Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-10-08; Planning Commission; ; SP 146A - UPDATE ON DEVELOPMENT ON SP 146A SANTA ANITA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONSTAFF REPORT October 8, 1976 To: Planning Commission &L*.. .-..^XFrom; Assistant -Personn-e-l/Di rector Re: Update on development of SP 146A The subject Specific Plan is for the shopping center east side of El Camino Real between Haymar and Marron. The last action the Planning Commission took on this site was the approval of signs and a building elevation. At that time a circulation problem was noted at the north east corner by the Standard Oil service station. The Planning Commission felt the problem may be aggravated by the approval of the drive-in bank adjacent to this area. Therefore staff was directed to work with the applicant and Standard Oil repre- sentative to mutually solve the problem and report back. We did have this meeting and have mutually agreed that some form of traffic channelization will be constructed on the access easement out to Haymar. The channelization will be curbed landscape areas separating the driveway from the service station operation. There will be an opening for mutual access between the sites. Mr. Hughes of Santa Anita Corporation submitted a proposal that was developed with Standard Oil. At this time Planning and Engineering depart- ments are reviewing this proposal of landscape channeliza- tion to determine if it will be effective. If it or a modification thereof is acceptable it is anticipated that construction of the landscape area will be completed at the time of the. development of the next building. We were not able to design any solution to the apparent traffic problem on the south side of the Standard Oil site, pending final site plan for the future building adjacent to the south (the area proposed for a McDonalds Restaurant). This will be taken into consideration at plan review for a build ing on the site. In addition, there was a question of what is the final Specific Plan of the center. To clarify what has been approved and what still needs to be done Planning Direc- tor Agatep wrote a letter to Mr. Hughes which answers these questions. The letter is attached for your infor- mation. Staff believes that the problem will be adequately solved and no further action is needed at this time. We antici- pate either further amendments to S.P. 146A or possible a CUP on the site. Therefore the Planning Commission should be able to review the solutions. Bud Plender Assistant Planning Director Att: Letter to Mr. Hughes dated September 17, 1976 cc Bill Hughes - Santa Anita Development Corporation Mr. Youngman - Standard Oil Corporation 1200 ELM A VENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 TELEPHONE: (714)729-1181 Cttp of September 17, 1976 Mr. Bill Hughes SANTA ANITA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Post Office Box 1880 Newport Beach, California 92660 Re: Specific Pl'an (SP-146A) In your letter of April 22, 1976 and my concurrence in my letter dated April 27, 1976, the plot plan dated April 16, 1976 for sub- ject Specific Plan was approved as substantially meeting the of- ficially approved plan known as Exhibit D dated January 21, 1975. The changes were substantial in that buildings were modified, added or deleted, and parking spaces and driveways were changed. I approved the plan because I felt the April 16, 1976 plan was superior to Exhibit D. Unfortunately, the Planning Director may only approve changes that are substantially the same as the approved plans. The proper method for approval is by City Council hearing with sub- sequent Specific Plan Ordinance Amendment. At present, the City has either issued building permits or has accepted for plan check all but three buildings on the site (build- ings 1, 4 and A as shown on April 16, 1976). The City recognizes your vested interest in these approvals and plan preparation, and we do not plan to change our commitments to you. However, build- ing permits will not be issued for structures in the areas of buildings 1, 4 and A of the April 16, 1976 plan unless the per- mit request is substantially the same as approved as Exhibit D. If you wish to build other than substantially as shown on Exhibit D, an amendment to the Specific Plan (SP-146A) will be necessary. In addition, the approved plan of SP-146A does not supercede any requirement for CUP. Therefore, if a proposed use or acitivity requires a CUP, the CUP must be requested and approved prior to issuance of any further permits or occupance for that particulai use. lar As you are aware, the Planning Commission is interested in evaluating how future approvals will effect the circulation patterns on the site and adjacent public streets. Therefore, it is expected that any future discretionary action requested either by Specific Plan or Conditional Use Permit will include a proposal to solve this problem. Mr. Bill Hughes September 17, 1976 •Page 2 Since there is no single Specific Plan Exhibit showing the approved buildings and the modifications, staff is preparing a composite plan for our file. Copies of this plan will be made available to you. I am very sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you. However, I believe by firmly establishing the approved plan and what changes are expected, we will eliminate further problems with this Specific Plan. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. A". AGATEP Planning Director DAA:mdp cc: City Manager City Attorney Public Works Director Building Director City Engineer Ron Roberts, SGPA