PC Minutes-2005-06-2832400 PASEO ADELANTO
SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA 92675
(949) 493- 1 171
(949) 493- 1053 FAX
www.surEjuuncupu~rano org
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 28,2005
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SAM ALLEVATO
DIANE BATHGATE
WYAT HART
JOE SOT0
DAVID M SWERDLIN
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Neely at
7:OO p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners Present: Tim Neely, Chairman
Sheldon Cohen
Joe Drey
Gene Ratcliffe
Commissioners Absent: Robert Cardoza (excused)
Staff Present: Molly Bogh, Planning Director; Omar Sandoval, Deputy City Attorney;
William Ramsey, Principal Planner; Sam Shoucair, Senior Engineer; Tamara Campbell,
Assistant Planning Director; David Contreras, Associate Planner; Justin Carlson,
Assistant Planner; Sue McCullough, Recording Secretary.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) 14343, SAN JUAN MEADOWS, A
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR REVISED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) 14343 APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
Staff recommends this item be continued to July 12, 2005, in order to correct the project
location on the hearing notice.
FEBRUARY 17. 1998, (APPLICANT: ADVANCED GROUP SJ-99)
Motion Sun Juan Capistrano: Preserving the Past to Enhance the Future
rn +a Prirted on recvzled oaDer
PC Meeting 2 June 28,2005
Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, to continue the item
to the July 12, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.
AYES: Commissioners Cohen, Drey and Ratcliffe, Chairman Neely L
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Cardoza
ABSTAIN: None
This motion passed by a vote of 4-0.
Chairman Neely indicated that he would be out of town July 12, 2005. Ms. Bogh said
that it appears there will be a quorum on July 12, 2005.
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 05-05, MITCHELL BUILDING, AN
APPLICATION FOR A PROPOSED WIRELESS ANTENNA LOCATED WITHIN A
FAUX CHIMNEY ON AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 30320 RANCHO VIEJO
ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET NORTH OF JUNIPER0 SERRA ROAD.
[APN 121-1 90-57) (APPLICANT: INFRANEXT FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS)
Written Communications
Staff report dated June 28,2005
Owner
Mitchell Land & Improvement Company, 2919 Gardena Ave., Signal Hill, CA 90755
u
Applicant
lnfranext for Cingular Wireless, 150 Paularino Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626
EngineedArchitect
Connell Design Group, 15615 Alton Parkway, Ste. 360, Irvine, CA 92618
Staff presentation and recommendation
Mr. Carlson presented the staff report. Staff recommends the Commission conditionally
approve CUP 05-05 and find that the project is exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Public Hearing
Tim Miller, 150 Paularino Avenue, Suite A166, Costa Mesa, represented the applicant
and said the previous carrier currently on the site is T Mobile, and that the applicant's
antenna will be housed within a faux chimney on a building at 30320 Rancho Viejo
Road.
Commissioner Cohen asked if this will improve cell coverage on the toll road between
Greenfield and Newport Beach. Mr. Miller said that the small area covered by the new
antennas will be along Interstate 5 (M), and there will be no additional coverage on the
toll road.
L
PC Meeting 3 June 28,2005
Chairman Neely said the staff report includes comments in opposition from a Mr. Smith,
but that the staff report had addressed his comments in light of the preemption by
federal law regarding health impacts of cellular antennas. L
Commissioner Drey said that he is satisfied that the project is in compliance with FCC
standards.
Motion
Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, to approve
Resolution 05-06-28-1 for Conditional Use Permit 05-05 confirming issuance of a
categorical exemption and approving an unmanned wireless communication facility
within a faux chimney at an existing building located at 30320 Rancho Viejo Road
(Assessors Parcel Number 650-1 62-I8)(lnfranext for Cingular Wireless).
AYES: Commissioners Cohen, Drey and Ratcliffe, Chairman Neely
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Cardoza
ABSTAIN: None
This motion passed by a vote of 4-0.
3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TPM) 03-142, FORSTER ESTATES, AN
APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 2.2 ACRE PARCEL INTO FOUR u
RESIDENTIAL LOTS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF VALLE ROAD
APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET SOUTH OF THE MCCRACKEN HILL GATED ENTRY.
lAPN 675-331 -02) (APPLICANT: ANVARI ASSOCIATES CORPORATION)
Written Communications
Staff report dated June 28,2005
Applicant
Shahram Anvari, Architect, Anvari Associates Corporation, 23591 El Tor0 Road, #280,
Lake Forest, CA 92630
Enqineer
Mo Ghiassi, P.E., Anvari Associates Corporation, 23591 El Tor0 Road, #280, Lake
Forest, CA 92630
Staff presentation and recommendation
Mr. Ramsey presented the staff report as a request for consideration of TPM 03-142, an
application to subdivide an existing 2.2 acre parcel into four residential lots. The project
is within the land use and density parameters of the Land Use Code. However, staff has
identified issues of conformity with the General Plan regarding community design for
hillside areas, neighborhood connectivity, aesthetics, and slope stability.
Staff recommends the Commission provide direction and make a determination
regarding the General Plan consistency of the proposed project, and continue
consideration of the project to the July 12 public hearing.
b
PC Meeting 4 June 28,2005
Commissioner Questions and Comments
Commissioner Cohen asked for clarification of the lot size. Mr. Ramsey said the
McCracken Hill Specific Plan establishes the development standards; the minimum lot
size is 20,000 square feet. The medium-low density range of the General Plan land use
designation allows a range of density from 1 to 2 dwelling units per acre. He cited a
General Plan provision stating that to achieve the maximum density allowed under the
General Plan, a project must demonstrate superior design.
W
Commissioner Ratcliffe asked if Paragraph 14.8.a of the environmental checklist stating
the project is “potentially significant unless mitigated’’ is correct on page 13 of the staff
report. Mr. Ramsey said yes.
Commissioner Ratcliffe asked if the Lawson Geotechnical recommendations to ensure
slope stability would be incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Ramsey said
the specific recommendations would be implemented during the actual grading plan
design and building plan design, if the project is approved with those conditions.
Ms. Bogh said that an additional parcel in the vicinity, identified as Parcel 33852 on the
map exhibit after page 5 of the staff report, is also the subject of a 4-lot parcel map that
has been submitted to the Planning Department for review, indicating a trend towards
resubdivision of large lots in the McCracken Hill area. The policy question before the
Commission is, “To what extent do we want to see the development pattern in the
McCracken Hill area of re-subdividing these lots, and what density is appropriate given
the steepness of that slope? In addition, these proposed new lots will access directly
onto Forster Canyon Road, which has not been designed as a neighborhood residential
street.
Commissioner Ratcliffe asked if the white stakes on the site indicate the edge of the
project’s site. Mr. Ramsey said they may be grading stakes for the Pacifica San Juan
project.
u
Chairman Neely asked if the 2003 City Council action to correct the General Plan
designation for this site was applied to sponsor additional subdivision of these parcels.
Mr. Ramsey said the medium-low density General Plan designation existed on the site
until 1999 when the City Council adopted the updated General Plan, which showed a
lower density. A few years later the Land Use Element was changed for the site back to
a medium-low density. He stated he did not know the intent of the City Council in
making this change.
Public Hearinq
Applicant Shahram Anvari said the General Plan designation was Low Density at the
time the property was purchased. Mr. Anvari said the project is not seen from the 1-5
freeway.
Mo Ghiassi, Civil Engineer for applicant, offered to answer any engineering questions,
and said the stakes on the site are for this project. -
Eric Cupferberg, 33511 Valle Road, neighboring property owner in the area directly
above parcels 3 and 4, spoke in opposition to the project due to safety concerns
PC Meeting 5 June 28,2005
regarding excavation of the steep hillside on an ancient landslide. He requested that, if
the project is approved, extra attention be given to over-sized retaining walls to protect a
number of young families in the homes directly above the proposed project. ‘-,
Commissioner Questions and Comments
Commissioner Drey said the steep hillside would be a grading challenge. The structures
appear to be in a row very close to the street, that there are aesthetic drawbacks, and
that 4 lots may be too many.
Commissioner Ratcliffe spoke of concerns regarding setting a precedent and aesthetic
impacts due to grading challenges, as well as the density.
Commissioner Cohen said he didn’t see a sufficient reason for pushing the density level
to maximum density. Mr. Ramsey said the Commission is being asked to make a
determination on General Plan consistency regarding the density.
Chairman Neely asked if this project would come back to the DRC or Planning
Commission, if approved. Mr. Ramsey said the project could be conditioned to require
Planning Commission review of the architecture of each structure. Mr. Sandoval said
the Municipal Code standards would apply to architectural review. Ms. Bogh said if this
map is approved with a condition saying that each individual house is subject to an
architectural control approval, each house would come back for review of colors,
materials, and landscaping. However, the question, “Is this an appropriate place to put
four homes?” must be answered prior-to approving the subdivision map.
Commissioner Drey said that the project falls short of offering an exceptional level of
design quality needed in order to increase density.
L
Chairman Neely asked what the consequence would be of a negative determination of
General Plan consistency. Ms. Bogh said a resolution for approval with conditions could
be brought to the next meeting if the Commission feels this density is appropriate. If the
Commission feels this density is not appropriate in this location, the applicant has the
choice to either redesign with less density and fewer lots, or have staff bring back a
resolution of denial which would then go to the City Council.
Chairman Neely said he can’t support compliance with the hillside residential criteria, is
not confident in the geological report, and does not want to set a precedent. The intent
of the Hillside Ordinance may not have been to re-subdivide property to build homes on
2-to-I lots.
Ms. Bogh said the determination of General Plan consistency could be forwarded to the
City Council for determination, and if they determine the project is consistent, the Parcel
Map could be brought back to the Commission for review of conditions of approval.
Commissioner Cohen said that the project does not meet the following General Plan
criteria on page 5 (3) of the staff report: “Development at an intensity or density between
the average ar;d maximum levels can occur only where projects offer exceptional
design quality, important public amenities or benefits, or other factors that promote
important goals and policies of the General Plan.” This finding should form the basis for
a resolution finding the project inconsistent with the General Plan.
L-
PC Meeting 6 June 28,2005
Chairman Neely stated he would like to add his comments regarding the well-planned
lot size aspect of the hillside guidelines to the resolution. ‘v
Motion
Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Drey, to recommend to the
City Council that the proposed project is inconsistent with the General Plan, and that if
the City Council determines the proposed density is consistent with the General Plan,
the Tentative Parcel Map shall be referred back to the Planning Commission for review
of the design and recommendations for conditions of approval; further, that the item be
continued to the July 12 Planning Commission meeting for adoption of a resolution
stating the findings for this recommendation.
AYES: Commissioners Cohen, Drey and Ratcliffe, Chairman Neely
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Cardoza
ABSTAIN: None
This motion passed by a vote of 4-0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. CONSIDERATION OF TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (TRP) 05-074, COBB L
RESIDENCE, AN APPLICATION TO REMOVE A CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREE, WITH
A DIAMETER OF 30 INCHES AND APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET HIGH LOCATED IN
THE SOUTHWEST REAR PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 31551 AVENIDA LOS CERRITOS APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET WEST
OF RANCHO VIEJO ROAD. (APN 650-151-16) (APPLICANT: JACK COBB)
Continued from June 14, 2005 Planning Commission hearing.
Written Communications
Staff report dated June 28,2005
Own e r/A p p I ica n t
Jack Cobb, 31551 Avenida Los Cerritos, 31551 Avenida Los Cerritos, San Juan
Capistrano, CA 92675
Staff presentation and recommendation
Mr. Contreras presented the staff report as a request for TRP 05-074, an application to
remove a California Pepper tree, with a diameter of 30 inches and approximate height
of 20 feet located in the southwest rear portion of the property located at 31551 Avenida
Los Cerritos. He related that staff had met with the applicant and adjacent property
owner regarding health and status of the tree due to construction activities on the
adjacent parcel, and that the adjacent property owner had paid for an arborist’s report.
This report determined the tree could be saved in a healthy condition with some
remedial work.
‘L,
PC Meeting 7 June 28,2005
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny TRP 05-074, based on the lack
of evidence to support the required findings.
Public Hearing
Applicant Jack Cobb asked that TRP 05-074 be approved, since the tree branches
could drop on the roof of his house, and the roof leaks and needs to be replaced often
since the roof is under the tree.
Brad Gates, 28546 Paseo Diana, owner of adjacent property affecting the tree, spoke in
support of Mr. Cobb's request to remove the tree due to safety concerns, and stated
that the tree would continue to need to be trimmed at the property line.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Ratcliffe concurred with staff that there is no compelling reason to
remove the tree and said that the tree would be in pretty good shape with a minor
amount of custodial care and that if the property is sold for development, the tree
removal can be reviewed again.
Commissioner Cohen asked if staff analyzed the tree for potential dangerous
conditions. Mr. Contreras said that the arborist's report speaks to the stability of the tree
in paragraph 2 of the Analysis.
Commissioner Drey said that the tree is one of the top ten pepper trees in the City.
Chairman Neely said that heritage trees should be protected and that the arborist's
report does not make the case for removal due to safety.
'L
Motion
Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Drey, of Resolution 05-06-
28-2 denying a Tree Removal Permit for one California Peppe;.tree located at 31551
Avenida Los Cerritos (APN 650-151-16).
AYES: Commissioners Cohen, Drey and Ratcliffe, Chairman Neely
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Cardoza'
ABSTAIN: None
This motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0.
MEW BUSINESS
None
COMMISS IONISTAFF COMMENTS
Ms. Bogh announced the following new City staff: Terri Delcamp, Historic Preservation
Manager; Justin Carlson, Assistant Planner; Josephine Ysais, Administrative Secretary;
and Brenda Heskett, Administrative Secretary.
PC Meeting 8 June 28,2005
Commissioner Drey said that a 30-foot 1'' Team real estate banner is on one of the
buildings directly above the lots on Valle Road. Ms. Bogh said she would notify Code
Enforcement. k/
Commissioner Cohen asked about the Village Dental signage in the car wash center.
Ms. Bogh said she would notify Code Enforcement.
Chairman Neely commented on the large amount of new development under
construction and the need to monitor development of each site for consistency with
approved landscape plans. Ms. Bogh said the Planning Department inspects
development sites prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and staff is open to
input from Commissioners if they see a problem on any site.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at
8:35 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 12, 2005, at 7:OO
p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Res pectfu II submitted , *Q
Molly Ek&h '
Planning Director
ism