Loading...
PC Minutes-2011-12-1332400 PASEO ADELANTO SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA 92675 (949) 4931171 (949) 4931053 FAX wwwsanjuancapislrano,oq A, CALL TO ORDER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, December 13, 2011 Chairman Cohen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p,m, B. PLEDGE Chairman Cohen led the Pledge of Allegiance, C. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Sheldon Cohen, Chairman Gene Ratcliffe, Vice -Chair Ginny Kerr Tim Neely Jeff Parkhurst Rob Williams Commissioners Absent: Roy Nunn (excused) MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Staff Present: William Ramsey, AICP, Principal Planner Grant Taylor, Development Services Director Tram Tran, Deputy City Attorney David Contreras, Senior Planner D. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. E, CONSENT CALENDAR SAM ALLEVATO LAURAFREESE LARRY KRAMER DEREK REEVE JOHN TAYLOR 1. Minutes of October 25, 2011: By motion duly -made and seconded, the Commission approved the subject minutes, with corrections to Section 2.b. to include reference to signs D1 and D2, by a 5-0.1 vote (Neely abstained). San Juan Capistrano, Preserving the Past to Enhance the Future Printed on 100% recycled paper PC Meeting Minutes 2 December 13, 2011 2. Minutes of November 8, 2011: By motion duly -made and seconded, the Commission approved the subject minutes with corrections to Sections F.1,b, and c. and the associated motion to include reference to "Title 9, Land Use Code noise standards compliance" and "adjacent residential neighborhoods;" and the adjournment date, by a 5-0-1 vote (Neely abstained). 3. Minutes of November 22, 2011: By motion duly -made and seconded, the Commission approved the subject minutes as submitted by a 4-0.2 vote (Neely and Ratcliffe abstained), 4. Final Resolution Awrovina the Sian Proaram for Architectural Control (AC Marriott Residence Inn (Project Manager; William Ramsey, AIR, Principal Planner), By motion duly -made and seconded, the Commission approved the final resolution as submitted by a 5-0-1 vote (Neely abstained). 5. Final Resolution, for Conditional Use Permit (CUP)10-014, San Juan Hills Golf Course Driving Range Lighting (Assessor Parcel Number 666.011-27)(Applicant San Juan Hills Golf Club, Tom Merrell, Representative)(Project Manager, Nick Taylor, Associate Planner), By motion duly -made and seconded, the Commission approved the final resolution as submitted by a 3-1.2 vote (Kerr opposed, Neely and Ratcliffe abstained), F, PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Cohen recused himself and turned the meeting overto Vice Chair Ratcliffe citing a conflict of interest because his personal residence is within Belford Terrace, 1, Gradina Plan Modificati of a retaini portion of the property and removal of the tract development landscape that faces Ortega Hiahwav located at 27652 Rosedale Drive, aenerally located 550 feet east of Belford Terrace (APN 650.191.08) (Applicant; Gaspar Pastor) Trolect Manager, David Contreras, Senior Planner). David Contreras, Senior Planner made the staff presentation with a power point overview and provided extensive background and chronology on the City's prior and current Code Enforcement efforts involving the property, He advised the Planning Commission that the applicant is seeking approval to authorize previously unauthorized and completed grading and filling of a slope, The property owner conducted grading and removal of landscaping in 2007 without having secured land use entitlement approval nor grading permit approval, The applicant requests approval to (1) legalize the import of 160 cubic yards of fill soil and allow import of an additional 50 cubic yards of fill soil to create a 3,300 sq. ft, pad area; (2) legalize the removal of slope landscape improvements that were installed with the original development of Tract 9382, Belford Terrace; (3) construct a 8 -inch concrete masonry unit (CMU) retaining wall with a height varying from 5'- 10" to 104" feet; (4) install 5 gallon Eugenia shrubs along the retaining wall; and, (5) install a 4 -inch storm drain that would connect into the existing drainage system at Ortega Highway. Staff recommended that the Commission adopt a resolution denying the proposed project, However, staff advised that if the Planning Commission determined that the project meets the Grading Plan Modification criteria and wanted to approve the proposed project, the Commission would need to continue consideration to a future meeting date, to be determined, in order to allow staff to complete the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review and prepare the appropriate resolution. Public Hearing Notice having been given as required by law, Acting Chairman Ratcliffe opened the Public Hearing. The applicant was requested to testify if he had a statement or presentation to make to the Commission; and the applicant's son, acting as interpreter, responded that his father declined to make a statement. There were no other persons requesting to speak and the public hearing was closed, Commission Discussion a. Commissioner Williams stated that the project has been around since 2007 and there should be a way for the property owner to develop a design for the project that fits into the existing landscaped slope design. He expressed support for giving the property owner an additional opportunity to re -design and submit a plan that would be consistent with the City's criteria. The Toal Engineering grading plan submitted as part of the application was deemed insufficient to allow Commission approval. b. Commissioner Kerr stated that there was merit in working with the applicant to create an acceptable design that would be consistent with the existing slope landscaping and improvements. She stated that the proposed 104" retaining wall was wholly unacceptable and could not be supported and the proposed plantings would be insufficient, The location of the retaining wall would need to be moved into the slope further to reduce the height and allow sufficient landscaping to screen the wall. She expressed concern that despite the property being red -tagged, the owner had proceeded with additional improvements, The property owner would need to provide a firm commitment to comply with City standards to warrant the Commission granting a continuance. c. Commissioner_ Parkhurst stated_ he understood and was sympathetic_ to the property owner's desire to take advantage of the property but the proposed 10'- 0" retaining wall was completely inappropriate. Building improvements shows a complete disregard for the process and the project plans as submitted are not supportable. He stated that the City should establish and impose firm deadlines to secure compliance. Commissioner Neely stated that it appeared clearthat the Belford Terrace subdivision was designed to provide a uniform slope treatment, He stated that the burden was on the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed changes to the slope area were consistent with the intent of the original subdivision design and that the property owner had thus far, failed to PC Meeting Minutes 4 December 13, 2011 meet that burden. The Commission needs to be assured that if a new design is developed for the slope area, it must be an acceptable design consistent with the City's Design Guidelines to serve as a guide for other property owner desiring to accomplish the same objective. The approved design approach needs to be unifying, Non-commercial crop raising should be acceptable. Before the Commission can consider any proposed modification to the slope area, the property owner needs to disclose the intended use of and planned improvements for the graded pad area, He stated that the applicant has not met the burden of demonstrating that his project is consistent with the intent of the original subdivision design. d. Vice Chair Ratcliffe stated that the proposed retaining wall is not acceptable as designed. She expressed concern that the property owner has not followed the City's permitting process and requirements, The City needs to know how the property owner intends to use the proposed pad. Any modification approved by the Commission could be precedent -setting and so, the Commission needs to assure the project is appropriately designed, She stated that the project is a "mistake that needs to be corrected," Adoption of Resolution The Commission briefly discussed whether a continuation of the project would be warranted or beneficial, They concluded, based on the code enforcement history and the propensity of the property owner to construct improvements without permits, that a continuance would likely not produce desired results, PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-12-13.01, GRADING PLAN MODIFICATION (GPM)11- 003. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A GRADING PLAN MODIFICATION FOR TRACT 9382, LOT 9 TO ALLOW FOR GRADING AND FILLING OF A SLOPE AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAINING WALL ALONG THE REAR PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OF THE TRACT DEVELOPMENT LANDSCAPE THAT FACES ORTEGA HIGHWAY; LOCATED AT 27652 ROSEDALE DRIVE, GENERALLY LOCATED 550 FEET EAST OF BELFORD TERRACE (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 650.191- 08)(GASPAR PASTOR), Commissioner Kerr made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Parkhurst, to adopt the staff -recommended resolution denying the proposed project The motion passed by a 5.0 vote, AYES: Vice Chair Gene Ratcliffe and Commissioners Ginny Kerr, Tim Neely, Jeff Parkhurst and Rob Williams, NOES: None, RECUSE: Chairman Sheldon Cohen ABSTAIN: None, PC Meeting Minutes 5 December 13, 2011 G. UNFINISHED BUSINESS m H. NEW BUSINESS 1, Worksession on the Draft Historic T Code for the Historic Town Center, and Draft Proqram Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) (Project Manager, William Ramsey, AICR Principal Planner), Bill Ramsey made the staff presentation on the project and informed the Commission that the 150 -acre Historic Town Center planning area, includes the 31 acre downtown core which includes the Mission San Juan Capistrano, The HTC Master Plan would provide a framework for redevelopment of the Town Center by both private landowners and the City and/or Redevelopment Agency, The HTC Master Plan would establish a broad framework for future development and does not specify absolute development capacity, The Plan allows a degree of flexibility to account for future changes in market conditions, Mr, Ramsey gave a Powerpoint presentation covering several Plan -related issues that had been surfaced by staff and other advisory Commissions, Mr, Ramsey recommended that following workshop review and public comment, that the Commission continue consideration of the proposed project to a public hearing for the Tuesday, January 24, 2012 meeting, Public Comment Chairman Cohen opened the floor for public comment. Steve Behmerwold, a resident, stated he had attended several of the Studio 111 - held workshops and summarized aspects of the Plan that he thought would be good for the downtown and aspects that were problematic, He stated a major concern is the lack of planning for bike lanes on downtown streets. Commission Discussion a, Commissioner Neely questioned property -ownership patterns along Del Obispo Street and the extent to which existing commercial properties were leased and the length of those leases which could hamper the implementation of the Master Plan, He requested a property ownership map for the Historic Town Center planning area. Mr, Neely expressed reservations aboutthe Master Plan stating that it appeared overly ambitious and relies too extensively on private decision- making. He questioned how and when the Plan would come together given the various public and private decisions required, The proposed conversion of under -performing commercial to residential makes sense, Relocating City Hall to the downtown has merit if funding is available, Neely stated that more thought needs to be given to the following issues; (1) How will commercial development along Del Obispo Street be coordinated and how many boutique retail shops can it support?; (2) How much taxable sales will be generated and will that support the public improvements; (3) How would a potential "business improvement PC Meeting Minutes 6 December 13, 2011 district" (BID) and the associated financial plan work?; (4) How would construction of a new City Hall be financed?; (5) Does the implementation of the Master Plan rely too heavily on Community Redevelopment Agency funding which will not likely be available much longer? How will a half or partially completed downtown look? These issues require introspection. b. Commissioner Parkhurst stated the Master Plan was quite ambitious and expressed concern that the most physically massive structure, the Ortega "Park Once" structure is located at the main entry and visual gateway to the historic downtown, The location and design will need to be studied closely, He asked how the City envisions the phased development of Del Obispo Street commercial buildings/uses would occur in a coordinated manner, The provisions of the Form -Based Code will be critical in guiding implementation, The Plan appears to preserve and respect the historical, small-town atmosphere of the town center, c. Commissioner Ratcliffe stated that the Master Plan concept that town center streets need to serve the downtown as a destination and not merely as a means to allow motorists to get through the downtown is important. The downtown shouldn't be merely a conduit for Dana Point motorists, The Master Plan streets should not be designed primarily to serve the needs of local commuters. The planned residential over retail is positive. Planning and providing parking in the downtown will be critical to the Plan's success, d. Commissioner Kerr stated she had attended several .of the design charrettes and understands that development of the town center under the Master Plan will be a long-term, evolutionary process, The phasing needs to be cohesive, Strengthening the pedestrian orientation of the downtown is a strong plus of the Master Plan, The Master Plan is "incredibly" ambitious, The proposed Plaza Banderas Hotel, an important component of the downtown is, unfortunately, behind schedule and will be an important part of implementation, The planned boutique hotel will not be needed for some time. Uses and activities in the downtown need to provide a reason to visit and stay in the town center, Protection of the City's historic and cultural resources is important. Ultimately, the Master Plan needs to maintain the overall character of the town center, e, Commissioner Williams complimented Studio 111 on theirwork and the process for developing the Master Plan, The Plan needs to preserve historic resources and seems to do that. Amending the Yorba Street extension so that it terminates at the Ortega "Park Once" structure makes sense, The planned Forster Street extension is needed and should be pursued; however, the EI Camino Real extension not so much, While the location of the Ortega "Park Once" structure is appropriate, the mass and height need to be limited to be consistent with the character of the downtown, Mr, Williams stated he was not a "big fan" of Form - Based Codes or diagonal parking in front of the Mission, However, diagonal parking could work along Camino Capistrano. The City should study potential PC improvements to the multi -modal parking lot, In reviewing the development summary, he stated that the building area numbers don't appear correct and that potential retail could be much larger, f. Chairman Cohen stated that aspects of the Master Plan would be good for the downtown; however, some were not, The Master Plan appears to be extremely ambitious in what it's attempting to accomplish, The City will need to understand the how short-term decisions (public and private) will affect implementation of the Master Plan. The Master Plan should consider planning a parking deck over the multi -modal parking lot with access to Camino Capistrano, He agreed with Commissioner Williams that the Form -Based Code may not be right for the downtown. He was not convinced another parking structure in the downtown is needed or desirable. Implementation of the plan will require many decisions by private property owners and businesses, Plaza Banderas Hotel will be an important "lynchpin" to the downtown. The City should not use eminent domain for right-of-way acquisition in the downtown, While the overall Master Plan concept is generally well -conceived, it has issues which need to be addressed, Staff advised the Planning Commission that the project had been tentatively scheduled for public hearing on January 24, 2012 and additional public notice would be provided for that hearing. I. STAFF & COMMISSION COMMENTS Grant Taylor, Development Services Director summarized upcoming agendas and reminded the Commission that the December 27, 2011 meeting had been cancelled, J, ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, Chairman Cohen adjourned at 8:50 p,m, to the next regularly scheduled meeting for Tuesday, January 10, 2011, at 6:30 p,m, in the Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, liam A, Ramsey, AICP, rinc pal Planner Planning Commission Sec eta