Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 06-28-93MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 0-gNE 28, 1993 CALL TO ORDER: 7:07 p.m., Tustin Senior Center PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Kasalek, Butler, Stracker and Weil Baker 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.) Attorney John Shaw, representing the City Attorney Office of Rourke, Woodruff and Spradlin, introduced his replacement at future Planning Commission meetings, Lois Bobak, Assistant City Attorney. 1. Minutes of the June 14, 1993 Planninq Commission meeting. Commissioner Weil moved, Stracker 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. 2. Modification to Conditions of Approval to Allow Time Extensions for Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve a modification to Condition No. 1.1 of Resolution No. 3110 to allow a six-month extension of Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 by adopting Resolution No. 3153, as submitted or revised. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 2 Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner Commissioner Weil asked if there had been any response to the public notice for this project. Staff replied there had not been. Commissioner Butler asked if there was any interest in building within the next six months. Staff replied there was none indicated. Commissioner Butler moved, Well seconded approval of a modification to Condition No. 1.1 of Resolution No. 3110 to allow a six month extension of Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 by adopting Resolution No. 3153 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 14748, Desiqn Review 92-043 and Conditional Use Permit 93-001 APPLICANT/ LANDOWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES 5 CIVIC PLAZA, SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 LOTS 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 17-44, "C", "E", "H", "I", "J", "K", "L", "Q", and "S" OF TRACT 14381. MEDIUM 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. 1. AUTHORIZATION TO RECONFIGURE TENTATIVE TRACT 14381 BY ADDING TWELVE (12) ADDITIONAL NUMBERED LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS; 0 0 AMENDMENT OF DESIGN REVIEW 90-55 TO MODIFY THE SITE PLAN FOR PRESIDIO TO ACCOMMODATE 12 ADDITIONAL DWELLINGS AND UTILIZE THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN;AND AMENDMENT OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-17 TO UTILIZE THE CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 12 ADDITIONAL DWELLINGS. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3144; 2. Approve Design Review 92-043 to amend Design Review 90-55 by adopting Resolution No. 3145, as submitted or revised; 3. Approve Conditional Use Permit 93-001 to amend Conditional Use Permit 91-17 for a cluster development by adopting Resolution No. 3146, as submitted or revised; and 4. Recommend approval to the City Council of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14748 which amends Tentative Tract 14381 by adopting Resolution No. 3147, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Commissioner Stracker asked if it were correct that Plan No. 2 was changed from four to three bedrooms. Staff noted that in the original plan submittal it was a four bedroom unit and the Planning Commission included a condition requiring no more than 30% of the units were four bedroom. The Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 3 developer's solution at plan check submittal was to modify the interior layout of plan 2 to eliminate the fourth bedroom to meet the 30% requirement. Commissioner Stracker asked if floor plans for plan 2 were available. Staff noted that they were not included in the staff report; the floor plans are not yet through the plan check process. The footprint did not change, it was just the upstairs floor layout that was modified. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:25 p.m. Jon W. Robertson, 5 Civic Plaza, #100, Newport Beach, Ca., representing California Pacific Homes, distributed the marketing product brochures for this project for the Commission's review and gave a project summary. He stated that he was in concurrence with the staff report as presented, with one minor exception having to do with the mailbox issue and if there was any identified problem he would try to solve it. Commissioner Kasalek asked Mr. Robertson to explain what he just stated about the mailboxes, especially as to how it would affect three of the homes as he stated. Mr. Robertson stated that there are four mailboxes currently in place on the project of the twelve that service that area. Three of the four mailboxes are in yards that have been disclosed to homeowners as being that location. If the mailboxes are moved, it would affect three homeowners currently living in those residences. The primary objection to moving the mailboxes is that they would obstruct picture window views. The Director asked if Mr. Robertson knew which lot numbers these were. Mr. Robertson responded, Lots 58, 57, 48, 47 and 37. now occupied are 58, 57 and 48 Those lots Commissioner Stracker noted that he had been at the site. He asked if lot 8 were not included since he noticed there had been a re- orientation of lot 8 from this map to the map of the old tract. He asked if this also would constitute a change. Mr. Robertson responded that the original tentative tract map 14381 was all 155 lots. Subsequent to the approval of the original tentative tract map they filed two final maps so that when they filed the final map those lot numbers superseded the tentative tract map. The entire portion of the site to the left of the recreation facility is Tract 14567 with numbered lots 1-62. Commissioner Butler asked if California Pacific would be willing to move the mailboxes on the unimproved lots. Mr. Robertson noted that there are four posts installed currently which they would like to have remain as is but anything installed from this point on they would be willing to install according to the direction of the Commission. He noted that they had gone through three approvals from the U. S. Postal Service prior to coming up with the current solution. Commissioner Weil stated she felt that the Company has already been put through enough and as far as the actual mailboxes in the ground she feels they should be left where they are. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 4 Commission Stracker asked where the mailboxes were currently specifically located. Mr. Robertson stated that they were on the corner of lot 58 on the curb return at the intersection of Gray and Kimball. Commissioner Stracker asked if these homes were FHA approved. Mr. Robertson answered no, that process has not taken place on this project because of pricing, but that all construction standards exceed FHA requirements. Commissioner Stracker asked if they anticipate installing the air conditioning units on the outside of the master bedrooms. He was concerned about the noise they create. Mr. Robertson stated that two phases of the project are currently occupied and that there has not been a complaint from any of the homeowners. The Director noted that there is a field acoustical study required prior to a certificate of occupancy which requires a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBa. If that is exceeded the developer would be required, pursuant to Title 25, to install additional noise insulation. Commissioner Stracker asked how the lots were drained. Mr. Robertson responded that most of the lots drain to the front and they have provided area drains to the rear yard for the homeowner to connect to. Commissioner Stracker asked, in regard to the walls, what type of fencing was being provided. Mr. Robertson responded that there were three levels of fencing in the project. The primary level on the circumference of the project is a Tustin Ranch standard block with brick cap and pilasters. The secondary fencing is a stucco stud frame wall on the project street scene and the third level of fencing is a wood neighbor fence which is installed by California Pacific and painted for the homeowner. Mr. Robertson showed the Commission an example of a section of this actual fence. Commissioner Stracker asked what the maintenance requirements were for the fencing and who was responsible. Mr. Robertson responded that the party wall fence would be the responsibility of the homeowner and the stucco wall maintenance would be the responsibility of the homeowner's association with the exception of the interior surface which is the maintenance responsibility of the homeowner, however, structural damage is to be taken care of by the association. Commissioner Stracker noted that the orientation of the side yards look right into the rear yards, especially lot 40, 39, 38 and 41. Mr. Robertson noted that this was not the intent. Within the four floor plans, as can be seen in the brochure, there are 17 different elevations available to the project. Lot 41 is the dead wall and there are no windows on that side, only glass block accents. Commissioner Stracker noted that he was concerned about security in the areas where the lots back up into the court areas. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 5 Mr. Robertson responded that all the rear yards are completely enclosed with a fence; where the rear yard does face a street a stucco and stud wall fence would be provided. The Director noted that each of the site plans have gone through extensive security analysis and the City also uses an outside security advisor to advise our Police Department. Both Mr. Robertson and Mr. Moorhous will confirm that there was an extensive list of corrections for security concerns that each of the Patio Home projects has gone through in the initial stages of project review. The Tustin Police Department has no outstanding security issues at this time. To make a judgement concerning security without the input of the Police Department, here and now, is really difficult and it would be hard to pose a redesign request at this time to the applicant when the project has undergone an extensive security analysis. Commissioner Weil asked what the target pricing is and what might be the price of the four bedroom. Mr. Robertson responded that the current market pricing starts at 230 thousand with the four bedroom at 265 thousand. Commissioner Butler asked that if the four homeowners involved where the mailbox posts currently are would request to have them moved to be in conformance with the rest of the development, would California Pacific be willing to move the boxes. Mr. Robertson responded that would not be a problem. The Public Hearing closed at 7:45 p.m. Commissioner Weil would like to have the mailboxes that are already installed in the ground remain and recommends only moving the location of future boxes which have not as yet been installed. Commissioner Butler agrees but would like the homeowners with installed mailboxes to have the option of having theirs moved if they wish it. Commissioner Well feels this particular type of gang mailbox is an abomination and cannot understand why the post office vehicles can't maneuver down the streets. She would like to pursue trying to bring our residents more convenience and to accomplish getting the mailboxes on the corner individually. She feels that having a homeowner who lives at the end of the cul-de-sac have to walk all the way up to the end and sometimes around a corner or park illegally in order to pick up mail is setting up future residents and doing them a disservice. She feels the Commision should try to solve this problem. Commissioner Kasalek agrees and also does not see any reason why the postal vehicles cannot go down the streets or the mailman walk to individual boxes. Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3144 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to approve Design Review 92-043 to ~mend Design Review 90-55 by adopting Resolution No. 3145 by revising Item 3.1 to read, "excluding mailboxes on Lots 37, 47, 48, 57 & 58 of Final Tract Map 14567" and omitting the last paragraph of Item 3.1 which reads, "This condition will require the applicant to relocate those mailboxes that have field issues Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 6 associated within them as requested by the City in earlier phases of the project". Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 93-001 to amend Conditional Use Permit 91-17 for a cluster development by adopting Resolution No. 3146, as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to recommend approval to the City Council of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 by adopting Resolution No. 3151, as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. o Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 14782, Desiqn Review 93-008 and Conditional Use Permit 93-009 APPLICANT/ LANDOWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES 5 CIVIC PLAZA, SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 LOT 10 OF TRACT 12763 MEDIUM 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. 1 . AUTHOR I ZATION TO CREATE TWENTY FIVE ( 25 ) NUMBERED LOTS AND FORTY (40) LETTERED LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING 95 PATIO HOME DWELLINGS; 2. APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT; AND 3. AUTHORIZATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PATIO HOMES. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3148; 2. Approve Design Review 93-008 by adopting Resolution No. 3149, as submitted or revised; 3. Approve Conditional Use Permit 93-009 by adopting Resolution No. 3150, as submitted or revised; 4. Recommend approval to the City Council of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 by adopting Resolution No. 3151, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner Commissioner Weil asked why fire sprinklers are being required. Staff responded that the Orange County Fire Department has recommended it. The Director noted that although the fire code does not outright require the installation of automatic sprinkler systems there is an operating standard of the code that allows the Fire Marshal to determine that automatic sprinkler systems on individual units would be required if the unit is not within a certain radius provided by hose service from an existing hydrant. Commissioner Weil asked if any of the fire hydrants are on any of the drives? The Director responded it would really depend on how the applicant works out the situation with the Fire Department. Based on the initial submittal information the template has indicated that they Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 7 cannot comply on those units that have been identified for sprinklers. However, there could be some field conditions that could be modified in working with the Fire Marshal or alternate fire safety provided that would give the Fire Department greater assurance that those units would be more adequately protected. Commissioner Stracker asked what the future parking area of the model home area would become. Staff replied that would be an open site which would be landscaped. Commissioner Stracker asked if the garage doors were roll up or tilt type. Staff replied that they are typically tilt type controlled with an electric door opener. Commissioner Kasalek asked if the Ficus trees being put in are the type that will cause damage from roots later on. The Director responded that depending on the species of the type Ficus recommended, the City's landscape architect, BSI, would require the installation of a root barrier system. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:16 p.m. Bill Moorhous, Director of Project Management for California Pacific Homes, the Irvine Division, brought an exhibit of the actual fence for Commission review. He noted that they had submitted this project only three months and 12 days ago and commended staff since this was a real record for processing. He stated that they were in concurrence with all the conditions with one exception which is, Condition 3.7 on page 4 of Resolution 3149 of the design review resolution, which is the condition which requires that all fences and walls be slumpstone or masonry rather than the combination of wood and masonry. He feels that this condition is unnecessary since with the addition of the metal post that these fences will hold up to all maintenance responsibilities and that this project does have a homeowner's association with a budget for maintenance. Commissioner Weil asked if this type of stucco on wood fence were the same type construction as is applied to a house. Mr. Moorhous responded yes. Commissioner Stracker asked if there was an amount reserved for maintenance of the slumpstone walls. Mr. Moorhous responded yes, a dime a lineal foot on the slumpstone which is the same as the stucco and 9 cents a square foot on the painting. Commissioner Kasalek asked how far apart the steel posts would be. Mr. Moorhous responded eight foot on center. Commissioner Weil asked what the price of these homes would be. Mr. Moorhous responded under 200 thousand to low/mid 200 thousand. Commissioner Stracker asked what type of street lighting would be on the project. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 8 Mr. Moorhous responded that on the loop street there would be cobra heads and additionally there would be carriage lantern type lights on the individual short motor courts on each garage, and post lamps on each of the three entrances to the park. Commissioner Stracker asked what the difference in cost would be for concrete in private courts as opposed to asphalt. Mr. Moorhous responded that it would be double. Concrete is $3.00 per square foot while asphalt is $1.50 per square foot. Jane Anderson, Board President of Sevilla Homeowners Association, 2473 Via Corella, Tustin, stated that Mr. Moorhous went to their Board of Director's meeting to talk to them about the problems they were concerned about. The association had two main problems, field mice when the grading started and buffer as far as trees between the two developments. She was satisfied that California Pacific would work with them to resolve these problems. Ms. Anderson stated that she felt that cluster mailboxes were a plus as far as security. Theft out of individual mailboxes is prevalent and there has been damage to individual mailboxes from having cherry bombs placed in them which blow out the backs. Mr. Moorhous noted that relative to the landscaping buffer between the two products, California Pacific needs to construct a portion of a wall along the Sevilla property and also relocate a storm drain, so he is sure that the developer will be able to satisfy them from the landscaping standpoint or will not be able to get their approval. Commissioner Weil asked if some of the Eucalyptus trees have died. Jane Anderson replied that there has been a problem with the Eucalyptus trees in their development. They have lost about 26 trees in the development from an unknown disease. Rene Redfield Shaw, 13453 Verona, Tustin, spoke in opposition to the project, mainly stating that it detracts from the Arcada which is across from the project, and lowers the value of their property and also that they had wanted a park for Arcada, not more homes. She stated the homes were sold with the assumption that there would be an elementary school site. She realizes that this is a statement after the fact but just wants to be on record for opposition. Commissioner Weil asked if Ms. Shaw was aware that these were patio homes. Ms. Shaw responded yes. The Director stated that the Tustin School District has released this land and that Market Place Annex commercial/retail approval went through the normal public hearing process. The City Council felt that the Costco project was in the best interest of the community. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:51 p.m. Commissioner Butler stated that he feels the developer should be allowed to have the fences as they have explained them and he would be in favor of removing Condition 3.7 as discussed. He feels that in case of an earthquake, the slumpstone would be ultimately more expensive to replace. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 9 Commissioner Stracker disagrees and feels the slumpstone will work better and would be easier to maintain. Commissioner Weil agrees with Commissioner Butler. She feels that the wood gives a little more and would help the homes to be more affordable. She feels that the original of 18 units to an acre has been cut in half and she feels this is commendable. Commissioner Kasalek stated she was pleased with the whole project. She initially was opposed to the wood fences but after the presentation and the explanation of the steel post and paint she feels they would be alright. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3148 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Co--.Lissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to approve Design Review 93-008 by adopting Resolution 3149 as revised to delete Conditions Of Approval 3.8 and 3.9, as the applicant and Police Department have determined that enhanced security need only occur at recessed entries that would not have surveillance from the looped street. A new Condition, 3.8 was added to read: "The front door of floor plan 2 units 6, 10, 15, 21, 25, 37, 48, 57, 61, 71, 75 and 91, shall be improved with a metal frame to enhance security in the recessed doorway." Condition of Approval 4.10, related to the landscape buffer adjacent to Laurel Glen Park should be revised to read: "The private side and rear yards of units 1,2,3,6,7,10,11,14 and 15 adjacent to the north boundary of the development shall be buffered from visual and noise impacts of the adjacent neighborhood park. The applicant shall provide one 24 inch box tree per each 30 lineal feet of the northern tract boundary, excluding those common areas indicated on the conceptual landscape plans which shall receive the accent/interest area trees as prescribed by the conceptual landscape plans subject to the final review and approval of the Community Development Department. Said tree shall be of a specimen type that will provide adequate visual and noise buffering, (i.e. Italian Cypress, Brisbane Box or Cajeput tree). As an alternate, or in combination with some additional planting, the applicant shall apply for an administrative adjustment for additional wall height of up to 20 percent above the maximum permitted height of 7 feet-six inches along the northerly property line, not to exceed 9 feet." Motion carried 3-1. Commissioner Stracker was opposed. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit 93-009 by adopting Resolution No. 3150 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded, to recommend approval to the City Council of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 by adopting Resolution No. 3151 as revised to modify Condition of Approval 1.6 to read, "Streets, storm drain, water and sewer improvement plans shall comply with the "City of Tustin Minimum Design Improvements except as modified by the Building Official." Condition of Approval 1.12 should be modified to read, "Provisions for landscape maintenance and ownership of landscaped lots CC, DD, EE,FF and GG and all other lettered lots of Tract No. 14782, excluding lot HH, shall be the responsibility of the adjacent property owners and/or Homeowners Association." Condition 4.1.B.9 is deleted. Condition 5.4 revised to read, "Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all underground piping for automatic fire extinguishing systems shall be approved. Plans for an automatic fire extinguishing system shall be approved by the Fire Chief prior to the installation. Such system shall be operational prior to the Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 10 issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy. The residences on the following lots shall have automatic fire sprinkler systems installed in the structures: 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 40, 41, 44, 45, 48, 49, 50, 56, 57, 60, 61, 64, 65, 68, 69, 71, 74, 75, 78, 79, 86, 87, 90, 91, and 94 or as otherwise approved by the Orange County Fire Department." Typographical errors in the following Conditions of Resolution No. 3151 shall be corrected: 4.2F "beams" should be "berms" Typographical errors in the following Conditions of Resolution No. 3151 shall be corrected: 1.5B "an" should be "and"; "constructin" should be "constructed"; "rems" should be "terms"; 5.5, "Paking" should be "Parking" and 1.12 "Rod" should be "Road". Motion carried 4-0. OLD BUSINESS: 5. Status Reports Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to receive and file this report. Motion carried 4-0. NEW BUSINESS: 6. Office of the Zoning Administrator Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission provide direction to staff as to: 1. The types of development applications which should be reviewed by the Planning Commission; and 2. The types of development applications which might be reviewed by a Zoning Administrator. Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development Discussion followed in which each Commissioner expressed their separate concerns on the types of development actions they wished to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator. Staff will take all of the information obtained and generate a report for the Commission and City Council to act on concerning this issue. STAFF CONCERNS: 7. Report on actions taken at June 21, 1993 City Council meetinq Staff reported on the subject agenda. The Director reminded the Commissioners that there will be a meeting with the City Council on July 6th at 6 p.m. o Status Report - National Pollutant Discharqe Elimination System (NPDES) Received and filed. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 11 COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Weil - Stated that she had a recent conversation with Ms. Courtney Wierchioch, Manager of the John Wayne Airport, concerning extending over the 405 Freeway but that it would not be a possibility since the water table is too high. Commissioner Stracker -Concerned about the damage to the mast arm on the signal light at E1 Camino and B Street. Commissioner Butler - Disturbed about the number of "student painter" signs appearing all over his neighborhood. Commissioner Kasalek - Questioned who was responsible for weed abatement in the condemned properties in the right-of-way area off Nisson Road. - Commented that she had participated in the graffiti paint out this past Saturday and had a good time, as did the other participants. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to adjourn the meeting at 10:05 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on July 12, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at the Tustin Senior Center, 200 S. "C" Street, Tustin. Marjorfe~ ~-~aIek - ' ~- Chairpersokf Kathleen Clancy Secretary T ....... · I !!!i --F -Il- --' 7