Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 05-24-93MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 24, 1993 CALL TO ORDER: 7:05 p.m., Tustin Senior Center PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Kasalek, Baker, Butler, Stracker 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. 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 May 10, 1993 Planninq Commission meetinq. Commissioner Weil moved, Stracker seconded to approve the minutes from the May 10, 1993 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 3-0. Commissioner Kasalek abstained from minutes portion, only. Commissioner Butler was absent at this point. 2. Final Tract Map 14366 APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCATION: A-M/GREYSTONE HOMES 7 UPPER NEWPORT PLAZA NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 A PORTION OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14366 (LOTS 6 AND J OF TRACT 13627) ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL THIS PROJECT IS CONSIDERED MINISTERIALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15268(b) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO CREATE 48 NUMBERED LOTS AND FOUR (4) LETTERED LOTS TO ACCOMMODATE 48 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1993 Page 2 Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3143 recommending approval to the City Council of Final Tract Map 14366, as submitted or revised. Commissioner Weil moved, Stracker seconded to adopt Resolution No. 3143 recommending approval to the City Council of Final Tract Map 14366 as submitted. 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 P~AISED 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. 3. Conditional Use Permit 93-013 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: MR. SAX ENDO CHEVRON AGENT CHEVRON U.S.A. PRODUCTS INC. P.O. BOX 2267 LA HABRA, CA 90631 CHEVRON U.S.A. PRODUCTS INC. P.O. BOX 2833 LA HABRA, CA 90632 14122 NEWPORT AVENUE RETAIL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-l) A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. TO AUTHORIZE THE INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF TWO SELF-CONTAINED MOBILE UNITS TO EXTRACT AND TREAT CONTAMINATED VAPORS FROM THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14122 NEWPORT AVENUE FOR 12 TO 24 MONTHS. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3141, certifying the Final Negative Declaration as adequate for the project; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 3142, approving Conditional Use Permit 93-013, subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner The Public Hearing was opened at 7:09 p.m. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:10 p.m. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to continue the item until the next meeting per the applicant's request. Motion carried 5-0. 4. Conditional Use Permit 93-016 and Variance 93-003 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: SILICON SYSTEMS S.S.I. PROPERTIES 14511 MYFORD ROAD ASSOC. 6511 CAMINO DEL REY 14351 MYFORD ROAD BONSALL, CA 92003 TUSTIN, CA. 92705 14511 MYFORD ROAD 14531 MYFORD ROAD PLANNED COMMUNITY - INDUSTRIAL (PC-I) IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-016 AND VARIANCE 93-003 HAVE BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1993 Page 3 REQUEST: (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS AUTHORIZATION OF THE FOLLOWING: 1. A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TEMPORARY USE PERMIT EXTENSION FOR A TEMPORARY TRAILER AT AN INDUSTRIAL FACILITY, LOCATED AT 14511 MYFORD ROAD. 2. A VARIANCE FROM SECTION V.B.4 OF THE IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATION TO ALLOW A STORAGE ROOF TO ENCROACH FOUR FEET INTO A REQUIRED SIDEYARD SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED THREE FOOT ENCROACHMENT AUTHORIZED AT THE INDUSTRIAL FACILITY LOCATED AT 14351 MYFORD ROAD. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Approve Conditional Use Permit 93- 016 by adopting Resolution No. 3139, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A as submitted or revised; and 2. Approve Variance 93-003 by adopting Resolution No. 3140 subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Weil requested clarification of Condition 1.5 of Exhibit A pertaining to request for increased parking. Staff replied that there may be a time when there are no tenant improvements where the space would be available for occupancy and could require additional parking; that all projects are required to provide a parking summary based on existing square footage of proposed and existing improvements as part of every tenant improvement plan. Commissioner Weil suggested that it would look better if the requirement was removed; and inquired about the concrete fence. Staff replied that the fence was installed as a fence for screening of a storage area and was required to be a minimum of eight feet high. Commissioner Stracker asked for clarification of the water run-off from the roof; if they are required to have an NPDES permit; and was concerned about the possible run-off of acid into the storm drain which is a direct violation of the law. Staff replied that the roof overhang would allow better drainage at the site; that they are required to have all permits and licensing; that now that the location is technically enclosed, it may change what is allowed to be stored. Commissioner Weil commented that the company underwent extensive scrutiny with their remodeling. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:15 p.m. Ron Moyer, Director of Facilities at Silicon Systems, stated that they are attempting to meet the Fire Code requirements; that the Fire Department requires a roof over the enclosure where the 55- gallon drums are stored; that their process may leave a residual amount of acid on top of the container which could wash off into the storm drain in event of rain if the roof is not overhead; that the Code requires that any work done on hazardous materials must have a roof overhead. Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1993 Page 4 Commissioner Stracker asked if they were pursuing NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits. Mr. Moyer replied that it would fall under their Employee Health and Safety Department. Commissioner Butler asked how long the tenant improvements were intended to take. Mr. Moyer replied that he was unsure of how long the improvements might take since they are still expanding; he commented that last year's sales were $240 million, next year's were expected to be $360 million, and there are 100 open positions. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:20 p.m. Commissioner Baker moved, Butler seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 93-016 by adopting Resolution No. 3139, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A as submitted. Motion carried 4- 0. Commissioner Kasalek abstained. Commissioner Baker moved, Butler seconded to approve Variance 93- 003 by adopting Resolution No. 3140 subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Kasalek abstained. OLD BUSINESS: 5. Status Reports Commissioner Weil asked the status of 1991 projects. Staff replied that they may not have receive a resubmittal from the applicant; that they clean out the listing approximately every three months; that some items have specific expiration dates; and some are still under construction. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to receive and file. Motion carried 5-0. NEW BUSINESS: o Fire Retardant Wood Shake and Shinqle Roofinq Materials Adoption of Updated Edition of Uniform Fire Code Staff introduced Rick Brown, the City Building Official as staff member for questions. Commissioner Weil commented that she had UL testing criteria information regarding fire retardant roofs to provide to staff. Staff replied that he had received that information; that the current ordinance requires that all residential property require a minimum of a Class C rating for all new roofs, excepting the hillside area which requires Class A. Commissioner Weil stated that the report seemed to weakly define the difference between class ratings; that there is an enormous difference between C and B ratings. Staff noted that the State encourages cities to stay within a three year adoptive cycle for amendments; that the City's requirements are more restrictive than the California Building Code. Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1993 Page 5 Commissioner Weil requested a tickler file be created to provide the City Council with expanded information; noted that all of Anaheim requires Class A roofs; explained a difference between the rating system; that the lots in the City are not big enough for brush clearance to be effective; that with a Santa Ana wind condition, Class C roofs would allow 900 homes to be burned in a couple of hours, as in Anaheim and La Posada Apartment fires. Commissioner Butler suggested that the tickler file indicate the cost difference between a Class C and B roof; and asked how the Building Official determined the class rating of a roof being installed. Staff replied that each bundle of tiles or shingles is identified with the fire resistive classification, manufacturer, and material. Commissioner Butler indicated that cost and aesthetic values are important to some homeowners. Commissioner Weil stated that the services that clean and treat shake shingles are a "rip-off" and that some wood shingles are pressure treated at the factory with a Class B rating. Staff commented that each product type has to meet the suitability and durability standards in addition to fire resistance. Commissioner Baker inquired about metal roofing material on top of shake shingles. Staff replied that that process is currently allowed with a fiberglass batting between the metal and shingles; that the product is approved by the International Conference of Building Officials evaluation service as an approved method, but the air space between the old and new roofs gets overheated by an interior fire and creates a difficult to fire to fight; that he has since withdrawn the approval of that report upon the recommendation of the Fire Marshall; that based on concurrence with the Fire Department they have allowed this product with installation of the solid fiberglass insulation which eliminates the air void; that the product is effective against exterior fires. Commissioner Weil commented that the heat could build up enough without the fiberglass batting to cause spontaneous combustion of the shake roof; and asked if an additional inspection was required for a metal roof. Staff replied that the insulation and runners can be installed prior to their first inspection and verified without additional inspection costs for the City; that they are taking a proactive approach with roofing contractors by informing them of the requirements. Commissioner Kasalek asked if spark arresters are required on existing roofs; that perhaps an incentive program would be effective to assist people with installation; and that upon sale of a home it might be required. Staff replied that it has been in effect for the past three years for new construction, not as a retrofit ordinance. Commissioner Butler asked for clarification of the fire sprinkler ordinance. Staff replied that the ordinance presented to the City Council contained the standard language of the 1988 version of the Fire Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1993 Page 6 Code with optional wordings of 1) residential fire sprinklers required in homes of 3,600 square footage or greater; or 2) were more than five minutes from the first responding station, or more than 2 1/2 miles from the first responding station; or 3) require fire sprinklers in all new residential construction; that at the June 7 meeting the Building Official and Fire Department will dispute some of facts presented by the building industry; that the Council has supported the requirement of sprinklers in homes of 3,600 square feet or greater; that the number was based on the fire department's ability to fight a fire of a certain size. Commissioner Butler asked for a clarification of the cost factor involved. Commissioner Weil asked if it could be made optional, since it would be much less expensive to install it while the home is being built, rather than afterwards. Staff replied that it would cost approximately $4,000 for a 3,600 square foot home; that it was discussed, but that none of the builders offer it as an option; that it would cost 4-5 times the price to retrofit; but that the purchaser would have to buy early in the construction process to have it installed while the rough plumbing was being installed. He continued with noting that his office currently maintains a library of building materials reference directories and technical journals; that a separate legislation file is monitored; and that he will comply with any additional direction from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Weil stated that she was uncomfortable with the lack of information regarding the difference in classification of roofing materials. Staff commented that the building industry is supportive of increased roofing requirements rather than sprinkler requirements. Commissioner Weil commented that from a community point of view, a Class A or B roof will save a community before a sprinkler system would, even though a sprinkler would save a house faster. Staff commented that sprinklers have saved maintaining the fires. other communities that have required fire department costs due to houses Commissioner Kasalek stated that education is the key. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to receive and file. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS: 7. Report on actions taken at May 17, 1993 City Council meeting Staff inquired if the Commission had any questions on the City Council Agenda. Commissioner Stracker would like a copy of the Council report pertaining to the Sports Park. 8. Update on Urban Rail Staff reported on the project status. Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1993 Page 7 COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Butler -Thanked Commissioner Weil for the additional information she provided on the roofing issue. -Inquired if the soil remediation project that was continued from the meeting had signed a graffiti release form. Also inquired as to the property owner's intention for use of the site after completion of soil remediation. Staff indicated that those concerns will be addressed in the report when the item is brought back to the Commission at the next meeting. Commissioner Baker -Indicated that he was concerned that the soil contamination of the Chevron project would affect the well on Mitchell Avenue. Staff indicated that, again, this concern would be addressed in the report at the next Commission meeting. -Inquired about the status of the cactus wren issue in East Tustin. Staff indicated that Daniel Fox, Senior Planner was part of a committee on the subject and a status report would be provided to the Commission at a future meeting. Commissioner Weil -Informed staff that she was impressed with the work of All- American Asphalt who is doing street resurfacing in her neighborhood. -Informed staff and the Commission about her taking part in a quarterly tour of the IRWD facility. She indicated that the tour was very interesting and highly recommended it to anyone who is interested. Commissioner Stracker -Inquired about why the continued Chevron project was using the form of soil remediation that they chose? Staff indicated that would be a question for the applicant when the item comes back to the Commission. -Asked when the Tustin Garage moved. Staff indicated that the Tustin Garage had moved approximately three weeks ago. Staff also indicated that an inspection of the site is forthcoming. -Requested a report from staff about NPDES. Commissioner Kasalek -Asked about the procedure of the street sweeper. Asked if a resident can request that the sweeper redo an area. Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1993 Page 8 Staff from the Public Works Department indicated that they would check with Field Services about the sweeper's routine. -Inquired about the City's regulations for leaf blowers. Staff indicated that they were allowed by a Council decision. Any problems that have arisen with leaf blowers have generally been handled by contacting the property manager. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to adjourn the meeting at 8:13 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on June 14, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at the Tustin Senior Center, 200 S. "C" Street, Tustin. Ma~j'o%ie/~asalek~] -~-' Chairpef~/on Kathleen Clancy Secretary