Loading...
MIN 06 13 16_Item 5_Amy V_gmJUNE 13, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES ITEM NO. 5 CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2015-00505 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2015-00284 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05832 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17959 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00003 (DEV2015-00101) Location: 415 South Anaheim Hills Road Request: The following land use entitlements are requested to permit the development of a 60-unit, attached single family residential project: a general plan amendment to amend the General Plan land use designation from Open Space and Water Uses to Open Space, Water Uses and Corridor Residential; reclassify the subject properties from the OS (SC) (Open Space, Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone to the RM-1 (SC) (Single Family Residential, Scenic Corridor Overlay) and the OS (SC) (Open Space, Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zones; a conditional use permit to permit a 60-unit attached single-family residential development with modified development standards; a development agreement between the applicant and the City of Anaheim to provide funding for open space amenities; and a tentative tract map to create a 60-unit residential subdivision. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request under the California Environmental Quality Act. Resolution No. PC2016-050 Resolution No. PC2016-051 Resolution No. PC2016-052 Resolution No. PC2016-053 Resolution No. PC2016-054 Resolution No. PC2016-055 (Bostwick / Caldwell) Approved, Recommended City Council approval of the following:  Mitigated Negative Declaration, along with MMP No. 333; General Plan Amendment; Reclassification; and Development Agreement  Conditional Use Permit, modified Condition No. 21, adding language which requires the applicant to coordinate with the Electrical Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department regarding possible upgrades to the existing street lights on Anaheim Hills Road. Modified Condition No. 41, adding language to modify the site plan and tract map allowing the applicant to relocate one dwelling unit from the middle building to the building at the northerly end of the property.  Tentative Tract Map, modified Condition No. 8, adding language requiring maintenance of the vacant property north of La Paz Road by the homeowner’s association. VOTE: 5-0-1 Chair Lieberman and Commissioners Bostwick, Caldwell, Ramirez and Seymour voted yes. Commissioner Henninger abstained. Commissioner Dalati was absent. Project Planner: Amy Vazquez avazquez@anaheim.net JUNE 13, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES Amy Vazquez, Contract Planner provided a summary of the staff report dated November 16, 2015, along with a visual presentation. Commissioner Seymour stated neighbors are concerned regarding an increase in traffic given the number of units that are proposed. David Kennedy, Associate Transportation Planner, said the traffic study results did not show a significant impact at any of the surrounding intersections due to the increase in traffic generated by the proposed project. Commissioner Seymour asked how a tennis club exists at this location if it was zone Open Space. Jonathan Borrego, Planning Services Manager, answered that when the property was developed as a tennis court, the property was zoned in general plan for public recreation. In 1986 the adjacent senior citizen apartment complex to the south was developed and as result, the Planning Commission asked that a General Plan Amendment be initiated for the balance of the property, which included the tennis center and tennis courts as Open Space. Commissioner Seymour reference the site plan and asked who owns Lot 2. Ms. Vazquez responded that the lot is owned by current property owner and is part of the project. There is an easement over the property for utility and road purposes. Commissioner Seymour requested more information regarding the infiltration basin. Edgar Garcia, Assistant Engineer, explained the process. Commissioner Caldwell, asked if the sidewalks on both sides of the street will mirror each other once the project is complete. Is there evidence that the proximity of a structure to the sidewalk increases the accident rate or a danger to pedestrians? Mr. Kennedy responded that there is no evidence to his knowledge; however, having a wider sidewalk does provide more space between the street and where the pedestrians will walk and should improve their safety. Chair Lieberman opened the public hearing. Greg McCafferty, representing Sage Crest Development, 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 800, Anaheim. Mr. McCafferty clarified that the setback is actually a minimum of 17 feet to approximately 40 feet. None of the intersections rose to a level of significant impact and would have to be mitigated. He address Commissioner Seymour’s question regarding the retention basin. The water quality requirements in Orange County are now stricter. Orange County Public Works requires that on-site drainage be treated before it enters the public storm drain. Mr. McCafferty said they went door to door from April to June to talk with neighbors. There were at minimum of three visits to each home, if no one was home, a postcard was left to call. They received letters and verbal support several people. The tennis facility has evolved from a private prestigious tennis facility to a property that has seen a lot of deferred maintenance. Since privacy is a concern to some neighbors, they have installed dual hedge screen on the east and sides of the channel. The code allows a height greater than proposed; however, given its proximity, they chose to remain at two stories, unlike the senior apartments to the south, which JUNE 13, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES are three stories. They are installing a large sidewalk along Anaheim Hills Road and will underground the power lines. This project will not take away Open Space or Parkland, but adds to it. Commissioner Bostwick asked if they were proposing to install landscaping on the west side of the drainage channel and who will maintain it. Mr. McCafferty responded yes and they will also plant shrubs on the County access area. It will be maintained by the homeowners association (HOA). Commissioner Bostwick asked if a retaining wall would be installed. Mr. McCafferty answered that they are installing an eight foot sidewalk, putting the grades of the pads above the channel as required. Commissioner Seymour asked if the HOA is responsible for maintaining Lot 2. Mr. Garcia said the area should be maintained by the City. Jim Minisci, resident, 348 S. San Vicente Lane, Anaheim. He is neither in favor or opposed to the proposed project. He is concerned that there will be an increase in traffic and that the sidewalks are currently inadequately lit. Steven LaMotte, Government Affairs Director, Building Industry Association of Orange County. He is in favor of the proposed project. Cindy Graves, 377 S. San Vicente Lane, Anaheim. She is in opposition of the proposed project. Ms. Graves said the original design and intent of Anaheim Hills was to be semi-rural within the city of Anaheim. She expressed concern regarding increased traffic and how that would affect Police and Fire access. Christine Haynes, 307 S. San Vicente Lane, Anaheim. She is in favor of the proposed project. Andrew Fisher, 5940 E. Marsha Circle, Anaheim. He is neither in favor or opposed to the proposed project. Mr. Fisher is concerned with the open space and that the City cannot manage the area it already has in the area. He asked if the park land will be completed at the same time as the project. He is concerned traffic and parking will be become an issue as there will be no onsite access at the park. Eleanor Beatty, 397 S. Vicente Lane, Anaheim. She is concerned with the increase in traffic and if there would be only one entry into the proposed project. Chair Lieberman closed the public hearing. Mr. Kennedy stated they would make a request that the Utilities Department look into the inadequate lighting concern. He requested that exact locations be provided. Chair Lieberman asked if there was a correlation between the amount of street lighting and the speed limit. JUNE 13, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES Mr. Kennedy replied no. Commissioner Seymour asked if it would be appropriate to contact the Police to increase enforcement. Mr. Kennedy responded that he would be contacting the Police Department to increase their presence in the area. Chair Lieberman asked that the Fire and Police access be addressed. Ms. Vazquez confirmed that there is one access point into the project and that the Fire and Police departments reviewed and approved the plans. She added that the street light issue along Anaheim Hills Road can be added in the Conditional Use Permit resolution, Condition No. 21. Chair Lieberman reopened the public hearing. Mr. McCafferty stated he and his engineer were available to answer any questions the Commission might have regarding the traffic study. Chair Lieberman closed the public hearing again as the Commission did not have any questions for Mr. McCafferty. Pamela Galera, Principal Project Planner, briefed the Commission on the proposed park land, contribution, developer fees, access and timeline. Chair Lieberman asked about the size of the proposed project and the cost of acquisition and development of passive uses. Ms. Galera replied that it would be approximately six acres, it may or may not include the Canyon Library. The City already owns the property and it is only a matter of developing these uses. The cost estimate is $500,000. The project would include minor grading and would keep the land form. They would grade enough to get through the property and it would be a wheelchair accessible trail. Chair Lieberman asked about parking availability and access. Ms. Galera said the park will be designed in such a way that the neighbors would utilize it for walking. Commissioner Caldwell asked why the park is not being built as soon as the funds are available. Ms. Galera stated that there is a great need in the east. Their funding works so that they receive developer fees from residential development and as she has stated, there has not been any residential development in the east in quite a while. All the playgrounds on the east side need to be upgraded. They would rather take the time and leverage these funds with grants. Commissioner Seymour asked if the residents could be assured that, in fact, the land on Nohl Ranch Road is part of this plan and will be funded by these development fees and if they leveraged with foundation fees, they most likely go to another location as needed. Ms. Galera responded that this land is a high priority to develop and they will have more community meetings. JUNE 13, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES Ms. Vazquez interjected that Condition No. 8 on the Tentative Tract Map resolution, has a condition of approval pertaining to maintenance covenant that shall be submitted prior to final map. Staff is recommending that language be added to that condition and read the addition into record. Ted Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney, read into record a modification to Condition No. 41 on the Condition Use Permit resolution. Chair Lieberman asked if the condition that is being amended will leave it open ended or will it force them to do it. Mr. Reynolds replied that it is taking up the recommendation of what they want to do or what they said they have agreed to do with the adjacent property owner. The modification will require them to break up the appearance of the 12-unit building. Chair Lieberman asked Mr. McCafferty if he agreed with the modification. Mr. McCafferty replied that he agreed to the condition as read. Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell and the motion carried, recommending that the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions attached to the June 13, 2016 staff report, determining that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request and recommending City Council approval of CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment No. 2015-00505, Reclassification No. 2015-00284, Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05832, Tentative Tract Map No. 17959, Development Agreement No. 2016-00003 (DEV2015-00101). Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolutions passed with five yes votes. Chair Lieberman and Commissioners Bostwick, Caldwell, Ramirez and Seymour voted yes. Commissioner Henninger abstained and Commissioner Dalati was absent. OPPOSITION: One person spoke in opposition to the request with concerns related to traffic, fire and police emergency access, and the proposed density of the project. During the public hearing staff noted that two e-mails were received expressing opposition to the request. IN SUPPORT: Two persons spoke in favor of the subject project. During the public hearing, staff noted that a piece of written correspondence was received in favor of the subject project. Prior to the meeting, a piece of written correspondence was received in favor of the subject project. JUNE 13, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES IN GENERAL: Three persons spoke in general to the subject project with concerns related to safety and traffic issues, line-of-sight along Anaheim Hills Road, inadequate street lighting, the project’s egress and ingress, and the provision of the open space and park areas to serve the neighborhood. DISCUSSION TIME: 1 hour and 16 minutes (6:38 to 7:54 p.m.)