Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 APPEAL OF CUP 07-020 03-18-08AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 18, 2008 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-020 SUMMARY: This matter was continued from the March 4, 2008, City Council meeting. On January 22, 2008, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4079 denying Conditional Use Permit 07-020 to establish a dental office at 740 EI Camino Real. On January 29, 2008, the property owner appealed the Planning Commission's action to the City Council. Applicant: Dr. Ashok Mehta 13711 Newport Ave., Suite 11 Tustin, CA 92780 RECOMMENDATION: Property Owner: Dr. Sayed Mirrafati Mira Properties, LLC 685 Nyes Place Laguna Beach, CA 92651 Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9294(d), the City Council could take action on one or a combination of the following alternatives: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 08-22 (approval), reversing the decision of the Planning Commission and approving Conditional Use Permit 07-020; or, 2. Adopt Resolution No. 08-22 (denial), denying the appeal, thus upholding the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit 07-020; or, 3. Remand the project back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings. FISCAL IMPACT: The conditional use permit application is an applicant-initiated project. The applicant has paid applicable fees for the processing and appeal of this project. City Council Report Appeal of PC Denial of CUP 07-020 March 18, 2008 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: If the appeal is denied, the action may be statutorily exempt pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (Projects Which Are Disapproved). If the appeal is supported and the Planning Commission's decision reversed, the project may be categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). DISCUSSION: Details regarding the proposed project, project location, written communications from the project applicant, Planning Commission staff reports, meeting minutes, etc. are provided in the staff report to the City Council dated March 4, 2008 (Attachment A). On December 11, 2007, January 8, 2008, and January 22, 2008, the proposed project was considered by the Planning Commission. At the January 22, 2008, meeting, the Planning Commission heard the item and voted 4-0 to adopt Resolution No. 4079 denying CUP 07-020. Pursuant to Section 9291 of the Tustin City Code (TCC), the Planning Commission is authorized to make decisions on use permits. Pursuant to Section 9294 of TCC, any person may appeal a decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council. On January 29, 2008, the property owner appealed the Planning Commission's action to the City Council. On March 4, 2008, the Tustin City Council continued the matter until the March 18, 2008, meeting. Project Description The applicant is requesting approval to establish a dental office in an existing 1,757 sq. ft. stand-alone building located at 740 EI Camino Real. The subject property is located within the Central Commercial (C-2) zoning district where professional offices fronting onto Main Street or EI Camino Real are conditionally permitted, subject to criteria established in Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y). Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y)(1), professional offices proposed at the ground floor level shall not be approved unless the approving authority finds, based on supporting documentation and evidence, that an office use would be more compatible with the existing and planned uses in the vicinity than a retail commercial use on the subject property and that an office use would be more beneficial in implementing applicable land use policies such as the Tustin General Plan, Tustin City Code, and any Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency Project Area Redevelopment Plan than a retail commercial use on the subject property. Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y)(2), approval of professional and general office uses shall meet one or more of the following criterion: City Council Report Appeal of PC Denial of CUP 07-020 March 18, 2008 Page 3 a. The proposed use is to be located in an existing building originally designed, built, and occupied asoffices or converted to office uses pursuant to an approved building permit b. The proposed use is to be located in an existing building that, because of its design and orientation, is impractical to modify or alter to accommodate retail establishments. c. The proposed use is to be located in an existing building requiring significant reconstruction that is not economically feasible or practical to accommodate retail establishments. d. The proposed use is to be located in amulti-tenant retail center and is ancillary but complementary to the remaining mixed uses with respect to type of use, hours of operation, convenience, and parking demand. e. The proposed use is determined to be beneficial, complementary, and compatible with surrounding neighborhood and nearby retail establishments. COUNCIL ALTERNATIVES: Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9294d, the City Council has generally three (3) alternatives they may act upon regarding this project: reverse the Planning Commission's decision; uphold the Planning Commission's decision; and/or or remand the project back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings. If the City Council is inclined to reverse the Planning Commission's decision, staff would recommend that the Council adopt Resolution No. 08-22 (approval) - (Attachment B), finding that the request meets TCC Section 9233c(y)(1) and (y)(2)b and conditioning the applicant to obtain Planning Commission approval of a Design Review application that provides high quality, four-sided elevation improvements and parking lot and landscape improvements to enhance the site. It should be noted that prior projects have been similarly required to make facade and site improvements, including Cathy's Kids Club, Tustin Crossings shopping center, and the Rengel professional building. Reina Kapadia Elizabeth A. Binsack Assistant Planner Community Development Director Attachments: A - City Council Agenda Report dated March 4, 2008 B - Resolution No. 08-22 (approval) C - Resolution No. 08-22 (denial) ATTACHMENT A CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT DATED MARCH 4, 2008 (Due to the volume of pages, this document is only being provided to the City Council. Members of the public interested in viewing Attachment A should contact the City Clerk, Community Development Department, or view on the City's website.) ATTACHMENT B RESOLUTION NO. 08-22 (APPROVAL) RESOLUTION NO.08-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-020 AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-020 AUTHORIZING A DENTAL OFFICE LOCATED AT 740 EL CAMINO REAL IN THE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) ZONE AND FRONTING ONTO EL CAMINO REAL The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: A. That a proper application, Conditional Use Permit 07-020, was filed by Dr. Ashok Mehta, requesting authorization to establish a dental office in an existing stand-alone building at 740 EI Camino Real. That the property is located in the Central Commercial (C-2) zoning district, and is designated as Old Town Commercial by the General Plan Land Use Policy Map; B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on December 11, 2007, by the Planning Commission; C. That at the December 11, 2007, public hearing, the applicant's legal counsel submitted correspondence and a Public Records Act request to the Planning Commission; D. That the Planning Commission continued the project to the January 8, 2008, meeting to allow the Planning Commission and City staff time to review and respond to correspondence and the Public Records Act request; E. That at the January 8, 2008, public hearing, the Planning Commission continued the project to the January 22, 2008 meeting, in order to conduct further research as to whether a conditional use permit was required; F. That at the January 22, 2008, public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4079, denying Conditional Use Permit 07-020; G. That on January 29, 2008, the property owner's legal counsel submitted a letter of appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit 07-020; H. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on March 4, 2008, by the City Council; I. That at the March 4, 2008, public hearing, the City Council continued the item to the March 18, 2008 meeting; Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 18, 2008 Page 2 J. That pursuant .to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y), professional and general offices fronting onto Main Street or EI Camino Real and located within the Old Town Commercial General Plan land use designation are conditionally permitted, subject to certain use criteria; K. That the City Council determines that the property fronts onto EI Camino Real, is located within the Old Town Commercial General Plan land use designation, and is subject to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y). L. That the City Council has considered the matter and determined that if implemented consistent with the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto, the proposed project meets finding requirements needed to support the conditional use permit, in that: 1. Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y)(1), the proposed office use would be more compatible with the existing and planned uses in the vicinity than a retail commercial use on the subject property and that the office use would be more beneficial in implementing applicable land use policies such as the Tustin General Plan, Tustin City Code, and any Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency Project Area Redevelopment Plan than a retail commercial use on the subject property. 2. Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y)(2), approval of the professional office use meets the required criteria, as follows: b. That the proposed use is to be located in an existing building that because of its design and orientation is impractical to modify or alter to accommodate retail establishments. 3. The proposed project has been determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan, which allows for a variety of retail, professional office, and service-oriented business activities to serve Old Town and surrounding areas, and 4. The Redevelopment Agency has reviewed the project and has indicated its support for the proposed use if architectural improvements are provided. M. That the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 1) of the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act). Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 18, 2008 Page 3 II. The City Council hereby reverses the Planning Commission decision denying Conditional Use Permit 07-020, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A, and approves Conditional Use Permit 07-020 authorizing a dental office in an existing building at 740 EI Camino Real in the Central Commercial (C- 2) zoning district and Old Town Commercial General Plan designation. JERRY AMANTE MAYOR PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 08-22 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 18th day of March, 2008 by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A -RESOLUTION NO. 08-22 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-020 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped on the date of approval, on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve subsequent minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are consistent with provisions of the Tustin City Code. (1) 1.2 This approval shall become null and void unless the use is established within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be granted if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. (1) 1.3 Approval of Conditional Use Permit 07-020 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. ARCHITECTURE (***) 2.1 Prior to the establishment of a dental office, the applicant shall enhance the exterior of the building through the Design Review application process, for review and approval by the Planning Commission. At a minimum, exterior improvements shall include high quality four-sided architectural .improvements and parking lot and landscape improvements. Conditions of project approval including but not limited to appropriate conditions on the use as permitted by this CUP 07-020 shall be considered concurrent with the design review approval. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (2) CEQA MITIGATION (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTIONS (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENTS (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (7) PC/CC POLICY Exhibit A Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 18, 2008 Page 5 FEES (1,5) 3.1 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of ffty dollars ($50.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. ATTACHMENT C RESOLUTION NO. 08-22 (DENIAL) RESOLUTION NO. 08-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DEClSlON DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-020 TO AUTHORIZE A DENTAL OFFICE LOCATED AT 740 EL CAMINO REAL IN THE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) ZONE AND FRONTING ONTO EL CAMINO REAL The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: A. That a proper application, Conditional Use Permit 07-020, was filed by Dr. Ashok Mehta, requesting authorization to establish a dental office in an existing stand-alone building at 740 EI Camino Real. That the property fronts onto EI Camino Real, is located in the Central Commercial (C-2) zoning district, and is designated as Old Town Commercial by the General Plan Land Use Policy Map; B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on December 11, 2007, by the Planning Commission; C. That at the December 11, 2007, public hearing, the applicant's legal counsel submitted correspondence and a Public Records Act request to the Planning Commission; D. That the Planning Commission continued the project to the January 8, 2008, meeting to allow the Planning Commission and City staff time to review and respond to correspondence and the Public Records Act request; E. That at the January 8, 2008, public hearing, the Planning Commission continued the project to the January 22, 2008 meeting, in order to conduct further research as to whether a conditional use permit was required; F. That at the January 22, 2008, public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4079, denying Conditional Use Permit 07-020; G. That on January 29, 2008, the property owner's legal counsel submitted a letter of appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit 07-020; H. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on March 4, 2008, by the City Council; I. That at the March 4, 2008, public hearing, the City Council continued the item to the March 18, 2008 meeting; Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 4, 2008 Page 2 J. That pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y), professional and general offices fronting onto Main Street or EI Camino Real and located within the Old Town Commercial General Plan land use designation are conditionally permitted, subject to certain use criteria; K. That Tustin City Code does not define "fronting" and that the City Council has considered available definitions contained in the Tustin City Code and Webster's Dictionary to determine the meaning of "fronting" as follows: "Lot Front" is defined as "the narrowest dimension of a lot fronting on a street," which in the case of the subject property, is the portion of the lot fronting on EI Camino Real. "'Side and Front of Corner Lots' means the narrowest frontage of a corner lot facing the street is the front, and the longest frontage facing the intersecting street is the side, irrespective of the direction in which the dwelling faces." Webster's Dictionary defines "frontage" as "Land adjacent to a building, street." In the case of the subject property, the land is adjacent to both EI Camino Real and EI Camino Way, thus it is fronting upon both streets. L. That the City Council determines that, like any property with any portion of the lot fronting on to EI Camino Real or Main Street and located within the Old Town Commercial General Plan land use designation, the subject property is subject to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y). M. That the subject property fronts on EI Camino Real, therefore a conditional use permit is required to establish a dental office at the subject location. N. That the City Council has considered the matter and determined that the proposed project does not meet finding requirements needed to support the conditional use permit, in that: 1. Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y)(1), professional offices proposed at the ground floor level shall not be approved unless the approving authority finds, based on supporting documentation and evidence, that an office use would be more compatible with the existing and planned uses in the vicinity than a retail commercial use on the subject property and that an office use would be more beneficial in implementing applicable land use policies such as the Tustin General Plan, Tustin City Code, and any Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency Project Area Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 4, 2008 Page 3 Redevelopment Plan than a retail commercial use on the subject property. While some of the documentation may support approval of the conditional use permit, insufficient and/or inconclusive evidence exists to meet finding requirements that an office use would be more compatible than a retail commercial use on the subject property. In addition, approving an office use would not be more beneficial in implementing applicable land use policies such as the City Code and General Plan, as outlined below. 2. Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9233c(y)(2), approval of professional and general office uses shall meet one or more of the following criterion: a. The proposed use is to be located in an existing building originally designed, built, and occupied as offices or converted to office uses pursuant to an approved building permit. The original building permit does not exist, but records dating back to 1972 indicate that the building was occupied as an office since the building was relocated to and first occupied in Tustin. The last business license issued for this property prior to the establishment of a tutoring facility was for EI Camino Chiropractic whose business license expired in 1995. Thus, the office use has lapsed for more than twelve (12) consecutive months and pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9273 (Non-conforming Structures and Uses) any subsequent use shall comply with current City Code. The intent of anon-conforming code in the City's Zoning Code is to permit the continuation or maintenance of a building and/or use to enjoy the benefit of a prior right/regulations until such time that a building and/or use is no longer used for the prior purpose, at which time the use and/or building should be brought into compliance with current codes. To further the non-conformity of a use and/or building does not meet the intent or purpose of anon-conforming code section and may set a precedent for other nonconforming sites when the use has been discontinued and the desire is to reestablish a non- conforming use contrary to the standards set forth in the Zoning Code and goals and objectives of the General Plan. On October 9, 2006, the Zoning Administrator approved CUP 06- 014, permitting a tutoring and counseling facility including a retail Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 4, 2008 Page 4 area, which currently occupies the building and further invalidating the continuance of the property as an office use. b. The proposed use is to be located in an existing building that because of its design and orientation is impractical to modify or alter to accommodate retail establishments. The existing building's site and orientation at the prominent crossroads of EI Camino Real and EI Camino Way at the entry to Old Town Tustin make it a prime location -for a retail establishment. The property, with minor modifications, presents a significant potential for retail uses or for redevelopment of the site to accommodate retail at least at the ground floor. Approving another office use at this location would lengthen the non- conforming use indefinitely and hinder the potential for retail or redevelopment. Evidence presented by the applicant about the cost to modify or alter the building to accommodate retail establishments indicated that the costs were similar to the costs to establish new office uses. There is inadequate evidence that modifying the building to accommodate retail uses is impractical. c. The proposed use is to be located in an existing building requiring significant reconstruction that is not economically feasible or practical to accommodate retail establishments. The existing building, with some modifications, could be suitable to accommodate service-oriented retail uses that are outright permitted in the C-2 zone. The building is currently oriented towards the interior of the lot, but the addition of some storefront elements along the elevation on EI Camino Real could feasibly transform the structure to accommodate retail by capitalizing upon its corner location. However, establishment of a dental office at this location would necessitate tenant improvements to the building, thereby impairing the opportunity for retail at this location in the reasonable and foreseeable future. Also, evidence presented by the applicant about the cost to modify or alter the building to accommodate retail establishments indicated that the costs were similar to the costs to establish proposed new office uses. There is inadequate evidence that modifying the building to accommodate retail establishments is economically infeasible or impractical. Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 4, 2008 Page 5 d. The proposed use is to be located in amulti-tenant retail center and is ancillary but complementary to the remaining mixed uses with respect to type of use, hours of operation, convenience, and parking demand. This criterion is not applicable, since the proposed use is to be located in asingle-tenant building. However, the site is located adjacent to EI Camino Plaza and other shopping centers, which feature a large variety of retail commercial operations. e. The proposed use is determined to be beneficial, complementary, and compatible with surrounding neighborhood and nearby retail establishments. The subject property is located within the Old Town Tustin District, which is a walkable neighborhood district. The intent of the office provision in the C-2 zoning district is to encourage pedestrian activity in the retail area. Although the applicant has indicated that the dental office use would bring increased foot traffic to the area, the nature of the patron for this type of activity is more single-use oriented than amulti-trip retail customer that might visit a travel agency or bank, or drop off children at an educational/tutoring facility, for example. The proposed use is not complementary to surrounding retail establishments in that office uses do not encourage pedestrian activity in the neighborhood in the same way that retail or service-oriented uses do. 4. The proposed project must be determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. The project as proposed appears to be in direct conflict with the following policies set forth in the Land Use Element of the General Plan: Provide for and encourage the development of neighborhood-serving commercial uses in areas of Tustin presently underserved by such uses. Encourage the integration of retail or service commercial uses on the street level of office projects (Policies 1.2 and 10.6). Encourage the elimination of non-conforming uses and buildings (Policy 4.4). The project proposal is for a dental office to fully occupy asingle-story building located in an area identified for retail commercial uses. The Old Town neighborhood has been recognized by the City Council and Chamber of Commerce as underserved by retail commercial uses. The proposed use does not further the land use goals set forth in the General Plan because it does not fill a land use need of the Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 4, 2008 Page 6 neighborhood. Tustin City Code Amendment 06-004 was adopted to address this deficiency and encourage much-needed retail uses in the heart of Old Town Tustin. In addition, grating the CUP for an office use would further the non-conforming status of the property, in direct conflict with General Plan Policy 4.4. The City's zoning code and general plan provide for several areas throughout the City where professional offices may locate. Dental offices are permitted outright in the Professional (Pr), Retail Commercial (C-1 ), and Commercial General (CG) zoning districts, as well as in the Central Commercial (C-2) district when not fronting on to Main Street or EI Camino Real and located outside of the Old Town Commercial General Plan land use designation. O. That the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15270 (Projects Which are Disapproved) of the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act); II. The City Council hereby upholds the Planning Commission decision denying without prejudice Conditional Use Permit 07-020 to authorize a dental office in an existing building at 740 EI Camino Real in the Central Commercial (C-2) zoning district and Old Town Commercial General Plan designation. JERRY AMANTE MAYOR PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 08-22 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 18th day of March, 2008 by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: Resolution No. 08-22 CUP 07-020 March 4, 2008 Page 7 COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK