Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 06-11-01 MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 11, 2001 A PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP PROVIDING AN OVERVIEW OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) WAS HELD AT 6:00 P.M. IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM BEHIND THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 7:03 p.m. Given All present Staff present Approved Approved, as amended 7:05 p.m. Ashabi Davert Director CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Doug Holland, Deputy City Attorney Doug Anderson, Senior Project Manager-Transportation Karen Peterson, Senior Planner Minoo Ashabi, Associate Planner Justina Willkom, Associate Planner Eloise Harris, Recording Secretary PUBLIC CONCERNS -- None CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 14, 2001, REGULAR MEETING It was moved by Davert, seconded approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. by Jennings, to PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-018 A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT AND SMALL GROUP EVENTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH SALON SERVICES WITHIN AN EXISTING TENANT SPACE. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED AT 13911 CARROLL WAY, SUITE E, IN THE RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-1), P ZONING DISTRICT. Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3788 approving Conditional Use Permit 00-018. The Public Hearing opened. Presented the staff report. Stated that Condition 2.2 does not address the sexually oriented business law; and, asked that language further restricting the usage to individual treatments be added. Suggested removing "or two individuals of the same sex" from that condition. Minutes - Planning Commission June 11, 2001 - Page 1 Hamilton Staff Hamilton Director Kozak Staff 7:12 p.m. Davert Director Hamilton 7:13 p.m. Hamilton Le Aine Dehmer, applicant Pontious Ms. Dehmer 7:16 p.m. Hamilton Holland Pontious Holland Asked if there is a divider in that room which would allow for two people. Asked if Commissioner Hamilton was suggesting a permanent divider. Responded he only wants to assure that applicant does not lose a room. Indicated that applicant could add a demising wall at a later date. Requested adding language to restrict employee parking to the rear of the building. Answered that language could be added requiring employees to park along the northern property line. The Public Hearing closed. Stated his appreciation to the applicant for bringing this facility into compliance; and, asked if there are similar businesses in the City in similar circumstances. Responded affirmatively. Stated he had a question for the applicant. The Public Hearing reopened. Asked the applicant about the male-female customer ratio. Answered that clientele is presently 25-30 percent male but that number is increasing Asked if there would be any problem with requiring the employees to park in the rear. Responded that the employees already park in the back, and the owner provides a security escort for employees going to their cars after dark. Closed the Public Hearing. Asked that "owners and managers" be added to Condition 2.11. Responded that the owners may not be so required under the Code since they might not be in contact with the clients. Asked the City Attorney if the condition should remain as is. Responded affirmatively. It was moved by Davert, seconded by Jennings, to adopt Resolution No. 3788, amended as follows: Remove "or two individuals of the same sex" from the second sentence of Condition 2.2. Minutes - Planning Commission June 11,2001 · Page 2 Approved, as amended 7:18 p.m. Willkom Holland Pontious Holland Director Pontious Director Add to Condition 2.23 between the first and second sentences: "Employees shall park in the parking spaces adjacent to the northem property line." Motion carried 5-0. DRIVEWAY CODE AMENDMENT NO. 00-001 A REQUEST RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY ADOPT STANDARDS FOR DRIVEWAYS FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES. Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3728 recommending that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration related to Code Amendment No. 00-001; and, That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3729 recommending that the City Council adopt Code Amendment No. 00-001 related to development standards for driveways for residential, commercial, and industrial properties. The Public Hearing opened. Presented the staff report. Referred the Commissioners to the proposed language revising Resolution No. 3729, paragraph D of subsection 9271(bb); and, stated the reasons for making this change. Stated that this revision addressed some of her concerns; and, asked if language should be included stating what would trigger compliance on a nonconforming property. Answered that the language in the draft ordinance would make this fully retroactive to all properties within the City. The proposed amendment would make this retroactive but only to the extent that someone did not receive some entitlement from the City for the work that was done. In other words, if an individual received a building permit or discretionary entitlement from the City that authorized the approval of construction or the installation of paved material beyond what is allowed in the Code, that individual would be able to maintain that paved area as essentially a nonconforming use of the property. Whereas, if the paved area was not associated with a prior building permit or entitlement, an individual would be required to meet the new Code requirements. Stated that a more laissez faire approach might be followed except in known problem areas. Confirmed with staff that a proactive approach will be focused on certain problem areas. Indicated that was correct. Minutes - Planning Commission June 11,2001 - Page 3 Jennings Staff Jennings Director Davert Staff Davert Staff Hamilton Holland Hamilton Holland Director Hamilton Director Hamilton Director Asked what the specifications are for a driveway that does not lead to a garage. Answered that the maximum allowable paved area within the front yard could be 50 percent of the total front yard setback area. Asked, if owners are required to verify the maximum allowable paved area, what record will be kept. Responded there will be no way to track that. Asked staff how 350 South B Street, which has a driveway on the south side leading to a garage and has a circular driveway in the front with no garage, would be impacted by this code amendment. Referred the Commissioners to subsection A which discusses paved areas for accessory residential uses. Referred to subsection B and asked if that is the width of the paving or the width between entrances. Answered width of the driveway. Asked if there are no records of building permits issued for a concrete area in the front yard. Stated that building permits were not required simply to construct a driveway or install paved areas; however, paving could have been accomplished in conjunction with other types of construction activity that would have occurred on the site. Asked for further clarification. Stated that if there was no building permit for an installation considered to be an excessive paved area, compliance with the Code would be required; if a permit exists that addresses that particular paved area and it appears that it was approved in some way by the City, that would be grandfathered and allowed to remain in place. Provided a hypothetical example: if a homeowner requested a detached garage showing an excessive area of paving ten years ago for which the City issued a permit, that paved area would be an entitled and would be nonconforming with the proposed ordinance. Conversely, if ten years ago an individual paved an area not shown on the building plan, there would be no entitlement. Asked what guidelines for approval existed in the past. Answered there were none. Asked, for clarification: if in the past someone received a permit which involved paving the entire front yard, would that be grandfathered in. Responded affirmatively; and, added that the paving would have been shown on the overall site plan. Minutes - Planning Commission June 11,2001 - Page 4 Hamilton Davert Pontious Director 7:34 p.m. Director Pontious Davert Director Kozak Director Asked for a rough percentage of people approved in the past who would have met the proposed guideline of 50 percent. Suggested that the intent of the statute as it has been revised is to ensure that the City has not granted someone a right and is now seeking to revoke that right without due process; the revised statute does an excellent job of making sure that the City is not infringing upon someone's property rights. Pointed out that in certain areas, such as Tustin Ranch, this is not a consideration because driveways were dealt with in the Specific Plan guidelines. Stated agreement with Commissioner Davert's and Commissioner Pontious' remarks. The Public Hearing closed. It was moved by Jennings, seconded by Davert, to adopt Resolution No. 3728, as presented, and Resolution No. 3729, with the following modification. Revise Subsection 9271(bb), item d, to read as follows: "The provisions of this Subsection shall apply to all lots in the City to the extent such lots have not been improved with paved areas authorized and approved through a building permit or discretionary entitlement of the City. Except as expressly provided in this paragraph d, nothing in this Subsection shall be construed as creating or providing any nonconforming status or any other right to maintain paved area on any lot in the City in violation of this Subsection." Motion carried 5~0. Asked if the Commission prefers a more laissez faire approach in terms of code enforcement with the City focusing on complaints or targeted areas where problems already exist, rather than identifying how quickly someone must come into compliance. Responded affirmatively. Asked if there might be 20-30 properties involved. Responded affirmatively; added the plan is not to put a time limit on coming into compliance; and, stated the policy regarding time limits will be modified before the Code amendment goes to the City Council. Asked how the policy will be communicated. Stated that the problem primarily involves multiple- family residential areas and will be addressed through TEAM (the apartment managers' association). Continued to September 10, 2001 o CONTINUED ORDINANCE NO. 1232 AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR ABOVEGROUND TELECOMMUNI- CATION FACILITIES ON PUBLIC PROPERTIES AND Minutes - Planning Commission June 11. 2001 - Page 5 Director reported Hamilton Director Hamilton Kozak WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS IS A CITYWIDE PROJECT. Recommendation: That the Planning Commission continue Ordinance No. 1232 to the September 10, 2001, Planning Commission meeting. It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Davert, to continue Ordinance No. 1232 to the September 10, 2001, Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 5-0. REGULAR BUSINESS -- None STAFF CONCERNS Noted various Planning Commission items the City Council approved, including the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for the senior living facility. The City Council may be considering a gate policy at the next meeting, depending upon whether or not there is a large SAUSD march on City Hall. Noted there is a Budget Workshop on July 2, 2001; staff will e-mail the Planning Commissioners regarding the time. COMMISSION CONCERNS Stated he enjoyed the State of the City luncheon. Noted that while he was unable to attend the Chili Cook- Off, the Police Department Open House was very informative; and, thanked Chief Foster and all the officers involved. Noted that weeds on the property below Edinger on Red Hill have been cleaned up; and, expressed his appreciation. Stated the weeds at the house on Bryan have grown back and are now two or three feet high. Stated the City will have to abate those weeds as the owner has died; the City has authorization from the County to bill the estate directly. Concluded that he had intended to vote against the Driveway Code Amendment, but the modification suggested by the City Attorney convinced him otherwise. Thanked The Irvine Company for the beautiful Irvine Ranch book. Thanked staff for the Der Wienerschnitzel roof color which is much improved. Minutes - Planning Commission June 11, 2001 - Page 6 Anderson Director Kozak Jennings Anderson Jennings Davert Noted the Old Town signs on the freeway exits are up and providing direction; the timing is perfect given the development going on at the Water Yard and the development at the Tustin Car Wash; and, asked, regarding the local signage within the public right-of-way, whether that signage will come back to the Planning Commission for review. Responded that the local signage is being designed in conjunction with the Tustin Old Town Association (TOTA); indicated he does not know whether it will come back to the Planning Commission; and, promised to keep the Commission informed. Noted the local signage program would not come back to the Commission, but staff can bring it back as an informational item. Stated the Primrose Plaza monument sign on the east side of Newport Avenue just below Sixth Street is broken down and covered with graffiti. Thanked staff for their work on the Driveway Ordinance. Asked staff to look into the possibility of an ordinance requiring retail only for the first floor of buildings in Old Town, not just new construction. Reported that she and Commissioner Davert attended the Cultural Resources Advisory Committee (CRAC) meeting and shared the following: CRAC is an active committee although there are only three members at this time; CRAC continues sending the letters of commendation for outstanding renovations or new projects in Old Town; CRAC is concerned about airport and freeway noise and talked about taking something to the City Council on those two issues; CRAC continues to pursue the listing of buildings on the Historic Register; a name change is being discussed pointing out that staff's research indicates most cities do not use that name; and, CRAC is pursuing the possible use of CDBG funds to be used in historic area. Stated she enjoyed the Police Department's Open House and found it informative. Suggested that Old Town items be given to CRAC by fax or e-mail, allowing the Committee some input. Stated the intersection of Main and El Camino has been backed up several times to B Street; and, asked if a study was done on this situation. Responded affirmatively, stating a modification of that intersection is planned for the next fiscal year. Stated she had her first experience with the Engineering and Community Development Departments regarding her gazebo; and, thanked staff for their excellent service. Noted that the Old Town signage on the freeway idea was brought up by Steve Kozak some time ago; and, stated the Old Town merchants are very happy with the signage. Minutes - Planning Commission June 11, 2001 - Page 7 Staff Davert Director Pontious 7:56 p.m. Elizabeth A. Binsack Planning Commission Secretary Stated that Mr. Surfas does not appear to have complied with his agreement to remove the blue banner; the paper cover over his sign is getting tiresome; and, asked staff to be more assertive. Responded that Mr. Surfas been issued a permit; he recorded an agreement with Econo Lube 'N Tune regarding the sign's design, ownership, maintenance, etc. Noted one of the things the Cultural Resources Advisory Committee (CRAC) wanted to address was increasing communication between the City and CRAC; the people on the Committee are talented, have Old Town expertise, and should be more involved; this suggestion would also apply to the Tustin Old Town Association Board. Asked about a rumor concerning a forthcoming project at the El Camino Real Bank building which is generating interest in Old Town; and, requested that staff keep CRAC and TOTA informed regarding this proposal. Stated the Chili Cook-Off was wonderful. Asked whether the License and Permit Board is a regular meeting board and who is on the Board. Answered that the Board meets only when there is an item; the Board consists of the Director of Community Development, the Police Chief, and the Chamber of Commerce Executive Director. Stated those who enjoyed the Police Department's Open House should go to the Police Academy, an informative and worthwhile experience. Thanked staff for the graffiti follow-up. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Davert, seconded by Hamilton, to adjourn the meeting at 7:56 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Monday, June 25, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. ~es~e A Pontious/ - Chairperson Minutes - Planning Commission June 11, 2001 - Page 8