landscaping required under Condition #3 be limited to installation near the block wall fence and stated she was not interested in planting a lot of trees on the property. She also requested that the irrigation system be an informal type and not automatic. Chairman Hart asked if anyone wished to speak in support. There was no one wishing to speak in favor. He asked for those in opaosition. Mrs. Frances Morris, 4554 Patricia Circle, Cypress, stated her property was immediately to the rear of the vacant lot and that she was concerned about a devaluation of her property because of the noise of the children which is already a nuisance to their privacy and comfort. She stated there are sliding glass doors at the rear of her home, only 12 feet between the house and fence, and that they were concerned about damage from balls thrown over the wall which is only five feet in height on her side and only 4 1/2 feet on the side of the vacant lot. She stated they could easily view activities on the vacant lot and there would be no privacy in their yard. She stated on one occasion a ball hit their patio and stated -2- Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 1975 that she would be reluctant to have her young child play in the yard. She recommended that the conditions attached to C.U.P. 73 -17 regarding the wall and landscaping be complied with and that the shrubs be an adequate height to provide screening. Mr. Robert Baker, 4544 Patricia Circle, Cypress, stated the shrubs would take about a year to grow to a height that is necessary for protection as a sound barrier and he asked if the wall would be raised around the preschool. The Planning Director stated the conditions applied to C.U.P. 73 -17 would have to be complied with if the applicant develops the vacant lot with the school building addition; the conditions did include raising the wall around the preschool. Mr. George Kronenberg, 10499 Jeanine Lane, Cypress, stated his property was adjacent to the east of the vacant lot and indicated he was concerned about the safety of the children and about rocks or gravel being thrown into his pool. He asked that a condition be imposed that no loose gravel or rocks be used for decorative landscaping. He stated that three blocks were missing from the fence between the pre- school and vacant area and questioned the safety of this. He stated an original condition of approval for the adjacent tract required the construction of a six foot high wall on the perimeter and that the wall had never been this height. He reported that he had discussed this matter with the City Attorney and the contractor had added another course in 1966 but the wall still was not six feet. Mr. Kronenberg stated an original condition on the permit was that play equipment not project above the wall and that at least two pieces of equipment did extend one or two feet above the wall. He asked that if the wall is increased that it also be rein- forced. He stated he did not object to the use but felt there should be adequate restrictions to protect the safety of all concerned and protect property values. The Planning Director reported that at the time of construction of the tract the Zoning Ordinance required only that the wall not be greater than six feet in height. He stated he did not know why the wall was less than five feet in some areas. Mr. Kronenberg requested that a specific condition be imposed that the wall be six or eight feet in height. The applicant indicated she did not feel it was her responsi- bility to heighten the wall if it was a condition imposed on the developer and stated the play equipment had been in the same location since the preschool opened. She stated the three blocks were knocked loose by the earth mover who removed the mounds. Chairman Hart asked if there would be any changes in the State license with the use of the additional property and the applicant stated no changes were required since the number of children was not being increased. Commissioner Van Allen asked why the applicant wished the play ground hours to be 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. when the school is open from 7 a.m. until 6 p.m. The applicant stated this would ensure that the playground is open if the school hours are extended in the future. Commissioner Van Allen asked if the addi- tional play area would enable the school to have additional children and the Planning Director stated that State law -3- Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 1975 requires a certain minimum indoor square footage per child and that the applicant already has the maximilm number of children permitted. Chairman Hart asked if the playground hours would be staggered and asked about the ratio of super- visors to children. The applicant stated the hours would be staggered and that the ratio was 1 to 12. She stated she had no plans to modify the wall between the school and vacant lot and that there would be supervisors in both the preschool and playground areas. Mr. Kronenberg asked if the applicant would be required to increase the wall's height and plant trees and the staff indicated these requirements were being recommended. Chairman Hart closed the public hearing. Commissioner Mullen stated that it appeared the homeowners did not oppose the use but were concerned about maintaining privacy and the integrity of their homes. He recommended an addition to Condition #3 that no loose gravel or rocks be used in the landscaping. Commissioner Van Alien recommended that a plot plan showing the location of all play equipment be submitted for Commission approval along with the landscaping plans and that this be stated in Condition #2 and Chairman Hart recommended that the plans showing the method of increasing the wall be in- cluded in Condition #2. Commissioner Greenwood stated he did not feel a six foot high wall was adequate to protect the homeowners' privacy and that the existing wall may be shaky. He recommended that the wall be more than six feet or that a new wall be constructed if necessary. Commissioner Mullen stated he did not feel an eight foot high wall was attractive. He felt the six foot wall would provide adequate protection to the homeowners which would be supplemented by the additional landscaping screening. Commissioner Greenwood stated there are other eight foot high walls in the City and he did not feel they were offensive. Commissioner Van Allen felt the application would have had a greater impact if the number of children was being increased. He felt the noise factor would not be as great by having the children spread out over a larger area and felt the problem would be greater in a more confined area. Commissioner Van Allen recommended that the hours for the play area be 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. He felt the 6 a.m. opening hour would cause more disturbance to the homeowners. Commissioner Mullen felt the 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. hours was more reasonable and he did not feel there was a need to open the play area prior to the school's opening. It was moved by Commissioner Mullen and seconded by Com- missioner Van Allen to approve the modification to Condi- tional Use Permit #73 -17 subject to the following conditions: 1. The use of the subject property as a temporary play- ground shall be limited to a maximum of two years. If the applicant should wish to extend this time period, a separate public hearing before the Planning Commission shall be required. Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 1975 2. The existing walls located adjacent to the residential areas to the north and east of the subject property shall be increased in height to a minimum of six feet above the highest grade. Landscape screening shall be provided adjacent to these residential areas as has been provided along the northerly boundary of the existing preschool facility. Plans for the proposed landscaping and irri- gation system, plans showing the method whereby the existing perimeter walls will be increased in height, and plans showing the location of the proposed play equipment shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. 3. All required wall construction, landscaping and irriga- tion systems shall be installed prior to any use of the subject property in conjunction with the operation of the preschool. No decorative -type rock, loose gravel or similar landscape techniques shall be used in the proposed landscaping program. 4. Proposed play equipment shall be arranged in a manner least disruptive to the privacy and comfort of adjacent property owners. 5. The hours of operation and proposed use of the subject property shall be limited to the hours between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 6. Approval of this temporary use does not excuse compliance with all applicable rules and ordinances of other State, County and local agencies nor compliance with conditions of approval of Conditional Use Permit #272. 7. The rights granted under this modification shall cease at the expiration of two years or at such time as the rights granted under Conditional Use Permit #73 -17 are exercised by the applicant or upon sale or other disposi- tion of the subject property if such sale or disposition places the property under separate ownership from the existing preschool facility. Commissioner Mullen felt a simple type of landscaping and irrigation system could be installed at this time and more formal landscaping be required at the time the applicant expands the school. The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 4 COMMISSIONERS: 0 COMMISSIONERS: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Greenwood, Mullen, Van Allen and Hart None Walsh The Planning Director advised that there is a 15 day waiting period during which time the Commission's decision may be appealed to the City Council. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS: 1. Tentative Tract #8472 - William Lyon Company - Westerly of Knott Avenue, southerly of the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way. -5- Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 1975 The Planning Director reported that the City Council con- sidered the proposed pre- annexation zoning of this property at its April 28 meeting and had continued consideration of the proposed zone change to the July 14 meeting to await the result of the July 1 referendum election. He recommended a continuance of the tentative tract map to the July 17 Commission meeting so that the zoning and General Plan amendment could be determined prior to consideration of the tract map. He stated the tentative map cannot be considered without a determination of the zoning and reported that the applicant agreed to the continuance. It was moved by Commissioner Mullen, seconded by Commissioner Van Allen and unanimously carried to continue consideration of Tentative Tract Map #8472 to the July 17 meeting. 2. Review of plot plan and elevations for proposed commercial development on Ball Road. The Planning Director reviewed the plot plan and elevations for a commercial center on the north side of Ball Road, east of Juanita Street. He reported adjacent uses were a dairy store to the east, vacant property to the west, and apartments to the north. The Planning Director also presented a colored rendering of the proposed development. He reported that the applicant would be submitting at the next meeting a conditional use permit application for a liquor store/ delicatessen and fast food facility. He outlined three conditions of approval for the application. Commissioner Van Allen inquired about parking provisions and the Planning Director advised one space would be provided for every 250 square feet which conformed to the requirements. Commissioner Van Allen asked if street trees would be required and the Planning Director stated street trees were a Code requirement on any commercial development in the City. Commissioners Greenwood and Mullen commended the applicant and stated the development would be an asset to the City. It was moved by Commissioner Mullen and seconded by Commis- sioner Greenwood to approve the plot plan and elevations for the commercial development on Ball Road subject to the following conditions: 1. Development of the subject property shall be in sub- stantial compliance with the plot plans and elevations submitted and approved by the Planning Commission. 2. Development of the subject property shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City Code. 3. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to final building inspection of this project. Said landscaping shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. At the time landscape and irrigation plans are submitted, a plan for the proposed signing program shall be sub- mitted for Planning Commission review and approval. Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 1975 The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 4 COMMISSIONERS: 0 COMMISSIONERS: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Greenwood, Mullen, Van Allen and Hart None Walsh The Planning Director reported that at its April 28 meeting the City Council had referred consideration of Tentative Tract #8888 back to the Planning Commission at the request of the applicant, Henry Roberts. The applicant proposed to either withdraw the application or submit a revised plot plan with 3 or 4 additional units. The Planning Director reported that notices for the public hearings scheduled for May 15 had been mailed out a week in advance but there was a delay at the post office and the notices had not been received in time by the newspaper office. He recommended that the Commission postpone the regular meeting until May 22. The Commission agreed to schedule the next meeting for May 22. Commissioner Greenwood suggested that the brake service shop on the east side of Walker, south of Lincoln be considered as a candidate for the Planning Commission recognition award because of its attractive appearance. Commissioner Van Allen recommended that materials presented by an applicant, such as a colored rendering, which are used to influence the Commission's decision should be kept and made a part of the City's files. He stated that the Commission had problems in the past when a final development did not conform to the plot plan, elevations and rendering submitted at the time the application was considered by the Commission. He felt the Planning Department should have these materials on record to ensure a consistent development. The Planning Director stated he kept these materials on file until a development has been finalized. Commissioner Van Allen mentioned the Commission rules and regulations provided for Commission reorganization at the first meeting in May and he inquired if the date had been changed. He requested that the staff research this matter to determine if the policy was changed and report back at the May 22 meeting. Commissioner Greenwood asked that the staff investigate an appropriate amount for a landscaping bond which could be a conditional use permit requirement. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Hart adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. until Thursday, May 22 at 7:30 p.m. ATTEST: • • SECRETAR F T PLANN CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION .NG COMMISSION