Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 04-24-95MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULi~ MEETING APRIL 24, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: 7:03 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Baker, Kasalek, Lunn, Mitzman and Weil PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda.) At this time members of the public may address the Commission regarding any items not on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission (NO action can be taken off-agenda items unless authorized by law). IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY MATTER, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE SO THAT YOUR REMARKS ON THE TAPE RECORDING OF THE MEETING CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO YOU. WHEN YOU START TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. IF YOU REQUIRE SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECORDING SECRETARY AT (714) 573-3105. CONSENT CALENDAR: (ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.) 1. Minutes of the April 10, 1995 Planninq Commission Meetinq. Commissioner Weil moved, Kasalek seconded, to approve the Consent C&lendar. Motion carried 3-2. Commissioner's Mitzman and Baker abstained. PUBLIC HEARINGS: IF YOU CHALLENGE AN ITEM CONSIDERED AT A PUBLIC HEARING IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING DESCRIBED IN THIS AGENDA, OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE PUBLIC HEARING. 2. Code Amendment 95-002 (Continued from April 10, 1995) APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL CITY OF TUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 CENTENNIAL WAY TUSTIN, CA 92680 CITYWIDE CITYWIDE Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 2 STATUS: REQUEST: IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED. AN AMENDMENT TO THE TUSTIN ZONING CODE TO AMEND PROVISIONS RELATED TO POLITICAL CAMPAIGN SIGNS AND TO ADD PROVISIONS RELATED TO NON COM/~ERCIAL SIGNS ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing on this matter until May 8, 1995. Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Community Development Director The Public Hearing continued at 7:07 p.m. Mr. Berklee Maughan, 14331 Green Valley, welcomed the applicants desire to impose regulations to require the immediate removal of political signs following an election but he was not pleased with some of the proposed amendments as proposed because he feels they infringe on freedom of speech. He feels that the appearance of the signs are being focused on rather than rights of the citizens. Two items are of particular concern to him, Section 9043D.13.item F, which limits only one sign per street frontage on private property, especially in light of the upcoming March 1996 primary election and Tustin City Council election, since this may prevent a person from displaying several signs for the choice of their candidates. He wanted to know the justification for limiting the number of signs on private property (Item G of Section 9043D.13) versus no limit of signs on other than private property. He feels that Items F & G discriminate as to the size of signs on private and other properties. The present code allows everyone to have equal sign size and height. Property owners should have the right to give or deny permission for political signs on any private property but should not have the ability to provide more visibility for political signs especially on the same street. Commissioner Weil stated that he had some good points and asked if Mr. Maughan would come back at the next meeting to provide further suggestions. Berklee Maughan stated he had recently made comments to the City Attorney and has contacted the California First Amendment Coalition and feels they will give him some necessary information for the next meeting discussion. Commissioner Weil thought it was good that Mr. Maughan brought up the point about the primary and city elections running at the same time. Matt Nisson, 14462 Red Hill Avenue, wanted to go on record to say he was totally in favor of the amendments to the sign ordinance and hopes the Commission will carry them through. He does not feel that the City of Tustin needs the sign proliferation and pollution. Commissioner Lunn asked if homeowner permission was needed to place a sign on private property. She has concern about political signs being placed in the right-of-way where the homeowner has no say but where it appears that the homeowner is supporting the candidate whose name is on the sign. Also the homeowner has to work around these signs when doing yard maintenance and she is not in favor of this. Commissioner Weil stated that she has heard this same concern from others and feels it is an invasion of the homeowner's privacy. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 3 Commissioner Baker asked what would constitute separate signs, and could a person staple several signs together, calling it one sign. Staff stated that these issues would be addressed when the matter was brought back for discussion. Commissioner Weil noted that sign makers have a standard size sign and the square footage should be taken into consideration. The Director suggested that in order to have an opportunity to cover all of the issues and confer with the City Attorney, the continuance should be scheduled for the May 22, 1995 meeting. Commissioner Well moved, Lunn seconded, to continue this item to the meeting of May 22, 1995. Motion carried 5-0. Variance 95-001 and Design Review 95-011 APPLICANT: LAND OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: MR. BRUCE THACKER 1222 TRIUMPHAL WAY SANTA ANA, CA 92705 TUSTIN RENAISSANCE INC. 300 EL CAMINO REAL TUSTIN, CA 92680 300 EL CAMINO REAL CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-2P) WITH A PARKING OVERLAY THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 1. APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FROM 39 SPACES TO 31 SPACES TO ACCOMMODATE A RETAIL ART GALLERY ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 300 EL CAMINO REAL. 2. APPROVAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW FOR PARKING, LANDSCAPING AND BUILDING MODIFICATIONS TO ACCOMMODATE A RETAIL ART GALLERY ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 300 EL CAMINO REAL. Recommendation -It is recommended that the Planning commission approve variance 95-001 and Design Review 95-011 by adopting Resolution No. 3352, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Scott Reekstin, Assistant Planner Commissioner Baker asked if the dye test was the only way to find out if the building was connected to the sewer and asked to whom the fee was to be paid. Staff stated that the Engineering Department does not have a record of a sewer connection fee ever having been paid for this property. If they are connected nothing else needs to be done, but if not they will have to be connected and the fee paid to the Public Works Department. Commissioner Lunn asked if the one additional parking space which was suggested and would necessitate removal of a tree was absolutely necessary. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 4 Staff stated that the report was written for 25 on site parking spaces which should be adequate for the use but should the Planning Commission feel the need for an additional space that was the location for it to be placed. Commissioner Weil asked if the City required all commercial operations to have a dumpster or enclosed trash area. Staff stated that this property has been served by bin service but Great Western Reclamation could provide curbside service if that was the desire of the applicant. The Public Hearing opened at 7:34 p.m. Gregory Kelly, 330 E1 Camino Real, stated he was a business neighbor next door to this project and was happy to welcome them to the area but he did have a minor concern about the parking. He feels that the parking next to the alley is too tight, with cars being parked straight in, and that large cars would overhang into the alley. He would like the parking area to be enlarged. Scott Young, representing the applicant, stated he had discussed this parking problem with the owner and currently they have concrete wheel stops on the site which can be retained after resurfacing to provide an additional six inch buffer and this would alleviate the concern. On the sewer connection issue they have no concerns and are happy to comply. Concerning the parking area they have widened the area to allow a full drive width and provided the accessible spaces, however, he would not like to remove the existing pepper tree and irrigation device. He is not in favor of the trash bin and enclosure since they have storage room for the trash. Letha Hodges, 24641 San Andres, Mission Viejo, Gallery Director, stated that their main goal was to maintain the character of the building and make the area of the drive-thru park like. The trash that will be generated will be minimal since the packing is custom made and will go with the sold item. There are only three employees who would be generating trash from the bathroom facilities and office. Commissioner Weil asked if she had checked with Great Western Reclamation to see if their trash could be picked up on 3rd Street. Letha Hodges, replied "no" since she was waiting to see what the direction would be, but that she knows there is pick up service on 3rd Street. Scott Young, stated that since the scope of the landscaping was minimal, he wished the landscaping notes to be incorporated into the site plan. He stated that since there would be under four employees, staff had agreed that only one of the two existing bathrooms had to be handicapped accessible. Staff stated that the Building Official would determine the ADA requirements and that the Resolution gives flexibility to that. Commissioner Baker asked the remaining duration of the Great Western Reclamation contract. Staff stated about five years. The Public Hearing closed at 8:07 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 5 Commissioner Mitzman stated he felt this was a good use for the area. Commissioner Well moved, Kasalek seconded, to approve variance 95- 001 and Design Review 95-011 by adopting Resolution No. 3352 revised as follows: Exhibit &, Condition 2.3 modified to read, "Individual trash can service may be provided on the site provided that such service is acceptable in writing to Great Western Reclamation. In the event that trash bin service is requested either at this time or in the future by Great Western Reclamation, a trash bin with surrounding enclosure shall be located on the property"; the remainder of the wording of the Condition to remain as previously stated. Condition 3.1 modified to read, Buildlng Plan Check, landscaplng information shall be submitted on a transmitted site plan and shall contain the following: &) combination of planting materials shall be used in all landscape areas. B) Ground covers shall be planted between eight (8) and twelve (12) inches on center. C) All plant materials shall be installed in a healthy vigorous condition typical to the species and landscaping must be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. This will include but not be limited to trimming, mowing, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering or replacement of diseased or dead plants. D) All newly planted trees shall be staked in accordance with the city's Landscaping and Irrigation Guidelines. E) Plant materials shall be chosen and located to promote water and energy conservation. F) New landscape areas and the upgrade of all existing landscaped areas on the site shall be consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping and Irrigation Requirements to the greatest extent feasible, as determined by the Community Development Department. G) Provide summary table applying indexing identification to plant material in their actual location. The plan and table must list botanical and common names, sizes, spacing, actual location and quantity of the plant materials proposed. Note on plans that the Community Development Department may request minor substitutions of plant materials during plan check. H) Show planting details, soil preparation, staking, etc. I) Show all property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plan, public right-of-way areas, sidewalk widths, parkway areas and wall locations". Condition 3.2 to read, "&t Building Plan Check the irrigation plan (for irrigation only) shall be submitted which shall show the location and control of backflow prevention devices, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing and coverage. Details for all equipment must be provided. Note on landscaping plan that coverage of landscaping irrigation materials is subject to field inspection at project completion by the Community Development Department". Condition 4.2 corrected to read, "The plans submitted into plan check shall indicate that both toilets shall be made accessible to persons with disabilities or as modified per &D& Guidelines by the Building Official." Condition 5.2 revised to read, "A separate 24" x 36" street improvement plan will be required for all construction within the public right-of-way. In conjunction with the above plan, a 24" x 36" reproducible work area traffic control plan will be required". &dd Condition 5.3 to read, "The applicant shall perform a dye test to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department to determine if the existing building is connected to the sanitary sewer system. If the results of the dye test indicate that the building is not connected to the sanitary sewer system, the applicant shall be required to connect the existing building to the sanitary sewer system". Condition 6.2 revised to read, "If the existing building is required to be connected to the sanitary sewer system pursuant to Condition No. 5.3 above, payment of the sewer connection fee in the amount of $3,643.91 shall be made to the Public Works Department. Payment will be required based upon those rates in effect at the time of payment and are subject to change". Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 6 REGULAR BUSINESS: 4. Community Service Orqanization Siqns Recommendation- Pleasure of the Commission Presentation: Robert Delgadillo, Assistant Planner Lois Bobak, Deputy City Attorney, stated the most important issue, should the Commission go along with this proposal, was to come up with a sound definition of a Community Service Organization and that regulation of use should also be addressed. Commissioner Weil asked if the sign in Mission Viejo was maintained by that city and was the decision of who could put their messages up controlled by the City Council. Staff stated that the maintenance of the sign was done by an independent contractor through their Community Service Department and when the sign was filled up then no one else could add notices. Commissioner Baker noted that the cities surveyed only seemed to be south of Tustin and asked if Santa Ana was surveyed. Staff stated that the survey result was compiled from those cities which had responded to the inquiry thus far. Commissioner Kasalek asked if schools could advertise on the sign in Mission Viejo. Staff stated that as it was explained by Mission Viejo, if the event was a public event, notice of it could be placed on the board. Commissioner Lunn stated she had occasion to see the Mission Viejo sign and asked if they had indicated experiencing any problems with concerning the sign. Staff stated "no", that they had given a very positive response concerning the sign. Commissioner Baker asked if this was used in place of banners. Commissioner Mitzman asked that when staff had spoken to other cities had any of them turned down this idea for any reason. Staff stated that possibly this could be an alternative to banners since it was an effective advertising device as reported by the City of Mission Viejo and that none of the survey cities spoken to had any issue with a sign nor requested any formal regulation. Leslie Pontius, 1881-51 Mitchell Avenue, stated that she was speaking on behalf of the Joint Club Committee and thanked the Commission for considering this issue. She stated that Tustin has a reputation of being a small town and very unique, and she feels that a sign like this could be a very positive reflection of that image. She indicated that the Committee would be happy to work with the Commission and staff on this project. David Vandaveer, representing the Lions Club, was in favor of this project. He stated that if maintenance was a problem any one of the service clubs would be available to help. Commissioner Kasalek thought it a great idea for both a standard entrance to the city sign like those of other small cities as well as a message type sign with changeable copy. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 7 Commissioner Weil was in favor of eliminating messages from the schools since they have their own boards for advertising. Commissioner Mitzman was concerned about a number of issues but was generally in favor of a sign. Commissioner Lunn stated there were a number of things that would have to be worked out with the sign but that she was in favor of it and believes things can be worked out. & consensus of the Commission showed that the project was f&vorable but that additional discussion was needed to iron out the details. Direction was given to staff to set up a sub-committee which would include two members of the Commission, the City Attorney, Public works, community service and Community Development Departments and local Service Clubs. Commissioners Lunn and Mitzman volunteered to serve on this committee. 5. Design Review 95-006 APPLICANT: THE HOME DEPOT 601 S. PLACENTIA AVENUE FULLERTON, CA. 92631 ATTN: JEFF NICHOLS OWNER: THE IRVINE COMPANY 550 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE P.O. BOX I NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92658-8904 ATTN: KEITH EYRICH AGENT: DONAHUE SCHRIBER 3501 JAMBOREE RD., SUITE 300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92660 ATTN: MARK WHITFIELD REPRESENTATIVE:GREENBERG FARROW 17941 FITCH ROAD, 2ND FLOOR IRVINE, CA. 92714 ATTN: TAMARA SANTONI LOCATION: 2782 EL CAMINO REAL ZONING: PLANNED COMMUNITY-MIXED USE (PC MU), SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: EAST TUSTIN THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH OUTDOOR SALES AREA ON THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE STORE AND MODIFY PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission table action on Design Review 95-006, pending resolution of the traffic and circulation issues related to West Drive improvements proposed by the property owner. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Mitzman stated he is uncomfortable with the wording as stated in the request portion of the staff report which reads "Authorization to establish outdoor sales" since he feels Home Depot has been ignoring the Ordinance for quite some time and this wording makes it appear that the Commission is condoning their actions. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 8 Jeffrey L. Nichols, representing The Home Depot, stated that the staff report is basically accurate but does not give the full picture. He stated that one problem they had in the past and which has been solved was that The Irvine Company, Donahue Schriber and Home Depot were not communicating. The problem The Home Depot has with a one way drive is that it puts the garden center out of business. The reason they did not go ahead with the expansion of the garden center project which was previously approved by the Commission was because it was very costly and they felt it would not work under these circumstances. They are now working to come up with a traffic study to mitigate the problems. When they were recognizing the wishes of the City and not holding outdoor promotional sales their sales went down by 10% which amounted to four hundred thousand dollars. He asked if approval of the action could be made temporarily so that they can be competitive. Commissioner Baker asked if the other Home Depot stores in the area had the same traffic congestion at the front of their stores Jeffrey L. Nichols, stated that the other stores are not next to a car wash with a one way drive. Staff stated that they have not received the revised traffic study and have not had time to review all the mitigation measures which would be created with a revision in it for a two way drive. Commissioner Baker asked if Mr. Nichols had witnessed the congestion. Commissioner Weil stated that perhaps the sales are down because people cannot get into the store. She also asked how long it took to get a traffic study done and didn't Home Depot have more leverage with The Irvine Company than the City for getting this done quickly. Jeffrey L. Nichols stated the only leverage they have is that The Irvine Company does not want them to move but they would have to if business didn't get better. Commissioner Kasalek stated it was frustrating since The Home Depot ends up getting penalized when it is The Irvine Company that is not doing what needs to get done. She does not feel that the sidewalk sales in front of the store are the main factor to the traffic congestion. Jeffrey L. Nichols, stated they need to be able to do promotions in front of the store and will come up with some screening solutions on a temporary basis but ask to be allowed to continue so as not to lose the Christmas business. Commissioner Baker asked who were they attempting to attract by sidewalk promotions. Jeffrey L. Nichols stated it was a very effective merchandising plan which works for them. impulse Commissioner Mitzman feels that things are getting way off the track, the traffic congestion is a major safety problem; there was no place to walk and asked Mr. Nichols to put pressure on The Irvine Company. He feels that The Home Depot is a great use but they have ignored the Ordinance and if it is not stopped he will move to deny the request. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 9 Deborah Frost, General Manager, Tustin Market Place, stated that a crossing guard had been tried one weekend at that location but that it did not work. She stated that The Irvine Company is open to the outdoor displays. She stated that all of the problems and projects were being worked on at once but each of them ran into road blocks; that a traffic study had been done a week ago Saturday and the analysis should be forthcoming shortly. In an effort to mitigate the traffic problems they have closed off some drives at Taco Bell, and added bollards at The Home Depot. Commissioner Kasalek stated that the day before Easter was not a good time to do a traffic study. Deborah Frost, stated that their traffic engineers had a different opinion on that. Commissioner Mitzman stated that there seems to be a lot of discussion and no action, that if The Irvine Company wanted to get it done they could. Commissioner Baker asked if a traffic study had to be done to widen a road. Staff stated that as part of the Black Angus proposal and approval there were very specific mitigation measures related to East and West Drives, one of those being the conversion of the Beacon Bay entrance to a one-way drive which has not yet been completed. This was a specific condition of approval and staffs understanding is that the applicant wants to propose something different now with a two way drive at Beacon Bay which would require an amendment to the conditions of approval. At this stage, the traffic study initially provided for the Planning Commission to approve the one way drive is in the process of being revised to justify the two way drive. Once the City receives the traffic study it can be brought back to the Commission for consideration, however it has been in the hands of the applicant for several weeks now. Commissioner Weil stated that she feels the last thing The Irvine Company wanted to do was widen the throat of West Drive and it looks like they are dragging their feet because they do not want to do it. Jeffrey L. Nichols, stated that although it doesn't seem so there really is a lot of activity, he has attended at least 15 meetings with The Irvine Company in the last four months. He stated that Home Depot has sued The Irvine Company to stop the work on the one way drive. They are under a hardship and wish some temporary solution with this request to the Commission. Commissioner Mitzman asked if there had been any pedestrian accidents or injuries in front of the store to the best of their knowledge. Jeffrey L. Nichols, stated "no". Commissioner Lunn can understand that they are in their Christmas season now and if a temporary solution could be accomplished she would be in favor of the request. Commissioner Weil suggested that a continuance to the next meeting, with time to get a definite commitment from The Home Depot and Donahue Schriber and then she would be in favor. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 10 Commissioner Kasalek feels like the other Commissioners that she likes the idea of the temporary approval, but does not feel it is fair to Home Depot. She stated that the major complaint she hears from everyone is traffic congestion in the whole Market Place. Commissioner Mitzman stated that area was probably the worst intersection in the whole City. His concern is if temporary sales were approved that a precedent was being set to allow all the merchants to use the sidewalks as part of their stores. Staff stated the application was for The Home Depot; the original condition was that no merchant was to have outdoor sales. Commissioner Lunn stated that Ikea also has things displayed at the front of their store and asked if that caused a traffic problem. Staff was not aware of the Ikea display. By consensus the Planning Commission agreed to continue this item to the meeting of May 8, 1995. 6. Sign Code Exception 95-002 APPLICANT: GANNON DESIGN ATTN: MOIRA BOYNTON 112 EAST CHAPMAN, STE. G ORANGE, CA 92666 OWNER: IRVINE APARTMENT COMMUNITIES ATTN: MR. RICHARD E. LAMPRECHT 550 NEWPORT CENTER DR., SUITE 300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 LOCATION: LOTS 18 AND BB OF TRACT 12870, 12771 ROBINSON DRIVE. ZONING: PLANNED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL - (MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) - EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL: THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUEST: TO AMEND A MASTER SIGN PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY TO ALLOW A THIRD PROJECT IDENTIFICATION MONUMENT SIGN AND SEVEN (7) POLE-MOUNTED AUTO DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. Recommendation -It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Sign Code Exception 95-002 by adopting Resolution No. 3351, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Scott Reekstin, Assistant Planner Moira Boynton, Gannon Design, stated the objective of the pole mounted sign was to get it high enough for emergency vehicles to see. Commissioner Kasalek moved, Mitzman seconded, to approve Sign Code Exception 95-002 by adopting Resolution No. 3351, as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 11 7. Use Determination 95-004 APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: CAR CAPITAL INC. ATTN: MR. GARY RHODES 18001 IRVINE BOULEVARD, SUITE 2C TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 18001 IRVINE BOULEVARD, SUITE 2C PROFESSIONAL (PR) DISTRICT THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 OF THE CALIFORNIA EQUALITY ACT (CEQA) TO DETERMINE THAT AUTOMOBILE PAWNBROKER BUSINESS IS PERMITTED WITHIN THE PROFESSIONAL (Pr) DISTRICT Recommendation -Pleasure of the Commission. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Weil wishes to have more control of future uses of this nature by requiring a Conditional Use Permit. Gary Rhodes, applicant, stated he needed a second hand dealers and auto dealers license to operate his business but his office location would not include vehicle sale or display. He does understand the concern of the Commission for future applicants, however, and would be glad to work with staff on that point. He noted that there was not enough room at the location to have a car lot in any case. Commissioner Baker asked if he agreed with the staff report. Gary Rhodes, stated "yes", everything in the staff report was correct. Commissioner Kasalek stated that having vehicles at this location would be a concern to her and she would like to see a Conditional Use Permit so that each use could be looked at individually. Commissioner Lunn asked if the vehicles were ever re-sold or were just sent to auction and if a vehicle were to be sold would it be brought over to this office location for inspection. Gary Rhodes stated that if they find a good vehicle they will try to sell it retail but not at this office location. Commissioner Baker asked staff how long it would be for this matter to come back before the Commission again. Staff stated if the applicant would apply tomorrow it could be put on the agenda in about 30 days. Gary Rhodes stated he would be at City Hall the first thing in the morning and was in agreement with the decision. By consensus, the Planning Commission agreed that the office component of an automobile pawnbroker business is allowed in the Professional Office (PR) District, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 12 8. Status Reports Recommendation -Receive and file. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Well moved, Kasalek seconded, to receive and file this report. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS: 9. Report on Actions taken at April 17 1995 City Council Meeting The Director reported on the subject agenda. She also noted that a new Code Enforcement Officer, Mark Galvan, had been hired and will begin work in two weeks. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Lunn - None Commissioner Weil - None Commissioner Kasalek Asked when construction would begin at the Taco Bell at Red Hill and Nisson. She reported that the perimeter fence was down and all the windows broken. She suggested it be boarded up. Staff stated that the project was in plan check now and anticipated construction work to begin in 30 to 60 days. Presented a flyer that had been mailed to her by Crazy Shirt's concerning a 3-day tent sale at the Tustin Market Place parking lot and asked if the City had been notified. Staff indicated no notice had been received and that follow up would proceed. Commissioner Mitzman Asked if there was any City enforcement available to monitor ice cream truck vendors. Staff stated that the City had a Vendor Ordinance and that a report would be presented to the Commission on this subject. Stated that it appears the Costco/K-Mart parking lot was being used as overflow car storage from the Auto Mall. Stated that he had purchased a bike and enjoyed riding around the City with his wife, getting to know the City a little better on a close up basis. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 1995 Page 13 Commissioner Baker - Asked if the Farmers Market was still in existence. Staff stated that there was a new manager running the market and that they had stopped operation for awhile because of the rain. Asked when the Specific Plan Amendments would be brought before City Council. Staff stated that May 15th was the date this item was scheduled to go before the City Council. Stated that someone attempted to break into his vehicle in his driveway recently and his natural reaction was to immediately go out and turn off the car alarm. He was told by a friend in law enforcement, he should not have gone out to turn off the alarm but should have called 911. He wanted to pass this information to others as a safety precaution. ADJOURNMENT: Co---~ssioner Weil moved, Lunn seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission is on May 8, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. Chairperson' Barbara Reyes Secretary