HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 10-08-01 MINUTES
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 8, 2001
7:05 p.m.
Given
All present
Staff present
Approved; one abstention
Adopted Resolution Nos.
3805 and 3806, as
amended
Ludi
Hamilton
Ludi
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
Doug Holland, Deputy City Attomey
Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner
Lori Ludi, Associate Planner
Eloise Hards, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC CONCERNS -- None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes of September 24, 2001, Planning Commission
meeting.
It was moved by Davert, seconded by Hamilton, to
approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0. Chair
Pontious abstained.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 01-025 AND DESIGN
REVIEW 01-031 A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO
CONSTRUCT A 14,500 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH
FACILITY. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF RAWLINGS WAY AND
TUSTIN RANCH ROAD IN THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC
PLAN - COMMUNITY FACILITY ZONING DISTRICT.
Recommendation:
That the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 3805 approving the
environmental documentation for the project.
Adopt Resolution No. 3806 approving Conditional Use
Permit 01-025 and Design Review 01-031.
Presented the staff report; and, added that the applicant
requested before the meeting that the hours of operation
be extended to 10:00 p.m.
Asked for clarification on the rationale behind the Monday
through Friday, 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., limitation in
Condition 4.5.
Answered this condition refers to any type of assembly
use: Bible study, classes, any special worship services,
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page I
Hamilton
Pontious
Ludi
Pontious
Ludi
Davert
Kozak
Davert
Jennings
Director
Davert
etc.; and, stated these hours have been extended to 10:00
p.m., including Saturdays and Sundays.
Stated that limiting the use to 10:00 p.m., especially on
Sunday, seems illogical.
Suggested that amending the condition to Monday
through Friday "evenings" might be appropriate.
Answered there is a provision in Condition 4.7 allowing for
special services that might go past the schedule of uses
staff has provided.
Asked if that would require a temporary use permit.
Indicated that has been the procedure.
Stated his agreement with Commissioner Hamilton;
indicated that Trinity offers a program during the day for
stay-at-home mothers and preschoolers that would be
precluded under this condition; expressed his concern
regarding the conditioning of specific services; at other
churches, some activities for the teenagers last until
midnight which seems more appropriate than having young
people in the malls, Tustin Market Place, etc.; and, stated
that, as long as there are not more than 200 cars in the
parking lot, the Planning Commission should not be
concerned about whether the people are in certain
buildings.
Agreed that, in building a church community, flexibility
should be allowed for serving needs known now and needs
to be discovered in the future; and, suggested there are
probably eight parking spaces that can be added to the site
plan in order to mitigate or remove the simultaneous use
restrictions.
Stated that the landscaping requirements seem severe;
and, suggested substituting parking spaces for some of the
interior landscaping--specifically, there are several trees
that will have to be cut down if the planned expansion takes
place.
Asked if these conditions require that when the nine spaces
are being used by the church office staff on Monday through
Friday, other activities are disallowed in the sanctuary.
Replied that is the way the condition is written; the
Commission can eliminate the uses and the hours; typically,
when there is no framework in place, the numbers are not
moved in and out appropriately because some services are
more popular than others, etc.; the Commission can identify
under Condition 4.3 that the maximum number of occupants
in the sanctuary, classrooms, and/or offices shall be 723;
Condition 4.5 could be amended to read 'q'he uses and
events at the facility shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m. daily"; if there are problems in the future, Condition 4.6
is designed to address those and allow the Commission to
reconsider the application.
Reiterated his concern regarding restricting youth activities
to 10:00 p.m.
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 2
Pontious
Hamilton
Davert
Director
Davert
Pontious
Director
Davert
Jennings
Director
Pontious
Jennings
Director
Holland
Pontious
Kozak
Joel Columbo, architect
for the project
Suggested moving the restriction to 1:00 a.m.
Agreed with Commissioners Davert and Pontious regarding
time suggestions; and, stated he talked with Dr. Chades
Lambert, Brent Rallo, and Roger Suthedand on his way into
the meeting this evening.
Indicated he had also spoken on numerous occasions with
the gentlemen referred to above; and, asked if, under
Condition 4.7, applicant would be required to obtain a
temporary use permit to hold an all-night function at the
facility.
Responded affirmatively; and, added that the Commission
could state parameters within this application which would
eliminate the need for a temporary use permit.
Stated his understanding that there is a concern regarding
setting a precedent and not wanting to create abuses, but a
church presents special circumstances.
Referred to Condition 4.6 which allows the Commission to
monitor parking, traffic, and noise problems and to require
mitigating measures if problems occur.
Offered the suggestion to strike the hours altogether.
Answered that would be his preference, so long as the
Commission has enforcement rights if there is a problem.
Asked if Tustin Presbyterian Church has these kinds of
restrictions.
Answered that approval was granted quite some time ago;
more recent approvals for churches have similar restrictions
primarily related to parking and the associated residential
uses that are adjacent to the site.
Noted this issue was a concern when this applicant came
through the first time because of the size; when applicant
comes back with Phase 2, this issue can be revisited.
Remarked that the eadier application created concerns in
terms of the preschool traffic which was a much bigger
issue.
Stated that, if the Commission had formed a consensus to
eliminate the hours, staff would remove Conditions 4.2 and
4.5 and the hours section of Condition 4.3.
Asked if there are any other sections that refer to limitations
on uses.
Referred to Condition 4.3, suggesting the second sentence
should be removed.
Reiterated the possibility of finding eight more parking
spaces on this site plan.
Stated the applicant's desire is to have all the original
entitlements granted in the eadier application when the
project was much larger, including the preschool and the
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 3
Davert
Director
Davert
Mr. Columbo
Kozak
Mr. Columbo
Davert
Mr. Columbo
Davert
Mr. Columbo
Director
same hours of use with the expansion of the time; while
there is no preschool now, the applicant would prefer to
continue the right to open a small preschool; the increased
landscaped area and the tree count is the same as it was in
the original entitlement; with the increased grass area, the
ratio of trees to landscape area has increased also;
applicant would prefer not to cut down trees when Phase 2
becomes a reality; the Irvine Company Development
Review asked the applicant for a more intensified plant
palette than the Tustin ordinanco this palette is expensive
and presents a heavy burden for a nonprofit church to bear;
applicant would prefer to use the grass areas for
playgrounds; since this is a church, open hours should be
longer to facilitate the Federal government's request to use
churches as an option for citizens to visit and find solace
during these trying times; keeping teenagers in a controlled
environment would be a proper use of a facility such as this;
the community supports this church; providing some
flexibility in these areas would allow the applicant to better
serve the community.
Asked staff if the preschool issue is a part of this
application.
Replied that it is not.
Stated his inclination to grant relief on the hours and the
landscaping and perhaps following Commissioner Kozak's
suggestion of extracting additional parking spaces.
Indicated that possibility would suit the applicant.
Pointed out on the site plan the areas which appear most
suitable for additional parking.
Noted that the critical aspect of this suggestion is not to
increase cost; stated the parking is the same as it was in
the original application which should provide ample parking
up until the start of Phase 2; and, proposed reviewing that
condition during Phase 2 rather than now.
Asked Mr. Columbo what he was proposing that is different
from the table in the staff report.
Answered the applicant would like to use the same
numbers that were used before the seven percent increase;
the applicant would prefer sod and shrubs rather than trees.
Asked if those suggestions are reflected in the site plan.
Answered in the affirmative.
Provided the following modifications:
1. Condition 5.1: "A minimum of 241 off-street parking
spaces shall be provided."
2. Eliminate Condition 4.5.
3. Maintain Condition 4.4.
4. Modify Condition 4.3 to read: "The facility shall be
limited to assembly uses for church and associated
services, Sunday school, and office uses." The second
sentence will be eliminated. The last sentence will read:
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 4
Davert
Columbo
Steve Shelton,
representing the
applicant
Director
Pontious
Holland
Davert
Director
Davert
Holland
"The maximum number of occupants on the premises
shall be 723 and/or whatever future parking can
accommodate."
Eliminate Condition 4.1.
Condition 3.1 modified to read: "The applicant shall
comply with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation
Guidelines. Areas adjacent to the east and west sides
of the building may be planted with a sod or similar
material."
Asked Mr. Columbo if the applicant understands and
approves of the suggested modifications.
Asked Mr. Shelton to speak.
Stated that, even though this project was not noticed to
include daycare, an entitlement exists from the odginal use
permit; the applicant is willing to reduce the size of the
daycare; there should be a route to maintain those
entitlements from last year.
Noted that this amendment does not apply to all the
entitlements of the first application; daycare was eliminated
from the original application; the applicant would have to
submit a different application to address the daycare issue.
Stated there were many issues in the odginal application
not addressed in this application.
Stated that the critical issue is the simultaneous use
concern which was tied to the traffic; there is no description
of that sort of use presented here; if an applicant came in
for a conditional use permit for daycare facilities indicating
that use was intended to be ancillary to the other kinds of
uses and the general occupancy would not exceed the
numbers that have already been approved and would be
used in that context, it would probably move through without
major problems.
Asked if that would require Planning Commission review or
be accomplished at the staff level.
Responded that could be handled at the staff level, provided
it was consistent with the spirit and intent of the original
approval; however, that does not sound like what is being
requested here.
Stated his belief that all these issues need to be discussed;
if the Commission feels a conditional use permit would be
required, that should be addressed; perhaps there is some
distinction between community care licensing and care for
youngsters during church services.
Noted that staff has not discussed all the issues; perhaps
the application should be continued for two weeks in order
for staff to reconnoiter, but the intent is to move the project
forward; the idea of a limited nursery-type use while
someone is using the facility is an ancillary use to the
church itself, which might not qualify as daycare; under the
former application, that was not what was being discussed.
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 5
Mr. Shelton
Pontious
Davert
Mr. Shelton
Director
Holland
Jennings
Pontious and Davert
7:55 p.m.
Approved, with a
recommendation that the
City Council resolution be
amended to allow for a
periodic review of the rate
schedule by the Director of
Community Development
Stated that he appreciated staff's working with the applicant;
there is an underlying conditional use permit for 250
students; perhaps the applicant could reduce that number to
125 or 100; the applicant does not want to go through the
whole application process again for a daycare facility; the
applicant is willing to work with staff to reach a compromise.
Stated her discomfort with this suggestion.
Agreed that daycare should not be considered beyond what
the Deputy City Attorney stated as an ancillary use; and,
indicated a continuance might be necessary for staff to
consider all the aspects of the applicant's proposal.
Stated the applicant would rather move forward; and, asked
staff to recapitulate the modifications.
Condition 3.1 would be modified to read: "The applicant
shall comply with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation
Guidelines. Areas adjacent to the building on the west and
east elevations may be planted with sod of similar material."
The entire table will be eliminated.
Condition 4.1 will be eliminated.
Condition 4.2 will be eliminated.
Condition 4.3 will be modified to read: "The facility shall be
limited to assembly uses for church and associated
services, Sunday school, and office uses. The maximum
number of occupants on the premises shall be limited to
723 and/or whatever future parking can accommodate."
The chart will be eliminated.
Condition 4.5 will be eliminated.
Condition 5.1, second sentence, to read: "A minimum of
241 off-street parking spaces shall be provided."
Stated the only change he would like the Commission to
consider is to the condition that says "such additional
parking" to read "such additional occupants as the parking
would accommodate as determined by the Director."
Asked if the childcare issue is being considered as ancillary.
Answered affirmatively.
The Public Hearing closed.
It was moved by Davert, seconded by Jennings, to adopt
Resolution Nos. 3805 and 3806, as modified. Motion
carried 5-0.
CODE AMENDMENT 01-004 TO AMEND SUBSECTION G
OF SECTION 9405 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE
RELATING TO ABATEMENT OF ILLEGAL SIGNS IN THE
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS IS A CITYVVIDE
PROJECT WITHIN PUBLIC PROPERTY AND
EASEMENTS.
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 6
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission:
Adopt Resolution No. 3807 recommending that the
City Council approve the Negative Declaration for the
project.
Adopt Resolution No. 3808 recommending that the
City Council approve Code Amendment 01-004.
7:58 p.m.
The Public Hearing opened.
Reekstin
Presented the staff report.
Davert
Expressed his enthusiasm for this Code amendment.
Hamilton
Agreed that this amendment is a good idea; and, asked
what would happen to the occasional offender who is
unaware of the Code.
Director
Answered that the large percentage of people targeted by
this amendment are repeat offenders; violations are
investigated on a case-by-case basis; this is a cost
recovery, not a punitive, action; staff is enlisting the aid of
the Volunteer Academy though the Police Department
which will provide additional sign removal.
Davert
Stated it is important to have a rule of law that is enforced
appropriately; for the casual violator, the expense will be
minimal; it is the repeat offenders who will be affected.
Jennings
Asked if this amendment will address the proliferation of
garage sale signs and election signs.
Pontious
Noted that different regulations govern political signs.
Director
Added the Code covers a wide variety of political sign
issues.
Holland
Stated the City must consider what kinds of signs are
permitted in the public right-of-way; the City Attorney's
office will be making recommendations to the City Council.
Jennings
Indicated that the Citizens' Academy advised participants
that patrol cars pick up these signs.
Director
Suggested patrol officers may be picking up those signs
creating an immediate hazard or line-of-sight problem.
Kozak
Offered the suggestion that since the rate schedule is
going to be set by resolution, perhaps a periodic review by
the Community Development Director allowing for the
possibility of cost increases in the future should be
included in the City Council resolution; asked if telephone
poles, stakes in the ground, traffic signals, directional
signs, utility boxes, etc., are sites considered for sign
removal; and, stated that signs are becoming more
offensive (example: pimpit.com).
Davert
Noted that sort of advertising could be considered
vandalism.
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 7
Director
Kozak
8:15 p.m.
Director reported
Director
Jennings
Davert
Hamilton
Kozak
Stated that sort of advertising is both; this amendment
does not modify the City's extremely broad definition of a
sign; those types of advertising could be removed under
this amendment.
Offered the suggestion that stickers being pasted on stop
signs, no left turn signs, etc., should also be included
since they advertise a vendor who is receiving a financial
benefit from those stickers.
The Public Hearing closed.
It was moved by Davert, seconded by Kozak, to adopt
Resolution Nos. 3807 and 3808, with the modification to
the City Council resolution suggested by Commissioner
Kozak. Motion carried 5-0.
STAFF CONCERNS
REGULAR BUSINESS - None
Report on Actions taken at the October 1, 2001, City
Council meeting.
The City Council adopted the Amendment allowing
vehicular and pedestrian gates at the entrance of the
Sedona Tract.
The City Council continued the Aboveground Utility
Facilities Ordinance to October 15, 2001.
Reminded the Planning Commissioners that the Planning
Officials Forum is this Thursday, October 11, 2001; specific
information was provided in their packets.
Reminded the Commissioners that the second October
meeting of the Planning Commission has been cancelled.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
None
Stated he had a great time at Tustin Tiller Days--another
fantastic parade, another fantastic event, another day of
great weather.
Stated that as we approach Thanksgiving, he wanted to
thank staff for their continuing hard work.
Echoed Commissioner Davert's remarks about Tustin Tiller
Days.
Stated there were signs along Newport Avenue and Irvine
Boulevard advertising "BasicProfits.com" and asked that
those signs be removed.
Thanked staff for the update on the sign ordinance.
Presented for the record the following excerpt from a letter
signed by the Rigbys of Acorn Naturalists: "We would like
to express our sincere appreciation for the work of Elizabeth
Binsack throughout the planning process. She is a
dedicated professional who watches out for the best
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 8
Pontious
8:29 p.m.
interests of the City while allowing sensible discussions to
take place over design rules. The City is very fortunate to
have someone of her caliber as Director of Community
Development." Commissioner Kozak added that, although
the letter mentions the Director by name, he felt the remarks
applied to everyone on the staff.
Shared that during her recent visit to Great Britain she
stayed at a little inn outside Aberdeen where she noticed a
local newspaper with an article reporting on the local
Planning Commission and found it very interesting to read
that planning circumstances/problems there seemed very
similar to those here.
ADJOURNMENT:
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is
scheduled for Tuesday, November 13, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. in
the Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way.
Elizabeth A. Binsac~ '
Planning Commission Secretary
Chairperson
Minutes - Planning Commission October 8, 2001 - Page 9