Loading...
PC Minutes-2004-05-24. 32400 PASEO ADELANTO SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO. CA 92675 (949) 493-1171 (949) 493- 1053 FAX Ji3t'li' sui~zruilcuput~urlo 0l.g MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SAM ALLEVATO DIANE L BATHGATE WYAlT HART JOE SOT0 DAVID M SWERDLIN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 25,2004 CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Cardoza at 7:OO p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Tim Neely, Chairman Robert Cardoza Sheldon Cohen Gene Ratcliffe Commissioners Absent: none Staff Present: Molly Bogh, Planning Director; William Ramsey, Principal Planner; Omar Sandoval, Deputy City Attorney; William Huber, Assistant City Manager; Larry Lawrence, Consulting Project Manager; Sam Shoucair, Senior Engineer; David Contreras , Assistant Planner; Sue McCullough, Recording Secretary. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of March 23, 2004: Commissioner Cohen moved approval, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, of the Minutes of March 23, 2004, and the motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. Sail Juan Capistrano: Pi-esetving the Past to Enhance the Futuf-e PC Meeting 2 May 25,2004 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL RETAINING WALL LOCATED ON THE WEST PORTION OF PROPERTY AT 33633 MODIFICATION (AC/MOD) 97-08, A MODIFICATION TO MATERIAL FOR A CAMINO CAPISTRANO, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF CAMINO CAPISTRANO, 250 NORTH OF STONEHILL DRIVE (WESELOH CHEVROLET/HONDA) Applicant John Morgan, 28570 Marguerite Pkwy #203, Mission Viejo, CA 92692 Written Communications Staff report dated May 25,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Contreras presented the staff report on this item which was continued from the April 27, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. He stated that staff had reviewed various wall system finishes presented by the applicant as well as the approved landscape plan for the project area in front of the wall. Based on the distance from the wall from various views, including the San Juan Creek trail and residences on the west side of the creek, and considering the density of landscaping proposed, staff has determined that the applicant’s proposed material will be acceptable and meet the intent of the original condition of approval. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the request for modification of the perimeter retaining wall system and the fractured granite finish, and maintain the approved landscape plan showing dense landscape planting along the wall. u Public Hearinq John Morgan, representative for Weseloh and Sons, showed samples and requested the fractured granite rather than the Ashlar stone due to cost and timing considerations. Commission Questions/Comments Chairman Neely asked about the natural color of the fractured granite. Mr. Morgan said the natural color is an integral color to the concrete and that it could be stained or remain natural. Motion Chairman Neely moved, seconded by Commissioner Cardoza, to approve an architectural control modification application (AC/Mod 97-08) to allow the reconstruction of a two tiered retaining wall and additional new vehicle storage area located on the west portion of property at 33633 Camino Capistrano, and adjacent to the MetrolinWSCRRA Rail tracks, retaining the proposed landscaping, and including the natural fractured granite with stained color as proposed by the Applicant. PC Meeting 3 May 25,2004 AYES: NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None This motion passed by a vote of 4-0. Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely L I. CONSIDERATION OF THE DRAFT SEVEN YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP). FISCAL YEARS 2004 THROUGH 2011 FOR GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY. Written Communications Staff report dated May 25,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Huber presented the staff report as a request for consideration of the Draft Seven Year CIP, Fiscal Years 2004 through 201 1 for General Plan Consistency. He stated the City reviews and updates the Seven Year Capital Improvement Program on an annual basis as required by the Municipal Code. State law requires that the Planning Commission review the draft CIP and determine its consistency with the General Plan. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward the Fiscal Year 2004 through 2011 Capital Improvement Program to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption based on a finding that the program is consistent with the General Plan. u Commission Questions/Comments Commissioner Cohen and Chairman Neely commented that the CIP document was well done. Chairman Neely said he was glad to see the driveway widenings on Del Obispo on the list and asked if landscaping along the freeway is budgeted through the CIP. Mr. Huber said freeway landscaping is a Caltrans project, that traffic congestion relief projects take precedence over non-traffic congestion projects, and that Caltrans has not authorized landscaping requested by the City. Commissioner Cardoza asked if the Los Rios parking lot and RV parking lot are in the Capital Improvements budget. Mr. Huber said that the Los Rios parking lot is in the Capital Improvements Project and that the size of the RV parking lot would be consequently reduced. Motion Commissioner Cardoza moved, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, to approve Resolution No. 04-05-25-1 finding that the fiscal year 2004 through 2011 Capital Improvement Program conforms to the City’s adopted general plan. L’ PC Meeting 4 May 25,2004 Motion Commissioner Cardoza moved, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, to approve Resolution No. 04-05-25-1 finding that the fiscal year 2004 through 2011 Capital Improvement Program conforms to the City’s adopted general plan. - AYES: Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None This motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. TENTATIVE TRACT 16632 AND COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN HOMES AND MAINTAIN 174 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE WITHIN FOUR LETTERED LOTS ON 314 ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE TERMINUS OF CAMINO LACOUAGUE AND WEST OF LA PATA AVENUE. [WHISPERING HILLS LLC) lCDP 04-01), AN APPLICATION TO CREATE 155 LOTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY AD DI ica n t Dennis Gage, Whispering Hills LLC, 19700 Fairchild Road, Suite 120, Irvine, CA 92612, u 949-833-1 I00 Proiect ProDonents Phillip Schwartze, the PRS Group, 31682 El Camino Real, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675,949-240-1 322 Peri Muretta, 3 Ragalo Drive, Mission Viejo, CA 92692,949-588-6090 John Erskine, Guthnew Knox Elliott LLP, 181 01 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800, Irvine, CA 92612, 949-833-7800 Fred Cornwell, Pardue, Cornwell & Associates, 151 Kalmus, Suite C-230, Costa Mesa, CA 92626,714-241-3400 Written Communications Staff report dated May 25,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Lawrence presented the staff report as a request by the Applicant for an application to create 155 lots for single family homes and maintain 174 acres of permanent natural L PC Meeting 5 Mav 25.2004 open space within four lettered lots on 314 acres, generally located south of the terminus of Camino Lacouague and west of La Pata Avenue. The purpose of this meeting is to introduce the new tentative map, describe the environmental review process, and invite Commission questions and wmments. The new traffic study has determined that the proposed residential development will have significant traffic impacts even though reduced from the previous project. These include 1-5 southbound and northbound ramps at Ortega, the Ortega Highway intersection access to the project, and two mid-block segments of Ortega Highway east of 1-5 and west of La Pata. The identified impacts will be mitigated by the improvements and fee contributions listed in Table 14 from the traffic study on page 6 of the staff report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive an overview of the project, take public input, and continue the item to the meeting of June 22, 2004 to allow for completion of the Addendum to the certified Environmental Impact Report. Cheryl Hodge, Environmental Consultant with Hodge and Associates, provided an overview of the environmental process and CEQA documentation for the project. Commission Questions Commissioner Cohen asked about how the potential significant impacts have been mitigated. Ms. Hodge said impacts such as grading, air quality, and biology that haven't changed are subject to mitigation measures of the previous certified final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Commissioner Cardoza asked how much of the area has been graded, if any of the residential area has been disturbed, and the amount of acreage involved. Ms. Hodge said the school district is currently grading over 70 acres for the high school project and grading within the east canyon residential area is being done by the district in order to balance dirt on the site and stabilize slopes. Public Hearing Phillip Schwartze, representing Whispering Hills, recapped the history of the project and referred to a 3-dimensional model and map showing grading. The CUSD has obtained the necessary permits from the State and Federal agencies and proceeded with development of the property. Commission Questions/Comments Commissioner Cardoza asked if the public hearing would continue. Mr. Sandoval said the public hearing would not close at tonight's meeting, but would continue. Chairman Neely asked that a letter dated May 20, 2004 from Michael Philbrick be entered into the record. 1) a substantive analysis of how this constitutes a new project different from the one rejected He also requested information on the following: PC Meeting 6 May 25,2004 through the initiative process, and 2) if changes to OCFA fire standards apply to the access off La Mancha to the proposed estate lots. Chairman Neely stated he would also be intaested in seeing La Pata intersection design details for this project as well as the following information: I) how the offsite landscaping would be integrated and maintained, 2) lighting, and 3) widening of Ortega Highway. u Motion Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, to continue Whispering Hills Estates: Application for Zoning Approval of Comprehensive Development Plan CDP 04-01; and approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 16634 (Whispering Hills LLC) to the June 22, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. AYES: Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None This motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. Chairman Neely took Item 3 out of order since Commissioner Cardoza would be recusing himself from Item 2. u 3. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 03-08. A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A MODIFICATION TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A “TAVERN & BREWPUB” USE AND “LIVE ENTERTAINMENT” USE IN CONJUNCTION WITH “ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE RETAIL SALES (INCLUDING WINE TASTING)” FOR MISSION WINERY LOCATED AT 31781 CAMINO CAPISTRANO. SUITES “201 & 202” IN THE FRANCISCAN PLAZA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 121-150-27) Written Communications Staff report dated May 25,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Ramsey provided an overview of the project and referred to a letter dated May 19, 2004, from Old Capistrano Merchants Association in support of the CUP for Mission Winery. He stated that staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving a modification of the conditional use permit to allow a “tavern & brewpub” use and “live entertainment” use in conjunction with “alcoholic beverage retail sales (including wine tasting)” for Mission Winery located at 31 781 Camino Capistrano, Suites “201 & 202” in the Franciscan Plaza. PC Meeting 7 May 25,2004 Chairman Neely opened the public hearing, and seeing no one step forward, closed the public hearing. I Commission Questions/Comments Chairman Neely and Commissioner Cardoza voiced their support of the application. Motion Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, to adopt Resolution No. 04-5-25-2 approving a conditional use permit modification to allow “Tavern & Brewpub” use and “Live Entertainment” use at 31781 Camino Capistrano, Suite “201 & 202” in the Franciscan Plaza (Mission Winery). AYES: Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None This motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. 2. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS (TTM) 15609 AND 14196. PACIFICA SAN JUAN: AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR A 292 ACRE TRACT TO BE DEVELOPED WITH 416 DWELLING UNITS AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF COMPREHENSIVE L4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) 81-01, FORSTER CANYON PLANNED COMMUNITY (ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS: 666-301-01, 675-081-10, 675-361-01, 05. & OG)(APPLICANT: SJD PARTNERS, LTD.) Commissioner Cardoza recused himself from this item. Written Communications Staff report dated May 25,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Ramsey presented the staff report and gave the history of the Development Agreement adopted in 1992, the 1992 tentative tract map, and the approval of Tract 15609 in September 2003. The two main changes to the development agreement are proposed to: 1) establish a new IO-year term; and 2) include a rollover provision to maintain the option for establishing a Community Facilities District (CFD) to provide the necessary funding for CUSD school improvements and some of the backbone infrastructure associated with this project. PC Meeting 8 Mav 25.2004 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that City Council approve the amended Development Agreement for tentative tract maps 15609 and 14196, Pacifica San Juan, extending the term of the agreement and including the rollover provision. He stated that. the City Attorney's office has advised staff that this item has been noticed for City Council action in June and it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review this item and take public testimony. - Commissioner Questions/Comments Commissioner Cohen and Chairman Neely asked to see a red-lined version of amended documents in the future. Chairman Neely asked for clarification of sections 7.3 and 7.4 of the draft agreement. Mr. Sandoval replied that these sections don't give the owner any rights to unilaterally override all the terms and conditions set forth in section 7.1. Mr. Sandoval said that he reads the agreement to say that the applicant would be responsible for the improvements for the capital facilities, however, they control the development of their own project and because the capital facilities are tied to their development, Le., the streets, gutters and storm drains will be constructed as the main development develops, 7.3 and 7.4 allow the developer and the City to mutually agree to change the timing of the public improvements in case there is an economic hardship. Mr. Sandoval said that there is a proposal to issue bonds to build the public improvements and to create the Community Facilities District. There would be an assessment on the properties that would raise the money to pay off the bonds and the interest. It would raise the money up front to build the public improvements. Many of these provisions would be moot if, in fact, the City would be able to obtain the money through the bonds. 'd Public Hearing Brad Gates said that SunCal spent considerable time and thorough discussion with City Attorney John Shaw on the vested tract map, the City building permit allocation plan, and the CFD process, which were previously approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. The number of permits in the allocation process was 282 permits in '05 and 134 permits in '06, and SunCal believes they will be built out in that timeframe or early '07. He requested approval of the agreement. Sharon Cheever, 33512 Valle Road, a resident and Board Member of the McCracken Hill community, spoke regarding growth management concerns and raised issues regarding the effect of the agreement on the growth management ordinance. Luis Rodrigues, 33512 Valle Road, asked about the potential effects of the agreement on other developments, who also might be requesting a rollover of residential allocations in order to issue CFD bonds. He questioned what factors will the City Council take into account on an annual basis over the next ten years when determining the maximum number of building permits to be issued under the Growth Management 0 rd ina nce. - PC Meeting 9 May 25,2004 Ted Powers, 33551 Forster Ranch (Valle) Road, spoke regarding three issues that could impact the residents of McCracken Hill. The only access road is in desperate need of repair as quickly as possible. The residents of McCracken Hill negotiated an agreement in which SunCal would and has prov‘i‘ded funds to assist in the repair of the shoulder and road. A secondary access road is a necessity for the residents of McCracken Hill for reasons of safety and “A street must be built first to connect to the secondary access road. He requested that these issues be addressed in the agreement. v Commission Questions/Comments Commissioner Cohen asked staff why there is urgency on moving forward. Mr. Sandoval said the public hearing has been noticed for the City Council June 1, this agreement would be approved by the City Council by ordinance, and requires lst and 2”d reading and it would become effective 30 days after that. Because interest rates are low, it costs very little to borrow money today, so there is an urgency to get those bonds issued. Commissioner Cohen said that all too often the Planning Commission sees projects at the eleventh hour. Commissioner Ratcliffe said that it is challenging to make reasonable evaluations with not enough time to get questions answered. Commissioner Cohen said that it is difficult to sit with a 20-page document that is purportedly being amended, and to try to figure out what is new and what isn’t. For all we know 7.3 is unchanged from the original document. Mr. Ramsey said that provisions 7.2 through 7.4 are the same as in the original agreement. Commissioner Cohen said perhaps it would have been more helpful to have a staff report fleshing out the CFD application and information from counsel with respect to the bond requirements. Commissioner Cohen stated his concern with the rollover of the units and impacts on other residential projects down the road. Chairman Neely said that the Planning Commission may not have seen the original development agreement when the project went through. He doesn’t object to the need for securing this rollover to be able to enable the bond sales under the CFD. What is being requested of this action in terms of the rollover is a big policy issue that affects the allocation process. While it is a City Council policy prerogative to provide preference to major projects that have a need for external funding mechanisms like this to be the basis for a grant of that rollover and how that might affect the prioritization of other projects under the Growth Management Program, there should be a fuller disclosure in the record prior to any action being taken by City Council. . PC Meeting 10 May 25,2004 Chairman Neely asked Mr. Ramsey if the other developers subject to the Growth Allocation Program received any special notice of this action. Mr. Ramsey answered Chairman Neely stated he can see the need for what is being requested, but it raises questions that he does not feel prepared to give a definitive recommendation to the Council on based on what is in front of the Planning Commission. If this item must get to the Council because the hearing date has been set, the Commission doesn’t want to impede the process. Chairman Neely stated he would support forwarding the item to the Council with no specific recommendation as to the requested action, and ask City Council to consider the implications with respect to other allocations under the Growth Management Ordinance and the previous recommendations of the Planning Commission to reconsider what is used in terms of rating and prioritizing the allocations so that whatever the program is, it needs to be clearly articulated. v that they did not. i Commissioner Cohen added that staff may want to look into noticing all other Applicants that have projects in the pipeline as they may be impacted by the decision that the Council will take on this item. Motion Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Neely, to pass the item on to the City Council without a positive or negative recommendation, and that staff forward the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission to the City Council for consideration. AYES: -v’ Commissioners Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None This motion passed unanimously by a vote of 3-0. COMMlSSlONlSTAFF COMMENTS Ms. Bogh asked Planning Commissioners to place on their calendars the Planning Directors Association of Orange County Planning Officials’ Forum on September 15 in Newport Beach. Chairman Neely said that he would be in Sacramento on June 8, and would be absent from the June 8 Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Neely asked what happened to the large pepper tree on the northbound 1-5 offramp at Ortega next to the Chevron Station. Chairman Neely asked staff to verify that removal of this tree wasn’t a City PC Meeting 11 May 25,2004 action and that it was in Caltrans’ right-of-way. Ms. Bogh stated staff would look in to this issue and provide information to the Commission. ADJOURNMENT I There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 8, at 7:OO p.m. in the Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, “%“h“ Molly gh Planning Director Ism