Loading...
PC Minutes-2004-06-22’V 32400 PASEO ADELANTO SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO. CA 92675 (949) 493- 1 17 1 (949) 493- 1053 FAX ww\t’ sai~jiiaricayrstruiio org MEMBERS OFTHE CITY COUNCIL SAM ALLEVATO DIANE L BATHGATE WYATT HART JOE SOT0 DAVID M SWERDLIN MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, JUNE 22,2004 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 Robert Cardoza Sheldon Cohen Gene Ratcliffe Commissioners Absent: none Staff Present: Molly Bogh, Planning Director; William Ramsey, Principal Planner; Omar Sandoval, Deputy City Attorney; Larry Lawrence, Consulting Project Manager; Sam Shoucair, Senior Engineer; Sue McCullough, Recording Secretary. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR None PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF WHISPERING HILLS ESTATES, (TENTATIVE b TRACT 16634, COMPOSITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) 04-01, AND ADDENDUM Sun Juan Capistrano: Preserving the Past to Enhance the Future PC Meeting 2 June 22,2004 TO EIR SCH 1998-031 150): AN APPLICATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 155 L SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON APPROXIMATELY 314 ACRES LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE CITY, SOUTH OF THE TERMINUS OF AVENIDA LA MANCHA AND WEST OF LA PATA AVENUE. 140 HOMES ARE PROPOSED IN THE EAST CANYON AREA WITH ACCESS FROM LA PATA AVENUE, AND 15 HOMES IN THE WEST CANYON AREA WITH ACCESS FROM LA PATA AVENUE, AND 15 HOMES IN THE WEST CANYON AREA WITH ACCESS FROM AVENIDA LA MANCHA. THERE WILL ALSO BE 174 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE WITHIN FOUR LETTERED LOTS. (APN# 124-140-49,50.51,53~ 124-223-23, 124-223-45. Applicant Dennis Gage, Whispering Hills LLC, 19700 Fairchild Road, Suite 120, Irvine, CA 92612, 949-833-1 100 Proiect Proponents Phillip Schwartze, the PRS Group, 31682 El Camino Real, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675, 949-240-1 322 Peri Muretta, 3 Regalo Drive, Mission Viejo, CA 92692, 949-588-6090 John Erskine, Guthner Knox Elliott LLP, 18101 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800, Irvine, CA 9261 2,949-833-7800 v Fred Cornwell, Pardue, Cornwell & Associates, 151 Kalmus, Suite C-230, Costa Mesa, CA 92626, 714-241-3400 Written Communications Staff report dated June 22,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Lawrence presented the staff report on this item which was continued from the May 25, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. Staff distributed an addendum two weeks ago to the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the earlier, more intensive Whispering Hills residential project and high school. The purpose for the meeting tonight is to invite questions and comments on the EIR addendum and to provide for discussion of the revised tentative map and the CDP. Mr. Lawrence summarized the findings of the new traffic study, which has determined that the proposed residential development will have significant traffic impacts at three intersections and two mid-block road segments, including 1-5 freeway southbound and northbound ramps at Ortega Highway, La Pata Avenue and Ortega Highway, and two road segments (Ortega Highway east of 1-5 and Ortega Highway west of La Pata Avenue.) In addition to the improvements identified as required at those intersections and road segments, the developer will be required to pay traffic fees for the Capistrano Circulation Fee Program in the amount of $7,387 per dwelling unit, or a total of $1.1 L million. The Transportation Commission has reviewed the traffic study and PC Meeting 3 June 22,2004 v ‘d L recommended that the identified mitigation measures be required as conditions of any project approval. The traffic study has been provided to the Planning Commission as part of the EIR addendum. The new CDP contains a total of 404 acres, 52 of which are taken up by the high school. Of the remainder there are 140 acres in the two residential development areas, 174 acres retained in natural open space and 34 acres of additional open space in the strip of land along La Pata to be annexed to the City will be retained. Staff believes that the project is an improvement over that which was approved previously by the City. The amount of open space is greater than before and there are increased lot sizes in the east canyon and 20 fewer dwelling units. The west canyon is virtually identical with that previously approved with 15 large estate lots and a 500 foot minimum setback between the existing Hidden Mountain Estates development and the new homes. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission fotward the project to the City Council with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. Commission Questions/Comments Chairman Neely asked where candidate sites for the reservoir might be. Mr. Lawrence pointed to two candidate sites, each on an area of the western and eastern ridgelines, and said that the preference would be to bury the reservoirs or to provide a landscaped berm around the reservoir if economically feasible. Public Hearinq Phillip Schwartze, representing Whispering Hills Estates, referred to a letter given to the Commissioners this evening that recaps the key points. The Applicant has read and concurs with the conditions of approval. Mark Nielsen, 31621 Via Quixote, referred to a letter Tony Foster drafted to the resource agencies regarding getting relief on public use restrictions for the Camino Lacouague access, the drop-off point for the high school. Mr. Nielsen asked that staff reconsider requesting in-lieu fees instead of requiring affordable housing to be done on site. Mr. Nielsen referred to page 7 of the staff report regarding density, Table 2 Section 3.3.6 in the CDP regarding frontages, and the maximum floor area ratio be consistent with Title 9. Mr. Nielsen voiced concern regarding the distance between units and referred to page 3-5 section 3.4.3 regarding educational and utility buildings. In section 4.3 development review procedures page 4-2. Mr. Nielsen asked that the wording, “except as otherwise modified through adoption by the City Council of a Development Agreement for the project” not be included, and that page 23, condition 3.1 should be changed to allow affordable housing be required to be on site. Mr. Lawrence said that the condition prohibiting drop-offs remains and that the Lacouague utility maintenance road will still be gated for control purposes. That road is the only potential bikeway connection that is usable and reasonably safe between the PC Meeting 4 June 22,2004 L high school, the residential area and the rest of the City. The project’s development concept of large single-family lots does not lend itself to affordable housing, and the contribution of the fee to the City’s fund could help support an affordable housing project. The slope density issue has changed because the zoning code has changed. The grading for the high school tends to render such calculation moot because it has been largely flattened. The tentative map shows more than 90 foot frontages. The FAR issue is one of density and development intensity, and the Commission could recommend changes to the FAR and frontage issues. Every single-family detached lot should stand on its own and should not be dependent on whether the next-door neighbor builds out to his setback or not. The developer is planning to approach the City with the possibility of a Development Agreement, and it should be referenced in the CDP. Mr. Lawrence said that staff tried to partially replicate what is now allowed by the County in the transition line easement along La Pata Avenue as far as educational and utility structures, since there are already transmission towers. Chairman Neely asked if the open space being discussed is the county strip adjacent to La Pata between the project and La Pata that has utility structures on it and if it would be a proposed ultimate local park site. Mr. Schwartze said that it seemed natural that there may be a spill-over of school uses when this portion is annexed into the City. Ms. Bogh said it is part of the CDP and one of the requirements for annexation is that a rezone needs to be established for that 34-acre strip of land and the CDP process is the rezoning. Commissioner Cohen said that the City needs to eventually address the need for affordable housing, and asked if project landscape plans and architectural details would come back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Lawrence confirmed that they would. Commissioner Ratcliffe asked about the status of the Hidden Mountain gate at San Juan Creek Road and if staff could obtain permission from the property owner who would be impacted, and if it were a question of stacking. Mr. Schwartze said there is a desire by the City and the residents of Hidden Mountain to make changes, and that he understood that an existing right-of-way configuration would allow some additional stacking. Commissioner Cardoza said that special care should be given to restoration and re- vegetation of natural elements such as arroyos, and that although this project isn’t appropriate for affordable housing, the over-all project is an improvement. Chairman Neely said he was impressed with the preservation of open space and is in agreement with the staff recommendation with the addition to condition 1.27 of disclosure of the reservoir site(s) to home buyers, to the extent known at the time, that the package goes to the residents. Chairman Neely spoke of his concern that this project will be requesting an amendment of the permit allocation vis-a-vis the City’s growth management ordinance. L Commissioner Cohen said supply and demand take care of the permit allocation issue. PC Meeting 5 June 22,2004 Motion L Commissioner Cardoza moved, seconded by Commissioner Cohen, to adopt Resolution 04-6-22-1 recommending approval of a Comprehensive Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 16634 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval subject to the conditions according to the draft resolution and the addition of the water tank information. This motion also includes the Findings included in the staff report and Resolution. AYES: Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None This motion passed by a vote of 4-0. 2. CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF REZONE (RZ) 04-04, ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL (AC) 03-05, CAPISTRANO ANCILLARY FACILITY; A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE “R&D” (RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT/OFFICE) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE \u PRELIMINARY SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR A 125,388 GSF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE COMPLEX ON AN EXISTING 17.38 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTH END OF VALLE ROAD; ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: FORSTER CANYON COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP 81-01) AND 675-361-06 (CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT). Written Communications Staff report dated June 22,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Ramsey presented the staff report on this item which was continued from the June 8, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. The project consists of a rezone application to amend the development standards established by the Forster Canyon Comprehensive Development Plan for the “R&D” (Research and Development/Office) District. The project also includes consideration of an architectural control application for the development of a proposed 125,388 gross square feet administrative office complex for the Capistrano Unified School District (CUSD). Staff has evaluated the issue of building height and how different building configurations relate to a 30 to 35 foot height. Three options were presented for the Planning Commission to evaluate: I) denial of the Applicant’s requested 39 foot building height standard, which would impose the City’s standard height of 35 feet; 2) approval of an alternative building height standard of 37 feet; or 3) approval of the Applicant’s 39 foot height standard. PC Meeting 6 June 22,2004 L Two concepts for the vertical tower element massing and location were presented, including design issues. Staff noted that DRC recommendations had been incorporated in the landscape palette. Staff recommended that the Commission conditionally approve the project; provide staff with specific direction on the tower element alternative design; approve color palette alternative #2; and recommend City Council approval of the project with revisions to reflect Commission direction. Public Hearinq Anson Rane, PJHM Architects Southwest, 647 Camino del 10s Mares, #201, San Clemente, showed renderings of the building and tower designs and requested the 39 foot building height so as not to compromise the design on what he described as a unique 17-acre site next to the 1-5 freeway. Commissioner Cardoza said the DRC requested that consideration be given to how the main entrance would appear if there were one tower and asked about lighting. Mr. Rane said that either of the tower designs would work, and that the lighting height would not have a negative impact on McCracken Hill residents. Chairman Neely said that the architectural rendering did not appear realistic as to what would be seen from the freeway in terms of slope and building heights. Carolyn Nash, 32906 Avenida Descanso, spoke in opposition to the project, asking that the site plan be modified by moving building B further back on the site, placing buildings A and C at more of an angle to building B to break up the massiveness, eliminating the tower, and maintaining the City's long-held building height standard of 35 feet. Richard Hill Adams, 33532 Forster Ranch Road, spoke in support of the project and said that the CUSD has kept the neighbors informed and the neighbors voted to support the project. Luis Rodrigues, 33512 Forster Ranch Road, spoke in support of the project due to the unique site, sound mitigation, and the architectural design and landscaping to enhance the surrounding community. Sharon Cheaver, 33512 Forster Ranch Road, spoke in support of the project due to manner in which traffic will be controlled and native vegetation will be managed. David Doomey, Associate Superintendent, CUSD, 32972 Calle Perfecto, spoke in support of the project stating that the building will complement the City and provide needed working conditions for District employees. Mr. Doomey spoke in support of the 39 foot height element and the tower, and asked consideration for the District's need to avoid further costs with more changes. PC Meeting 7 June 22,2004 Mark Nielsen, 31621 Via Quixote, asked that the Commission maintain the standard 35 foot height and not set a negative precedent by increasing building height. Com m issioner Com ments Commissioners Ratcliffe and Cohen voiced concerns with setting a precedent to deviate from the City’s building height standard unless there is a functional requirement. Commissioner Cardoza said that he prefers color option 2, landscape setback from 20 feet to 10 feet, a 46 to 48 foot tower (option I), and a 37 foot building height. Chairman Neely said that he supports the design, layout, and height of the structures due to the unique setting and the fact that the neighbors close to the project have accepted the fundamental design. He doesn’t like either tower alternatives presented, would favor color palette 1, and would like to see the color palette return to the DRC. Mr. Neely asked staff if the Planning Commission is advisory to the City Council on the rezone, and if final action on the CDP would be pending confirmation by the Council’s approval of the rezone. Mr. Ramsey confirmed that is correct. Commissioner Cohen said that exceeding the height limitation should be a decision made by City Council, and asked Mr. Sandoval for a recommendation. Mr. Sandoval said that the Planning Commission does need to take action on the AC, the height is part of the AC, and that the AC decision would be contingent on the City Council approving the zoning change. If the City Council does not change the zoning, the AC will be void. If the Planning Commission disapproves the AC, but the City Council approves the zoning, if the school district does not appeal the AC, then the AC would have to come back to the Planning Commission with some modification that the Planning Commission would approve consistent with the zoning action by the City Council. If any Commissioner should abstain from voting, there would still a quorum with three present, so the majority of a quorum would be taking action on this item. Chairman Neely said the lighting, the colors, the tower, and landscape of the foreground should come back to the DRC. The issue of height would be a policy matter to be forwarded to City Council for their determination as part of the rezone consideration. Motion Commissioner Cardoza moved, seconded by Chairman Neely, to adopt Resolution 04- 6-22-2 conditionally approving architectural and site development plans, with Conditions 2, 3, 4, and 5 to include provisions to be reviewed and approved by the DRC. The Commission deferred the building height amendments to the “R&D” District standards of Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) to City Council as a policy matter. Ms. Bogh clarified the items to go back to the DRC, as Conditions 2, 3 with the addition of tower design and height, 4, and 5. PC Meeting 8 June 22,2004 AYES: NOES: None Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely - ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None This motion passed by a vote of 4-0. Chairman Neely stated he agreed to the above motion due to the impasse regarding the 39 foot building height. NEW BUSINESS 1. GRADING PLAN MODIFICATION (GPM) 04-01, SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION (SE) 04-01; A REQUEST TO GRADE AN EXISTING LOT AND CONSTRUCT TIERED RETAINING WALLS TO CREATE A BUILDING PAD FOR A CUSTOM SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENCE AND TO ALLOW 1 %:I MANUFACTURED SLOPES WHERE SLOPES, ON A 2.65 ACRE LOT LOCATED AT 26922 PASEO CARDER0 AT THE L 1060 FEET EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF RANCHO VIEJO ROAD AND SECTION 9-4.313(A)(2) OF TITLE 9, LAND USE CODE REQUIRES MAXIMUM 211 EASTERN END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC IN THE MALASPINA SUBDIVISION ABOUT MALASPINA DRIVE (TRACT 91 84, LOT 1 O)(APN: 650-1 61 -14)(APPLlCANT: LARRY & SYDNEY GIELOW). Written Communications Staff report dated June 22,2004 Staff wesentation & recommendation Mr. Ramsey presented the staff report as a request to grade an existing lot and construct tiered retaining walls to create a building pad for a custom single-family residence and to allow 1 %:I manufactured slopes. He stated it is difficult to maintain landscape cover on a continuous basis on a 1 %:I slope, necessitating the tiered retaining walls. Staff had identified a concern with the potential for offsite visual impacts from the grading and walls. After meeting on May 6, the DRC recommended conditional approval . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution denying Grading Plan Modification 04-01, and Subdivision Exception (SE) 04-01 for the Gielow property, based on the findings that the grading plan deviates substantially from that approved for the original subdivision, which was conditioned to follow the City’s hillside grading standards. PC Meeting 9 June 22,2004 Commissioner Questions/Comments Commissioner Cohen asked for more information regarding the difficulties of 1 %:I slopes. Mr. Ramsey cited examples of the slope along Rancho Viejo Road that was graded along Spotted Bull Lane that has suffered occasional loss of landscaping and has been difficult to maintain, and the Stone Field subdivision off of Calle Sparrow and Del Obispo Street where a fairly heavy rainstorm washed out a portion of that slope within several weeks after landscaping with jute matte. Chairman Neely asked if the information in the staff report regarding the comparative square footage of other nearby developments was available at the DRC meeting. Mr. Ramsey said that it was not. Commissioner Cardoza said that the review criteria given to the DRC was minimal. Mr. Ramsey said that at the point that it was brought to the DRC for design review consideration staff had not identified hillside grading criteria as being applicable. Commissioner Ratcliffe asked about the hammerhead turnaround and the Orange County Fire Authority’s preference for a turnaround between the home site and the cul- de-sac. Mr. Ramsey pointed out the location on the map. Public Hearinq Applicant Larry Gielow, 3018 Samoa Place, Costa Mesa, said that he is hoping to build his dream home at 26922 Paseo Cardero. He gave a history of his background as a home designer and builder with extensive experience in hillside construction. He gave a history of his efforts to comply with all regulations in creating grading plans for the subject property and said that his neighbors have signed approval to the project. After spending ten months and $30,000, he still was unable to obtain a preliminary grading plan. Mr. Gielow referred to and answered points in the staff report, and referred to other homes built on steep slopes. Mr. Cohen asked for the additional pages on Exhibit C. Mr. Ramsey summarized by saying that Heatherington Engineering reviewed the original geotechnical report and the geotechnical work has been approved by the City’s peer review geologist. Mr. Gielow said that the Fire Department’s request to put the home up front is not feasible because main level access is critical. Robin Leffler, 3025 Samoa Place, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of the project, citing Mr. Gielow’s high standards in other building projects. Bruce Canetti, 29112 Country Hills Road, spoke in support of the project and said Mr. Gielow’s expertise in hillside building is second to none and that the theme of San Juan Capistrano is maintained with this project. PC Meeting 10 June 22.2004 Commissioner Questions/Comments Commissioner Cardoza said that he feels a sense of justice needs to be considered, that the Applicant has been willing to comply with all regulations, and that conditions on page 7 regarding the preliminary landscape design and retaining walls could be referred back to the DRC. ..- Commissioner Ratcliffe said that she is sympathetic to the travails of building and grading permit applicants with the layers of regulations, that there is no malevolence intended, and that a lot of grading and cut and fill is required for a house that big. Chairman Neely said his initial reaction was that it was too big a project for the site and that it relied heavily on retaining walls and it would likely be inconsistent with its surroundings. However, Exhibits K and L set the tenor for the development right across from the Applicant, and the 1 %:I slope will not be exposed and visible to the neighborhood. Motion Commissioner Cardoza moved, seconded by Chairman Neely, to reword the resolution to convert negative findings to positive findings to support the project, then adopt Resolution 04-6-22-3 approving a grading plan modification, and approving a subdivision exception for Tract 91 84, Lot 10 for an existing single-family lot located at 26922 Paseo Carder0 and more precisely referred to as assessors Parcel Number 650- 161-14 (Gielow), with the condition that the landscape plan be brought back to the DRC. AYES: L 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. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (TRP) 04-73; AN APPLICATION TO REMOVE ONE RED GUM EUCALYPTUS TREE WITHATRUNK DIAMETER OF APPROXIMATELY 49 INCHES, AND TWO TORREY PINES WITH A DIAMETER OF 29 AND 31 INCHES, RESPECTIVELY, ON A 20,855 SQUARE FOOT LOT LOCATED AT 31972 CAMINO CAPISTRANO. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF DEL OBISPO AND CAMINO CAPISTRANO. (APN # 668-242-14; APPLICANT: WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK). Applicant or Propertv Owner Washington Mutual Bank, 31 972 Camino Capistrano, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Applicant Consulting Arborist Modern Tree Service, James J. Klinger, P.O. Box 487, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693 v PC Meeting 11 June 22.2004 L- Citv Consultincl Arborist West Coast Arborists, Inc., Sara Young, 2200 E. Via Burton Street, Anaheim, CA 92806 Written Communications Staff report dated June 22,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Mr. Ramsey presented the staff report as an application to remove one red gum eucalyptus tree and two Torrey pine trees, on a 20,855 square foot lot located at 31972 Camino Capistrano. Mr. Ramsey said that the Torrey pine tree located closest to Camino Capistrano that grows over the top of Washington Mutual Bank has previously been the subject of a tree removal request in 1980 and in 1994, and the decision was to preserve it. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve TRP 04-073 for the removal of the red gum eucalyptus tree subject to conditions of approval, and deny removal of the two Torrey pine trees. Commission Questions Commissioner Cardoza asked the age of the tree and if it had any historical significance. Commissioner Ratcliffe said that red gum eucalyptus trees grow very fast. u Public Hearing Craig Shelby, Facility Manager employed by C.B. Richard Ellis, speaking on behalf of Washington Mutual Bank, said that he submitted the application for removal of the trees because the Applicant deemed the trees to be a potential safety hazard if the Torrey pine tree leaning over the Washington Mutual Bank entrance falls down. The eucalyptus tree is diseased. There is 4 to 6 inches heaving of the sidewalk pavement from the Torrey pine tree near the driveway entrance into the parking lot, and there would be a potential safety hazard if the tree falls. Carolyn Nash, 32906 Avenida Descanso, asked that all three trees be preserved. Mr. Shelby asked if the trees are maintained, Washington Mutual would suggest that the responsibility for denial be placed on the City if there is an incident where a tree falls down that Washington Mutual be absolved of any responsibility because they deemed that it is an issue. Commission Questions/Comments Commissioner Ratcliffe said that she is in favor of retaining the Torrey pine trees and removing the red gum eucalyptus and asked legal counsel about indemnifying the City or Washington Mutual. Mr. Sandoval said that State law provides immunity to the City. PC Meeting 12 June 22.2004 Commissioners Cohen and Cardoza agreed that the Torrey pine trees should be retained. Commissioner Cardoza said that if the eucalyptus is removed, it should be replaced by a tree that would be significant 10 to 20 years from now. v Ms. Bogh asked if it is the Commission's intent to ask for a replacement tree for the red gum eucalyptus, and if it would be the same type or different type of tree. Commissioner Ratcliffe said that it would depend if the eucalyptus stump could be ground out and if another tree could be planted without disturbing the two remaining trees. Motion Commissioner Ratcliffe moved, seconded by Commissioner Cardoza, to adopt Resolution 04-06-22-4 confirming issuance of a categorical exemption and approving a tree removal permit for the red gum eucalyptus tree, and denying removal permits for two Torrey pine trees, located at 31972 Camino Capistrano, and to replace the eucalyptus except as otherwise determined by a certified arborist to be detrimental to the Torrey pine trees. AYES: Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely NOES: None ABSENT: None 'W ABSTAIN: None This motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. 2. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (TRP) 04-072. AN APPLICATION TO REMOVE A COAST LIVE OAK TREE, WITH A DIAMETER OF 24 INCHES AND APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET HIGH ON A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IS LOCATED AT 31471 LA MATANZA STREET, APPROXIMATELY 190 FEET NORTH OF ACJACHEMA STREET (APN # 124-203-06)(APPLICANT: JOE MANKAW ICH) Written Communications Staff report dated June 22,2004 Applicant Joe Mankawich, 31471 La Matanza, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Consu I t i n q Arborist West Coast Arborists, Inc., 2200 E. Via Burton St., Anaheim, CA 92806 Soils Consultant Soil and Plant Laboratory, Inc., P.O. Box 153, Orange, CA 92863-6566 PC Meeting 13 June 22,2004 Staff presentation & recommendation Chairman Neely called for questions only due to the late hour. -..-A Commission Questions Chairman Neely and Commissioner Ratcliffe said it looks as though the tree must be removed since it is not salvageable. Motion Commissioner Cohen moved, seconded by Commissioner Ratcliffe, to adopt Resolution No. 04-06-22-5 confirming issuance of a categorical exemption and approving a tree removal permit for a tree located at 31472 La Matanza. AYES: Commissioners Cardoza, Cohen and Ratcliffe and Chairman Neely NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None This motion passed unanimously by a vote of L+- COMMISSION/STAFF COMMENTS Commissioner Cohen asked if there is a new Denny’s sign off Ortega Highway. Mr. Ramsey said the sign is being reconstructed in the same location with the same design consistent with what has been approved by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Ratcliffe expressed appreciation for the follow-up memos included in the package regarding the pepper tree and the church. Chairman Neely said that he would be on vacation June 30 through July 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:lO p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 13, at 7:OO p.m. in the Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, U Molly ah Planning Director ism