HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 04-08-96 MINUTES
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 8, 1996
CALL TO ORDER:
7:25 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners
Present:
Absent:
Marjorie Kasalek, Chairwoman
Lou Bone, Vice Chairman
Nanette Lunn
David Vandaveer
Howard Mitzman
Staff
Present:
Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
Lois Bobak, Deputy City Attorney
Daniel Fox, Senior Planner
Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner
Doug Anderson, Traffic Engineer
Barbara Reyes, Planning Commission Recording Secretary
PUBLIC CONCERNS:
No one from the audience addressed the
Commission.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of the March 25, 1996 Planning Commission Meeting.
Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Bone seconded, to approve the Consent
Calendar. Motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 15292 and Design Review 96-003
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
GREYSTONE HOMES
MR. DOUG WOODWARD
THE IRVINE COMPANY
MR. DAVE CONLEY
LOTS 17 AND 18 OF TRACT 13627
MEDIUM-LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
THIS PROJECT IS COVERED BY A PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED
EIR (85-2) FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN. NO
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 2
REQUEST: 1.
AUTHORIZATION TO CREATE 65 NUMBERED LOTS AND
16 LETTERED LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING
65 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING UNITS; AND
APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE PROJECT.
Recommendation - That the Planning Commission:
Approve the environmental determination for the project by
adopting Resolution No. 3428;
Approve Design Review 96-003 by adopting Resolution No. 3429,
as submitted or revised; and
Recommend that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative
Tract Map 15292 by adopting Resolution No. 3430, as submitted
or revised.
Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner
Sara Pashalides explained the proposed modifications to conditions
in Resolution Nos. 3429 and 3430. One condition noted that all
final exterior colors to be used shall be subject to review and
approval of the Director of the Community Development Department.
All exterior treatments shall be coordinated with regard to color,
materials and detailing and noted on submitted construction plans
and elevations.
The Public Hearing opened at 7:35 p.m.
Douglas Woodward, representing Greystone Homes, stated they were
pleased to be building their third project in Tustin Ranch. What
they are requesting is a lighter color scheme which they feel will
complement the architectural style of the homes.
Kevin Crook, William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc., stated that the
homes were in keeping with the early Santa Barbara-Montecito styles
and they feel it is very important to include a white stucco. They
are proposing a 25% mix to add diversity to the street scene and
provide articulation throughout the street.
Commissioner Kasalek asked which of the white color samples they
were interested in using.
Kevin Crook stated they wanted to use the brighter of the whites.
Commissioner Bone asked the Greystone representative to explain the
reasons behind the phasing which puts the last phase in the front
of the project.
Douglas Woodward stated that they did not want homeowners to drive
through a construction site and the Phase 5 homes on the street are
the models.
The Public Hearing closed at 7:40 p.m.
The Commissioners were in consensus that the requested white color
was acceptable.
Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Bone seconded, to approve the
environmental determination for the project by adopting Resolution
No. 3428 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 3
Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Bone seconded to approve Design
Review 96-003 by adopting Resolution No. 3429, revised as follows:
Condition 3.3 shall read, "All final exterior colors to be used
shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of the
Community Development Department. All exterior treatments shall be
coordinated with regard to color, materials and detailing and noted
on submitted construction plans and elevations." Motion carried 4-
0.
Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Bone seconded, to recommend that the
City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 15292 by adopting
Resolution No. 3430, revised as follows: Condition 2.6.C should be
modified for last sentence to read, "Sidewalks shall flare around
all above ground facilitles as required by the Building Division".
Condition 2.6.D modified for the last sentence to read, "Signage
and/or red curbing shall be installed where appropriate".
Condition 2.6.E is to be eliminated. Condition 3.3, amended to
read, "The subdivider shall dedicate Lot P to the City with
recordation of the final map. Final dedication documents shall be
prepared by the applicant and reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Department and the City Attorney prior to
acceptance of the park site." Motion carried 4-0.
Amendment To Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13908 and Design
Review 95-042
APPLICANT/
OWNER
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
BRAMALEA CALIFORNIA
MR. JEFF ROOS
TRACT 13908, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD
AND TOWNSHIP DRIVE
PLANNED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL - (LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL) - EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
THIS PROJECT IS COVERED BY A PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED
EIR (85-2) FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN. NO
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED.
AUTHORIZATION TO ADD THREE ADDITIONAL PRODUCTION
UNITS TO THE BUILDOUT OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Recommendation - That the Planning Commission:
Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by
adopting Resolution No. 3431;
Approve Design Review 95-042 by adopting Resolution No.3432,
as submitted or revised; and
Recommend that the City Council approve Amendment to Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 13908 by adopting Resolution No. 3433, as
submitted or revised.
Presentation: Daniel Fox, AICP, Senior Planner
Commissioner Lunn asked if this was the first time the homeowners,
present at the meeting, had seen the proposed options identified in
the staff report.
Dan Fox, stated that the options were identified in the staff
report.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 4
Commissioner Kasalek asked what the difference was in the interior
detailing and specifications and if staff was aware of meetings
held between the developer and the homeowners since October of
1994.
Dan Fox, stated that the developer could answer questions
concerning the interiors and that staff is aware of two or three
meetings that have been held since 1994.
The Public Hearing opened at 7:55 p.m.
Mark Franzen, 2145 Chandler Drive, Tustin, stated that the newly
proposed product will reduce property values in the area. The
original promises were not kept by the developer and the purpose of
value engineering was only to provide more profit for Bramalea and
does not consider the concerns of the existing homeowners.
Jeff Roos, Senior Vice President, Bramalea California, stated that
this application was made under protest. He stated that the
application should be approved on its own merit. He noted that the
Vesting Tentative Tract Map was approved in February of 1990, and
it took nearly four years to sell 27 homes in spite of spending
over two million dollars in marketing and merchandising. He
further stated that the project has been sitting vacant for two
years and the homes need to be designed to meet current market
demand. He explained that since October 1994 there had been five
meetings with the homeowners. Bramalea wants the design to be
consistent with the existing architecture and square footage with
a goal toward meeting or exceeding all of the standards, while also
remaining consistent with what the homeowners want, and they have
done this with their currently proposed plan.
Commissioner Kasalek asked the specific details and differences
from what the homeowners asked for and what the developer was
proposing now.
Jeff Roos stated they had met in October and December of the past
year and as recently as a few weeks ago. Bramalea had tried to
develop a compromise solution, but the homeowners want a wall and
the addition of a secondary access if the original buildout could
not be accomplished. He stated that the new product is in keeping
with the mid 1990 architecture with truss roofs instead of stacked
roofs and aligning walls with plumbing lines for a more efficient
design. He stated that the amenities of the interiors would be on
a level consistent with this price range of home. He stated that
Bramalea was not looking at building a cheap home which is what he
stated the homeowners are fearing the most.
Commissioner Bone asked for a clarification on the sale of the 27
homes in four years when others have stated people were lining up
to buy the residences. He asked if Bramalea was in agreement with
the three options offered by staff in tonight's presentation.
Jeff Roos, stated that people may have been lining up to buy real
estate when the market was overheated but that Bramalea had a
standing inventory for over a year. Mr. Roos stated that this
evening was the first time he had seen the actual plotting and was
not prepared to answer without further study.
Commissioner Bone stated that perhaps this discussion should be
postponed until further talks with the residents; Bramalea had
promised the residents something and the Commissioner believes
things can be resolved.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 5
Jeff Roos believes no one benefits when land is vacant.
Commissioner Kasalek expressed the same recommendation as
Commissioner Bone, stating that in the past it has worked well for
developers and residents to sit down together to work things out.
Elizabeth Binsack stated that the next hearing was the final date
at which action would need to be taken unless the applicant was
willing to waive the time frames established by the Permit
Streamlining Act.
Commissioner Kasalek asked Mr. Roos if he was willing to waive the
time restriction.
Jeff Roos stated he would like to see the item on the next agenda
and would like to meet with the homeowners.
Commissioner Lunn stated that all parties should make the time to
meet since the future development is a priority on both sides and
that each side should come to the discussion without a
predetermined bottom line.
Elain Nermon, 2460 Kiser, stated she lives in San Rafael and is a
member of the Tustin Ranch Community Association Master Association
and that their group has never been a party to these meetings.
Christopher Clark, attorney for San Marino Homeowners Association,
stated that the last homeowners meeting was very disappointing
since Bramalea was not willing to make changes except for a more
modified plan 4 and would make no additional commitments to the
homeowners. He expressed concern at what authority Bramalea even
had to make decisions since the company is now owned by Lanar Homes
of Florida. The homeowners had requested that this matter be put
on the next agenda but Bramalea was not willing to continue
tonight's hearing. He stated that the proposed interior details and
amenities were less architecturally detailed. He stated that the
smaller proposed homes will impact existing homes adversely and
that the City should view both the compatibility and the impact on
the value of existing homes. He stated there is no evidence that
the existing plan would not sell in today's market and would like
to see evidence that supports the downgrade.
Commissioner Bone asked for clarification on exactly what other
developers had stated they were dissatisfied with the designs as
stated in Mr. Hatterman's correspondence concerning the last
homeowner/developer meeting.
Carl Hatterman, 2180 Lindsey Court, Vice President of the
Homeowners Association, stated that he did not mean to mislead the
Commission but that he was talking about Elain Nermon's
dissatisfaction with the designs and not other developers. He
stated that Bramalea focused on size and continuity but what the
homeowners want is consistency of quality and the developer has not
given them information on this. He stated that the wall compromise
was a desperation plan because Bramalea has been giving them the
same plan proposals for over a year.
A1 Henslinq, 2205 Lindsey Court, Tustin, stated that he was one of
the last to purchase in the project and even at this late date the
representation was that the project would be builtout in its
entirety with the same quality and configuration as they had
purchased. He stated that what Bramalea is now proposing is a
lesser quality and an entirely different product.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 6
James S. Calanni, 2488 McCoy, Tustin, stated that neighboring
communities will undergo severe damages as well, with a direct
impact on resale value and he did not believe the financial
problems of Bramalea should be the problems of the homeowners.
Jim Nowakowski, 2170 Lindsey Court, stated that he is a 36 year
resident of Tustin and that when he wanted to purchase his home in
this project it took two full months of going door to door to find
someone who wanted to sell. He stated that the existing homes are
quality homes; therefore, it will not be difficult to market them.
Jennifer Phillips, 2130 Lindsey Court, stated that at the time of
her home purchase, the sales personnel were very difficult to work
with and perhaps that is why it took Bramalea so long to sell the
homes. Ms. Phillips distributed merchandising brochures from
Mission Viejo and other new surrounding communities for Commission
consideration.
Elain Nermon, 2460 Kiser, Tustin, stated that the three Tustin
Ranch Community Associations were all subject to Mello Roos which
took into consideration the size of the developments. When things
change such as base rates of homes, those who bought in at the top
rate will be carrying the burden or there may not be the services
provided. She stated there is a concern in Tustin Ranch that there
is too much deviation from the Master Plan and that schools,
churches and shopping areas originally proposed are all changing.
She urged the Planning Commission to support the original planned
community concept.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:40 p.m.
The Public Hearing opened at 8:40 p.m.
Commissioner Kasalek asked if Bramalea would be willing to make
any compromises if there was another meeting with the homeowners.
Jeff Roos stated that the proposed product meets all the criteria
and homeowners have contradicting comments. The homeowners do not
know what the amenity level is on one hand yet are saying it will
be of a lesser quality. When Bramalea met with the homeowners two
weeks ago Bramalea was willing to compromise but the homeowners
only compromise was the wall. He stated that when he spoke with
the management company prior to the hearing nothing had changed,
therefore, there was no point in postponing the hearing. He stated
Bramalea would be happy to meet with the homeowners and that
Bramalea is not looking to compromise the quality of the community.
Commissioner Kasalek asked if the homeowners felt it would be
realistic and worthwhile to hold another meeting.
Christopher Clark stated the discussion with Bramalea would be
difficult but that the homeowners would be in favor of the meeting.
He stated that this was not about price but about value.
Carl Hatterman stated that he would like to see someone at the
meeting that would hold Bramalea's feet to the fire but that they
are open to discussion.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 7
Elizabeth Binsack stated for the record that she had received a
telephone call from Nancy Muller, 12451 Eveningside Drive, which is
within the unincorporated area abutting this project and Ms. Muller
wanted assurance that single story homes would be built along the
unincorporated border. With respect to a meeting with the
homeowners and Bramalea, staff will make themselves available
within the two week time frame.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:50 p.m.
Commissioner Vandaveer stated he would like to see a compromise.
The Public Hearing opened at 8:50 p.m.
Elain Nermon stated that two weeks was not sufficient time for the
meetings with homeowners in San Rafael.
Commissioner Kasalek stated that a firm agreement would not have to
be made but that progress in the right direction would be a start.
Jeff Roos stated that he was not previously aware of the time issue
but was agreeable if talks show progress.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:52 p.m.
Commissioner Bone stated that all parties should work together with
a central theme which is, to maintain the quality of the project.
He stated that Bramalea needs to explain the exact amenities which
are proposed, compared to the existing amenities.
Commissioner Lunn stated she was anxious to see a compromise
reached.
Commissioner Kasalek stated she is in favor of this meeting and
feels it is extremely important that residents have the assurance
that the same quality will be represented.
Commissioner Bone requested that staff coordinate this meeting.
Elizabeth Binsack stated that this will be done.
Com-issioner Vandaveer moved, Bone seconded, to continue this item
to the April 22, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission. The
Commission suggested that Bramalea and the Homeowners meet again
within the two week interim and try to reach some compromise. Staff
was directed to coordinate this meeting and act as mediator. Motion
carried 4-0·
STAFF CONCERNS:
Report on Actions taken at the April 1, 1996 City Council
Meetinq.
The Director reported on the subject agenda.
Commissioner Vandaveer inquired about Item No. 21 on the City
Council Agenda, and asked if Mr. Cox desired removal of the bus
bench and the trellis.
Staff stated that only the trellis was requested for removal.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 8
COMMISSION CONCERNS:
Status of median island/parkway beautification and drainage project
at State Route 55/McFadden Avenue Off-ramp requested by
Commissioner Lunn.
Action: Discretion of the Commission
Commissioner Lunn stated that she had observed that the contractor
is starting to move the equipment out of the triangle and after
contact with Assemblywoman Brewer's office she has been given the
right person to call for Caltrans action. She stated that the
median looks nice but the mesh fence looks awful. Since most of
the residential neighborhoods have some sort of wall, a block wall
should be installed instead of the proposed prison-like fence.
Further, she has asked Tustin Pride to consider the issue of a
block wall. She stated that there are concerns about graffiti but
graffiti can happen with any wall in the City. She stated that the
Police can drive through the alley and that this fence cannot be
seen through at night anyway. She stated that she has inquired
about this area for the past five years and has never had a report
of any violations or crime and does not understand why, now, the
Police have a concern about seeing into the alley.
The Director stated that if installation of a wall was the
consensus of the Commission it can be conveyed to the City Council
before the recommendation goes forward. A block wall will cost
more than a mesh fence and the City Council would need to
appropriate the funds.
Commissioner Kasalek stated that this would send a message that
this end of the City is just as important as other areas in Tustin.
Commissioner Lunn stated that if the people of south Tustin are
given something nice, they will appreciate and take care of the
improvements.
Commissioner Bone complimented the Field Services Department for
their work on the median since it is the first view of Tustin for
those coming north on the 55 Freeway. The City has invested
redevelopment funds in that area; therefore, the impression should
be positive. He does not like the prison-like fence and also
believes there should be a block wall. He also stated that Tustin
Pride would consider this item at their meeting on April 16th.
Commissioner Vandaveer expressed concern about graffiti on a wall
but suggested that vines would eliminate the problem. He stated
that if funds are not available for a wall, a vine or planting
should be placed on the mesh fence.
Upon consensus of the Commission, staff was directed to draft a
letter to be signed by the Chairwoman to convey to the City Council
their concern and request for a block wall to be installed instead
of the proposed mesh fence.
Commissioner Lunn
Stated there was a sale over the weekend at the parking
lot at the Bonanza Market which culminated in a traffic
jam. She counted 42 bright green signs on the posts
attracting people. After calling the Police Department
she was disappointed that the Watch Commander returned
her call stating that since this was a nonprofit
organization, there was nothing that could be done.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1996
Page 9
Commissioner Lunn asked if the Director would notify the
Police Department that this type of sale requires a
temporary use permit. Also the signs were not removed by
this group.
The Director will contact the Watch Commander.
Commissioner Vandaveer
Asked if there was anything going on at Popeye's
Restaurant and asked if the old banners could be taken
down.
Staff has not heard of any other organization moving into that
location and will see that the banners are removed.
Asked if Code Enforcement would inspect Old Town
concerning all the illegal signs that have recently gone
up.
Commissioner Bone
Asked if Code Enforcement could be on duty seven days a
week and have a telephone number where they could be
contacted on a 24 hour basis.
The Director stated that the Officers work approximately two
Saturdays a month now but there is really a lack of staff for full
time weekend duty. Their scheduling can be re-evaluated. A report
will be made to the Commission following this review.
ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Lunn seconded,
meeting at 9:14 p.m.
to adjourn the
The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission is
on April 22, 1996 beginning at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers,
300 Centennial Way, Tustin.
Recording Secretary
MA~JOR'I~ ~S-AL~KU/~/
Chairwoman