PC Minutes-2011-02-2232400 PASEO ADELANTO
SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA 92675
(949) 493-1171
(949) 493-1053 FAx
www.sanjuancapistrano.org
A. CALL TO ORDER
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SAM ALLEVATO
LAURA FREESE
LARRY KRAMER
DEREK REEVE
JOHN TAYLOR
The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Cohen at 6:30
p.m.
R PI Fnr.F
The Chairman led the Pledge of Allegiance.
C. ROLL CALL:
Commissioners Present:
Commissioners Absent:
Staff Present:
Sheldon Cohen, Chairman
Ginny Kerr
Tim Neely
Rob Williams
none
Gene Ratcliffe, Vice -Chair
Roy Nunn
Jeff Parkhurst
William Ramsey, AICP, Principal Planner
Grant Taylor, Development Services Director
D. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
E. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. February 8, 2011 Meeting Minutes: The Commission unanimously approved the
minutes subject revision to indicate Mr. Nunn arrived and attended the meeting
following the close of deliberations on the proposed Darmal project.
F. OLD BUSINESS
None
San Juan Capistrano: Preserving the Past to Enhance the Future
co Printed on 100% recycled paper
PC Meeting Minutes 2 February 22, 2011
G. NEW BUSINESS
Sign Permit (SP) #10-031, San Juan Hills Golf: an application to install a new
monument sign on an existing 3.3 acre property situated in the OSR (Open Space
Recreation) Zone District and General Plan -designated 1.1 Open Space Recreation
and located at 32120 San Juan Creek Road and generally located at the corner of
San Juan Creek Road and Avenida Larga (APN: 666-181-01)(ApplicantDan
Friess)(Project Manager: Nick Taylor, Associate Planner). Nick Taylor, Associate
Planner made the staff presentation and advised that the applicant has proposed a 5 -
foot tall, 35 square foot, double -sided monument sign at the project entry. Mr. Taylor
recommended that the Commission adopt the draft resolution approving the proposed
monument sign and forward the project back to the Design Review Committee for follow-up
review.
Commission Questions/comments
Commissioner Williams stated he was amenable to having the Design Review
Committee (DRC) work out the final details of the project design. Otherwise, the
monument sign design concept was acceptable.
Commissioner Kerr stated that the design was a significant improvement over the
prior design but noted the pilaster elements needed attention which would be
addressed by DRC.
Commissioner Ratcliffe stated that the proposed text is too "wordy" and the
marketing text of "tasty food served all day" should be removed.
Commissioner Nunn stated the revised design was a vast improvement and he
thought it was substantially consistent with the City's Design Guidelines.
Commissioner Neely noted that during the DRC review, he had expressed concern
with the advertising copy on the sign, specifically the text "tasty food served all day"
and stated that allowing the text would be precedent -setting. The Commission
needs to address the issue of what constitutes acceptable sign copy based on the
Sign Code's focus on business identification, and not advertising.
Commissioner Parkhurst stated that he concurred with DRC's concern over the
advertising copy and thought it should be removed.
Chairman Cohen expressed agreement with the other Commissioners that the "ad"
text was not necessary and suggested that a commercial banner provided
advertising opportunity. Mr. Taylor briefed the Commission on the banner permit
provisions which allow up to 45 days with possible extensions granted by the
Planning Commission. Mr. Cohen open the meeting for public comment, and no
one spoke on the project.
PC Meeting Minutes 3 February 22, 2011
Adoption of Resolution
PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-2-22-01, SAN JUAN HILLS GOLF COURSE
MONUMENT SIGN (SP 10-031), A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO APPROVING A 5'-0"
TALL, 35 SQUARE FOOT, DOUBLE -SIDED MONUMENT SIGN FOR SAN JUAN
HILLS GOLF COURSE LOCATED AT 32120 SAN JUAN CREEK ROAD (APN
666-181-01). Commissioner Williams made a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Parkhurst to adopt a resolution conditionally approving the proposed project subject
to revising the sign copy to delete "food served all day" and referring the details to
the Design Review Committee (DRC) for review and final approval. The motion
passed by a 6-1 vote.
AYES: Chairman Sheldon Cohen, Commissioners Gene Ratcliffe,
Ginny Kerr, Tim Neely, Jeff Parkhurst, and Rob Williams
NOES: Roy Nunn
ABSTAIN: None
2. Fiscal Year 2011-2012 General Plan Annual Progress Report (Applicant: City of
San Juan Capistrano)(Proiect Manager: Grant Taylor, Development Services
Director). Grant Taylor, Development Services Director advised the Commission
that Government Code Section 65400 mandates that cities submit an annual report
on the status of the General Plan and the progress toward its implementation to
their legislative bodies, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR), and
the Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). Mr. Taylor
recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving the
Fiscal Year 2010-2011 General Plan Annual Progress Report and forwarding the
report to City Council with a recommendation of approval to be forwarded
Governor's Office of Planning and Research.
Commission Questions/comments
Commissioners Nunn, Kerr and Ratcliffe identified several sections of the annual
report that should be clarified or supplemented. Commissioner Kerr stated that the
housing production objectives in the General Plan Housing Element should be
reasonable and reflect the City's financial constraints. Mr. Taylor responded that he
would incorporate those revisions into a revised annual report that would be
presented to the City Council.
Adoption of Resolution
PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-2-22-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CALIFORNIA
ACCEPTING THE CITY'S FY 2010-2011 GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL PROGRESS
REPORT. Commissioner Ratcliffe made a motion, seconded by Commissioner
PC Meetinq Minutes 4 February 22, 2011
Nunn to adopt a resolution forwarding the annual report to the City Council with a
recommendation that it be forwarded to the Governor's Office of Planning and
Research. The motion passed by a 7-0 vote.
AYES: Chairman Sheldon Cohen, Commissioners Gene Ratcliffe,
Ginny Kerr, Roy Nunn, Tim Neely, Jeff Parkhurst, and Rob
Williams
NOES: Nunn
ABSTAIN: None
Commissioner Nunn recused himself stating for the record that he had a conflict of interest
regarding the Darmal project, and left the City Council chambers.
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Rezone (RZ) 10-003, Grading Plan Modification (GPM)10-008; Darmal Residence;
a request for approval of development plans for the construction of an approximate
4_,906 square foot single-family residence, two -stories and 25 feet in height with a
basement level and incorporate the property into Comprehensive Development Plan
(CDP) 81-01 Forster Canyon, on a vacant parcel totaling approximately 0.60 aces in
area located adiacent to the west side of Avenida California and east of Interstate I-
5 (APN 675-081-11) (Applicant: Arsalan Darmal, Owner) (Proiect Manager: Grant
Taylor, Development Services Director). Grant Taylor, Development Services
Director made the staff presentation and advised the Commission that the proposed
project consists of a Rezone (RZ) and Grading Plan Modification (GPM) that would
annex the property into the Forster Canyon Planned Community (CDP 81-01)
establishing a new "HE" (Hillside Estate) Zoning District and allow site grading to
accommodate construction of a proposed 4,906 square foot residence, two -stories
and 25 feet in height with a basement level including covered and open parking
areas, a pool, open patios and perimeter landscaping with access provided from
Avenida California via a 20 foot driveway. He reviewed the proposed project's
specifications and noted that the subject parcel is a vacant, irregular shaped lot that
totals approximately 0.60 acres with a 0.20 acre grading area. Mr. Taylor stated that
the proposed rezone would incorporate the property into Comprehensive
Development Plan (CDP) 81-01 Forster Canyon and establish a new zoning
designation of "HE" (Hillside Estate). The building pad is relatively flat with an
elevation of 235 on the front property line adjacent to Avenida California and gently
sloping to 228 at the lowest point of the rear property line near the 1-5 Freeway.
Proposed grading includes 310 cubic yards of cut and 280 cubic yards of fill with no
retaining walls. Proposed landscaping would include native drought tolerant shrubs
around the perimeter of the parcel. Mr. Taylor recommended that the Planning
Commission adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of the project
subject to conditions including a provision that design details be referred to the
Design Review Committee (DRC) for final action.
PC Meeting Minutes 5 February 22, 2011
Commission Questions
Chairman Cohen asked for background on the ownership of the property and how
the lot was created and what would happen if the requested rezone was not
approved. Mr. Taylor replied that if the rezone were not approved, the project would
not be developed.
Commissioner Neely stated that before proceeding with the review and any
potential recommendation, it was imperative that the Planning Commission
determine whether the lot was a legal building lot. He noted that the Title 9, Land
Use Code includes provisions for lot owners to secure a `Certificate of Compliance"
which may be necessary with the subject property.
Applicant presentation
Tom Merrell, Civic Solutions stated he represented the applicant and made a
detailed presentation to the Commission on the background and proposed design of
the project and how potential effects of the project/design would be addressed.
Commission Questions/comments
Chairman Cohen questioned staff as to whether the City has allowed the use of
caissons in other parts of the City and Mr. Ramsey replied that because of the
inherently unstable nature of the Capistrano Formation, which underlies the hillsides
throughout the City, caissons, "soldier" piles, buttressed and keyed fills, and tie-
backs have all been used at various hillside locations throughout the City. He added
that the City over the years created review processes and development
requirements to minimize the risk as much as possible of building in hillside areas.
Commissioner Williams questioned the elevation of the proposed swimming pool
deck, the disclosure of retaining walls, proposed building setbacks, and the
accuracy the site plan elevations depicted on the plans under review by the
Commission. He expressed concern with the overall design concept including the
proposed massing, height, and setback from Via California, and the visibility from
the surrounding valleys.
Chairman Cohen stated that before hearing further Commission comment, the
public hearing should be opened
Public Hearing
Notice having been given as required by law, Chairman Cohen opened the Public
Hearing.
Eric Hanke stated that he thought the applicant's presentation was inaccurate; that
there had been inadequate public notice; that the project would create public safety
issues due to street access; that the site had geotechnical limitations; and he
opposed amending the Pacifica San Juan Comprehensive Development Plan to
include the proposed project.
Connie Meredith stated that she agreed with Mr. Hanke's comments; the project
would create a public safety issue; that the design was incompatible with Pacifica
PC Meetinq Minutes 6 February 22, 2011
San Juan and she opposed the project.
Paul Jenkinson stated the project would result in view impacts to the public trail and
Via California; create public safety issues; and that view impacts had not been
satisfactorily studied.
Marisa Hanke stated that the City should deny the project due to land use
inconsistency because the project design is inconsistent with the Pacifica San Juan
Comprehensive Development Plan; that the public notice was faulty; and the project
would adversely affect property values.
Rich Adinolfi questioned the public notice for the meeting; requested additional time
to study the project; and stated that the economic impact of a future potential
landslide resulting from project grading needed to be studied.
Deb Adinolfi objected to the proposed project stating that the public meeting notice
was faulty and the project would result in public safety issues.
Hildi Becker stated that she opposed the proposed project and that it would
adversely affect open space views and it would create potential public safety
impacts.
Peter Fresca stated that he opposed the project; that the public notice was faulty;
and the project would violate the provisions of the Pacifica San Juan
Comprehensive Development Plan
Dara Derakhshan stated they opposed the project and asked the Commission to
consider the potential impact of the project on the Belle cliff neighborhood and
Pacifica San Juan community; and questioned how the proposed site was buildable.
Sharzad Talieh stated that she had not received mailed notice; that the project
raises issues of compatibility with the Pacifica San Juan community; and requested
a continuance to further study the project.
Michelle Basaitis stated that the open space and views that would be affected by
the project need to be protected and asked the Commission to deny the project.
Chris Basaitis stated that he opposed the project and that the applicant's
presentation had mischaracterized the project and its potential impacts.
Stacey Tran recounted the past failures involving SunCal's implementation of the
Pacifica San Juan project; stated that the Darmal residence would unfairly benefit
from the infrastructure, streets and parks that Pacifica San Juan residents have
financed; and opposed the project.
Tom Merrell provided a brief rebuttal to address some of the concerns expressed by
neighboring residents and property owners during the public hearing.
PC Meetinq Minutes 7 February 22, 2011
Commission Discussion
Commissioner Williams expressed concerns with the design compatibility of the
proposed project, the proposed building setbacks, the grading concept, the building
height, and the compatibility with the Pacifica San Juan neighborhoods. He said the
applicant should stake the site so the Commission and public can better understand
the location of the house. He stated the applicant should have the opportunity to
address these issues.
Commissioner Kerr stated she agreed with Commissioner Williams; that the public
notice process needs to be improved; and that the project will be visually prominent
which needs to be addressed. She stated that the owner of the Darmal property
needs to accept financial responsibility for Pacifica San Juan public improvements
which would benefit their property. She stated that the swimming pool would create
geotechnical issues which need to be closely studied; that the glazing on the house
was too extensive; and that the proposed curb -cut onto Via California would create
a potential hazard for pedestrians walking along the south side of the street.
Commissioner Ratcliffe stated the project was troubling from the perspective it
would benefit from improvements funded by Pacifica San Juan residents but have
no apparent financial responsibility. The architectural design appears to be well -
executed but the location makes it incompatible with Pacifica San Juan. She stated
that the project raises too many questions which need to be sufficiently addressed
before the project can be further considered.
Commissioner Neely stated that the agenda report did not accurately reflect the
DRC's review and action and clarified that the Committee forwarded the project to
Planning Commission to render determinations on the broader land use issues. He
stated that it was not clear from the record as to whether the lot was legal and
stated it may pre -date adoption of the Subdivision Map Act, and a Certificate of
Compliance may be necessary to confirm the lot as a buildable parcel. He
requested that the City Attorney review the record and title report and provide the
Commission with a determination as to whether the lot was a legal building parcel.
Neely also stated that the potential geologic impact of a future landslide on public
infrastructure should be addressed by the project. He recommended that the
applicant install story -poles on site so the Commission and public could understand
the building height and mass. He advised that the City does not have the authority
to compel Darmal to join the Pacifica San Juan Homeowners Association (HOA). He
concluded by agreeing with the other issues cited by his fellow Commissioners.
Commissioner Parkhurst stated he was uncomfortable with the proposed project
and agreed with the issues cited by his fellow Commissioners; that the project plans
appear incomplete or inaccurate, perhaps not intentionally; and that the property
has numerous constraints that make development difficult. He stated the proposed
architectural design was insensitive to the Pacifica San Juan community and the
grading unnecessarily elevates the first floor above the natural grade. He agreed
that story -poles are necessary to understand the visual impact. Parkhurst stated he
was not concerned over the need for and proposed use of caissons. He stated the
project needs additional work.
PC Meetinq Minutes 8 February 22 2011
Chairman Cohen stated he was in full accord with his fellow Commissioners and
that the City will need to improve the public notice process on the project. He
concurred with Commissioner Neely's assessment of the issue as to whether the
property was a legal buildable lot. He requested staff to research whether other
geotechnical studies had been completed for the surrounding area that would shed
light on the geotechnical constraints. Mr. Cohen stated a continuance was
necessary to further study the project.
Commission action
Commissioner Williams made motion to continue the item to the March 22 public
hearing and that the City provide new public notice for that meeting; that the City
Attorney provide a legal opinion as to whether the Darmal property was a legal
building lot; and directed the applicant to stake the property limits and install story -
poles. The motion was approved by a 6-0 vote.
I. STAFF & COMMISSION COMMENTS
Staff was requested to provide an update on the code enforcement status of the Chevron
signs. Commissioner Kerr requested staff to request traffic engineering provide an
evaluation of the safety of the existing mid -block crossing on Camino Capistrano near
Wells Fargo Bank. Mr. Taylor and Mr. Ramsey briefed the commission on several projects
in process.
J. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at
8:48 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for Tuesday, March 8, at 6:30 pm in the
Council Chambers.
Approved by the Planning Commission March 22, 2011:
Yb&J4-&
William Ramsey, AICP, Principal Plann r
Planning Commission Secretary