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