Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 02-28-94HINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 28v 1994 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGI/~NCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Weil, Baker, Butler, Kasalek Stracker (arrived at 7:02 following roll call) 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. 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 February 14, 1994 Planning Commission meetinq. Commissioner Kasalek moved, Baker seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried. 4-0. 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. Continued Public Hearing - Modification to Conditions of Approval to Allow Extensions for Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 Time Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve a modification to Condition No. 1.1 of Resolution No. 3153 to allow a six-month extension of Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 by adopting Resolution No. 3232, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 Page 2 The Public Hearing opened at 7:03 p.m. The Public Hearing closed at 7:03 p.m. Commissioner Baker noted that it was he who had asked that the item be continued to this meeting and he was now satisfied with the reason for the extension and would support it. Commissioner Baker moved, Butler seconded to approve a modification to Condition No. 1.1 of Resolution No. 3153 to allow a six-month extension of Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 by adopting Resolution No. 3232 as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. OLD BUSINESS: 3. Status Update on Deferral of Code Enforcement Action Reqardinq 13922 Red Hill Avenue (Abandoned Pole Signs) Receive and file. Commissioner Butler asked if the applicant would be allowed to apply for a higher pole sign. Staff replied that the applicant would be allowed a pole sign 24 feet high and 50 square feet in area. Commissioner Weil thanked staff for the updated report. Commissioner Kasalek moved, Baker seconded to receive and file this report. Motion carried 5-0. Draft Amendments to City Code Section 9299, Zoning Administrator Office of the Recommendation -It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and comment on the proposed Draft Ordinance amending city Code Section 9299 related to the Office of the Zoning Administrator. Presentation: Dan Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Kasalek Inquired about the monetary savings and the need for public hearing and noticing on minor adjustments as noted on the bottom of page 4 of the report. She also asked if a regular set hearing time would be established. Staff replied that State law provides for administrative adjustments to be handled without the need for public hearing. The Ordinance breaks out minor adjustments and these do not need to go through the cycle of newspaper publishing, thus saving the newspaper costs. Staff noted that a regular set hearing time would be established. Commissioner Butler asked if the City would be saving money as well as the applicant. Staff noted that fees are a reflection of costs and a fee cannot be imposed that is higher than actual service. Not having to hold public hearings or generate staff reports to the Commission will reduce the administrative costs substantially. Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 Page 3 Commissioner Butler asked that if the Ordinance was adopted could staff foresee anything that might occur which would be ambiguous. Staff replied that the Ordinance is quite clear with one caveat. Even with the minor deviations and adjustments identified, if there is any item which seems to the Zoning Administrator to be controversial or a potential problem, these items can be referred to the Commission. Commissioner Kasalek asked if wording could be added to limit the distance of dish antennas from residences. Staff affirmed. Commissioner Butler asked how it was determined who would be the Zoning Administrator and asked if someone should be identified as a secondary administrator in case of an absence. Staff stated that the Zoning Administrator would be the Director of Community Development or that person's designated representative. Commissioner Butler asked if then the Commission would be put into a position of having to accept the Community Development Director or Assistant City Manager as the Zoning Administrator. Although he feels comfortable with the current personnel he is concerned about the future. Staff noted that the Commission, through accepting this Ordinance, would be accepting whomever is the Community Development Director and this person is hired by the City Manager. Commissioner Butler asked if the city Manager was elected by the City Council. The City attorney noted that this is the case and that in the event of a loss of the Community Development Director, the City Council would appoint someone as acting City Manager and/or acting Community Development Director and that under the Ordinance, the acting Director would assume the position of Zoning Administrator. Commissioner Weil asked if the Commission would be giving up control of design review in the downtown area or at the base in regard to the Redevelopment Agency. Staff noted that this should be qualified and should read, "the design review applications within redevelopment project areas where the Planning Commission does not have design review authority pursuant to other provisions of the zoning code or adopted specific plans." Commissioner Weil asked if there could be some sort of system devised to simplify the appeal process and make it more user friendly. Staff affirmed. Commissioner Stracker was concerned about Item No. 2, the decrease in the number of off-street parking spaces, and asked how this would be determined. Staff noted that this is taken directly from State law and that the City can require the applicant to provide substantiation, by fact, of parking demand. Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 Page 4 Commissioner Stracker asked what "on premise dry cleaning" meant, and asked if there are higher authorities that this type of business would have to satisfy and was the Commission backing themselves into a corner if these other agencies also had review authority. He also asked what the normal appeal time was. Staff replied that this referes to retail center dry cleaning establishments and that these businesses are not precluded from Air Quality Management District review but that the City standards are even more complex than obtaining an AQMD permit. These businesses would be subject to the same standardized conditions of approval which apply at present. Normal appeal time is seven days. Commissioner Butler asked the cost of the appeal fees? Staff noted that currently the cost is one half of the appeal fee charge in addition to the Zoning Administrator's fee. Commissioner Stracker asked if the Commission would get copies of the agendas of the Zoning Administrators hearings. Staff replied that the Ordinance provides for an action summary to be provided to the Commission. Commissioner Weil asked how close to the end of appeal period would applicants be notified. Staff noted that just as with issues before the Commission, the applicant is usually present, but should they not be, every effort is made to notify them the following day. Commissioner Kasalek commented that she was surprised and pleased to see the savings to both applicant and City. There was a consensus of the Commissioners that the Sunset Clause was not needed. Commissioner Kasalek moved, Stracker seconded to direct the Community Development staff to prepare the environmental documentation as well as the final Draft Ordinance for public hearing to be held before the Planning Commission with the following changes to the Ordinance, amending city Code Section 9299, related to the Office of the Zoning Administrator as follows: 1., To instruct staff to refine modification to Draft ordinance relative to dish antennas, namely to provide an additional qualification for those antennas within 300 feet of a residential zone; Z., On the issue of Design Review, applications within project areas, it would be only where the Planning Commission does not have Design Review authority currently under zoning codes or future adopted Specific Plans; and 3., Under appeal section, Item F, Page 6, Appeal to City Council, appeals could be made to city Council and/or Redevelopment Agency as applicable. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to instruct staff to prepare an appeal form which is user friendly and customer service oriented that would simplify the appeal process for those applicants interested in appealing a particular action to the zoning Administrator. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 Page 5 5. Green Waste Report Receive and File Commissioner Baker moved, Butler seconded to receive and file the Green Waste Report. Motion carried 5-0. 6. Status Reports Receive and File Commissioner Baker moved, Kasalek seconded to receive and file the status reports. Motion carried 5-0. NEW BUSINESS: None STAFF CONCERNS: 7. Report on actions taken at February 22, 1994 City Council meeting Staff reported on the subject agenda. Confirmation was made of those Commissioners attending the League Conference in San Diego. City Attorney, Lois Bobak, reported on the changes in the Brown Act which will become effective April 1, 1994. Her firm has prepared an outline of the amendments and copies of this will be made available to the Commissioners and staff following its forwarding to City Council. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Butler - Appreciated the research done on the Zoning Administrator issue. He stated that his only concern had been as to how the Commission's decision to relinquish some of their duties would be perceived by the public, but the well researched report which pointed out the savings in time and energy as well as a dollar saving to the residents of Tustin, helped to influence his decision to approve it. - Asked if the suggested change in the City Council meeting dates to Tuesday would affect the Planning Commission. Staff noted that it was unknown at this time. However should it occur, it was not likely to affect the Commission unless the City Council wanted to change the Commission's meeting night. Staff would not suggest exploring modifying the Planning Commission meeting date unless the Council wants it. Commissioner Baker - Mentioned Tustin Pride meeting of February 24th and asked staff to report on the outcome of the meeting, especially the issue of the buildings at Nisson and Browning and the sale of the Pinebrook apartments by Cal Trans. I .... l]~l T ---Tn- .... Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 Page 6 Staff reported on the meeting action agenda. Commissioner Stracker - Asked for an elaboration on the county issue with the Air Station. Staff reported on the 6 applications for the site. Staff is working with the county to show them what types of uses would be consistent with the direction the Task Force is going but has made clear to them that the City will not support any detention facilities. The City is recommending a 3 acre site to accommodate a child abuse facility and is trying to identify what Law Enforcement needs are. The City is encouraging the Task Force to consider that a pistol range could be open to public, in conjunction with the plans of a Law Enforcement training facility. The City is asking the county to concentrate on the land area identified for public benefit conveyance within the village area of the site. The City is not taking a position on the work furlough issue at this time. Commissioner Kasalek - Asked what City policy was concerning repair of streets. Staff reported that the City routinely monitors the condition of the streets through regular rehab and annual maintenance programs. Commissioner Weil - Commended the Director on having been appointed to the National Association of Base Developers. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Baker moved, Butler seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on March 14, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. Kat~~ Chairperson Secretary