Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-08-93MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MARCH 8, 1993 CALL TO ORDER: 7:05 p.m., Tustin Senior Center PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Kasalek, Baker, Butler, Stracker and Weil Absent: None 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 SEPAR3%TE ACTION.) 1. Minutes of the February 22, 1993 Planninq Commission meetinq. Commissioner Baker moved, Weil seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. 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. Tentative Parcel Map 92-231 APPLICANT/ LAND OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL JAMES AND PATRICIA LONDON 1360 W. 6TH STREET, SUITE #305 SAN PEDRO, CALIFORNIA 90732 12821, 12831 AND 12841 NEWPORT AVENUE GARDEN OFFICE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE NEWPORT- WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 2 STATUS: REQUEST: IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT SINCE THE PROJECT INVOLVES THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL UNITS FROM SINGLE TO CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP, IT IS A MINOR ALTERATION OF EXISTING FACILITIES INVOLVING NO EXPANSION OF USE AND THEREFORE, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO CREATE A SINGLE-LOT AIRSPACE SUBDIVISION CREATING THREE COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission forward Tentative Parcel Map 92-231 to the City Council with a recommendation of approval by adoption of Resolution No. 3122, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Commissioner Weil asked for a clarification of assigned parking spaces as noted in the CC&Rs; and if buildings would be divided. Staff member Pashalides replied that each building will assign a specific amount of parking, but it will not be designated; and that each building is a condominium which could be divided as leased space, but not sold. Commissioner Butler asked what fees were being charged; if letter 2.3 G of Exhibit A was standard verbiage; and asked for a clarification of enforcement of the CC&Rs. Staff member Pashalides replied that usual processing fees would be charged, but no building permits; and that 2.3 G and the CC&Rs enforcement were standard conditions. The Director added that there is a standard section in the Resolu- tion identifying fees required at building permit stage; and that there was a lengthy discussion with the legal department when the City standardized CC&R language; that the Council directed, at that time, that the City should not bear the cost of CC&R enforcement. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:10 p.m. Chris Fewel 2000 Republic Avenue, Costa Mesa, representing the applicant, concurred with staff's findings. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:11 p.m. Commissioner Butler moved, Baker seconded to forward Tentative Parcel Map 92-231 to the City Council with a recommendation of approval by adoption of Resolution No. 3122, as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Variance 92-011 APPLICANT: OWNER CONTACT: LOCATION: MICHAEL GREENWALT J.R.S. GREENWALT MOVING & STORAGE 15171 DEL AMO AVENUE TUSTIN, CA 92680 CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ATTN: JOHN LOW OR LYNDA COLLIE 1065 N. PACIFIC CENTER DRIVE, STE 200 ANAHEIM, CA 92806 15171 DEL AMO AVENUE Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 3 ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: PLANNED COMMUNITY - PACIFIC CENTER EAST SPECIFIC PLAN, REGIONAL CENTER DESIGNATION THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 01) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 1. TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FROM TUSTIN CITY CODE SECTION 9273 TO ALLOW ALTERATION OF A NON- CONFORMING USE. 2. TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FROM TUSTIN CITY CODE SECTION 9241(A) (18) TO ALLOW OUTDOOR STORAGE WITHOUT SOLID FENCING. 3. TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FROM TUSTIN CITY CODE SECTION 5502(K) TO ALLOW OVERNIGHT PARKING ON AN UNPAVED (GRAVEL) SURFACE. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Variance 92-011 by adopting Resolution No. 3120, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Scott Reekstin, Assistant Planner Commissioner Butler asked if any complaints had been received from neighbors; and how long the trucks had been parked there. Staff member Reekstin replied that there have been no complaints; that the adjacent property owners are Catellus tenants; and that the trucks had been parked since December, 1992. The Director noted that the site is not a nuisance and that they are directly across the street from City Hall. Commissioner Butler asked if the Pacific Center East is not executed due to economic or other reasons, would the applicant be able to continue this matter with further Commission approval; and what is planned for this area and if it is on schedule. The Director suggested that they would have to request an amendment to variance; that Newport Avenue is to be extended and the 55 Freeway ramps are proposed to be realigned; that they will know more regarding the project feasibility and schedule after Caltrans approval; that build-out of the area is unlikely without implementation of the infrastructure improvements. Commission Baker asked if Newport Avenue extension was in the last phase of the project. The Director replied that Phase I allows building permits to be issued in Phase I for 100,000 square feet of commercial space before any improvements or changes to Newport Avenue; that certificates of occupancy for this square footage cannot be issued until the plans for the Newport extension are approved; construction of Newport Avenue would be in two phases. Commissioner Stracker noted that Caltrans has had some concerns about the alignment. The Director replied that Catellus is addressing these concerns; that the project is on hold due to the current market being poor for office space due to the recession. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:22 p.m. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:23 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 4 The Public Hearing was re-opened at 7:23 p.m. Commissioner Baker noted that the applicant moved in without notice or business license; that he was concerned about granting approval on this type of item due to past history. Michael Greenwalt, applicant, noted that they are across from City Hall and want the site to look good. Commissioner Stracker asked how long the applicant had been in residence; and that he had not noticed any cleanup. Mr. Greenwalt stated that they cleaned up the lot on the south side, repaired the fences, painted, cleaned up graffiti, re- painted, and continuing to work on the site. Commissioner Baker asked if the surface would be sufficient to carry the large vehicles; and asked if permits were necessary. Mr. Greenwalt replied that the surface is compacted now, but will be better with a further three (3) inches of rolled surface. Staff replied that permits were not necessary. Commissioner Kasalek asked about the applicant's concern about the redwood slats. Mr. Greenwalt replied that the Police Department wanted the ability to see in the lot 200 feet on drive by; and that the redwood slats would invite vandalism. Commissioner Stracker asked what amount of gravel was to be installed. Mr. Greenwalt replied that it was approximately 25 tons at 300 x 60 feet. Commissioner Weil asked the size of the gravel; and noted that the land was very compacted. Mr. Greenwalt replied that their consultant recommended 3/4 inch gravel. Commissioner Butler asked if additional lighting was planned. Mr. Greenwalt affirmed, as recommended by the Police Department; and that they are installing sensors in the rear. Commissioner Stracker asked if the weeds would be cleaned up along the front of the property. Mr. Greenwalt replied that the weeds will be removed, and the area replanted after sprinkler lines are repaired. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:28 p.m. Commissioner Weil suggested that language should be added to 2.6 requiring that the area be maintained in a weed-free manner. Commissioner Kasalek asked if staff still recommends the redwood slats; and if the Police Department was concerned. Staff affirmed, and replied that the Police Department preferred to be able to see into the lot; and that it was a trade-off. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 5 The Director replied that the Police Department did not want opaque screening, and that the slats can be seen through. Commissioner Weil asked if the Police Department was given an option; and did they agree that they could see through. Staff member Reekstin replied that the Police Department preferred no opaque screening and added illumination to increase visibility from the street; that the building will be visible from the parking lot in an area not seen from Del Amo. Commissioner Kasalek noted that this is not a highly traveled area, but is a high graffiti area; and asked if it was necessary to require the slats, or could they be eliminated for safety reasons. Commissioner Butler stated that it should not be required for the temporary time that the applicant will be located there. Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to amend Variance No. 92- 011 by elimination of Item 2.3 of Exhibit A, Conditions of Approval of Resolution No. 3120 and renumbering items 2.4 to 2.6 accordingly. Motion carried 4-1. Commissioner Stracker was opposed. Commissioner Baker asked if there has been a visual problem. The Director replied that the City's ordinance requires opaque fencing, which other storage yards have complied with; that the Police Department did not want an opaque wall at this location; that this is a building that will be demolished; that chain link fencing with redwood slats does not obscure visibility. Commissioner Stracker noted that his reason for voting against the issue was due to it being an industrial building across from City Hall; and that something is needed to limit visibility. The Director stated that the building is in better condition occupied than vacant; that when the City moves out along with Siemens other parties like FHP have indicated an interest and might be concerned about the view across the street. Commissioner Weil stated that it was a shame that the graffiti taggers have put the City in this position; that the redwood slats will be another target which will look worse than the trucks; that the usage is temporary; that new tenants should be made aware that the storage lot is temporary; and is not in favor of the slats. Commissioner Kasalek agreed, and noted that due to the economy and that it is a short-term problem, this would eliminate the possibility of graffiti. Commissioner Butler noted that Condition 2.2 states that no other material other than commercial vehicles may be parked on the lot; that if they violate the conditions, the approval can be reversed; and that he feels secure that they will not see an unsightly mess. Commissioner Stracker asked if there was a timeframe for the improvements to be implemented; and if 2.5 includes landscaping on the Del Amo frontage. Staff member Reekstin replied that Condition 1.3 allows 30 days; and that 2.5, renumbered to 2.4, requires landscaping that this property applicant is responsible for. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 6 Commissioner Baker moved, Weil seconded to approve Variance 92-011 by adopting Resolution No. 3120 as revised to add "and be maintained in a weed free manner" to Item 2.5 renumbered from 2.6. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Stracker noted that this was on the edge of being a hardship due to the length of time allowed; and that anything longer should be looked at more closely. Commissioner Weil noted that the Commission has set a precedent in the past for this type of issue; that it is a good temporary use; and asked the applicant to keep it in good condition. 4. Conditional Use Permit 93-006 APPLICANT: LAND OWNER: MR. HAMID RASHIDIAN 1 WEEPING WOOD IRVINE, CA 92714 MR. ELDON PRIMROSE 4823 SURREY DRIVE CORONA DEL MAR, CA 92625 LOCATION: 13882 NEWPORT AVENUE, SUITE D ZONING: COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG) DISTRICT, SOUTH CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A CONVENIENCE MARKET WITHIN AN EXISTING TENANT SPACE Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3121 denying Conditional Use Permit 93-006. Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner Commissioner Butler asked if this was the same location where a dry cleaner was recently approved; and if video games were requested. Staff member Stone affirmed regarding the dry cleaners; and that video games were allowed under a CUP. The Director commented that the Business License Section regulates the number of pinball machines if there is less than five (5); more than five machines requires a CUP. Staff noted that the Commission has the discretion to add conditions to a CUP that coin operated games be prohibited. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:46 p.m. Hamid Rashidian, applicant, stated there are no dirty magazines, open food, drinks or alcoholic beverages, and carpet in the store; they are far from schools; requested that the store be inspected for cleanliness; that he requires the packaged foods to increase his business; that his wares are 90% retail, and 5% packaged; that in this economic time, he would like the ability to increase his sales; that since the 1987 decision to limit convenience stores, two have been opened, and he would like to be the third; that most local residents would like packaged foods available; that he would like the City to support efforts to improve business. He presented maps of the area noting that students cannot walk past his store; that there would be 20-30 cars per day on Bonita Street. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 7 Commissioner Weil asked if the applicant was already in business; and what he sells now. Mr. Rashidian replied that he opened approximately four (4) weeks ago; that he sells small toys, detergents, etc.; that it does not draw enough customers; that, if he cannot put packaged foods in, he will have to close this location; that his other store in Orange did not require a permit for food. The Director stated that the store is similar to a 98 cent store; that the applicant was informed of the CUP process required to open a convenience store. However, rather than waiting, he opened the business for those items he is currently selling; that it is the applicant's justification that he needs a convenience type of operation to make his business successful; that there has been previous Planning Commission concern that all the strip centers not become convenience centers. Commissioner Kasalek asked if once approval has been given for a convenience store, the applicant would have a right to add other food items at will in the future. The Director affirmed. Commissioner Stracker asked if deli-type sandwiches could be sold. The Director replied that if the store has less than 15,000 square feet and is not considered a restaurant/deli, it is considered a convenience store. Mr. Rashidian stated that he would not be selling any sandwiches. Commissioner Weil stated that if the market is sold to another party, the next owner is not bound by the applicant's promises; that the rules are not specific enough to disallow sandwiches, but allow packaged foods for sale. Mr. Rashidian asked if there was a way to confirm his statements in writing. Commissioner Butler asked received. Mr. Rashidian affirmed. if the owner's approval had been Mark Haszada, associate of Mr. Rashidian, noted that he is working with the applicant to increase sales; that the applicant has spent $80-85,000 to open the business; that a convenience store has soft drinks and open food items and a retail store like a 98 cent store has packaged items; and asked what was the difference to the City. Staff replied that the applicants current operation is like a dime store, with general retail sales. A convenience facility could be like a 7-11. It was explained that a CUP does not discriminate between the types of food sold. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:58 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 8 Commissioner Butler stated that he wished there was a way to define the use other than as a convenience store; asked if a restriction could be made to allow packaged foods only; that he did not want alcohol and video machines which promote loitering; that any students traveling past his store would probably pass Shirley's Market first; that he is not sure the additional parameters would help the business; that the financial portion is not of the Commission's concern; and asked if the Commission could restrict a convenience store, or must it be denied. The Director replied that the CUP allows the Commission to restrict operations with conditions, but they become enforcement nightmares; that the City has had a tremendous amount of experience with convenience markets; that in 1987 the City adopted an ordinance to address the issue; that convenience markets have an impact on deteriorating strip centers; that the Planning Commission previously had concerns that there were more than adequate convenience markets in the area; that staff wants to be sensitive to the applicant, but recognize what might be best for land uses in the area and that the Planning Commission has also previously placed restrictions prohibiting convenience markets on or near new site developments north of E1 Camino along Newport Avenue. Commissioner Weil agreed with the Director since convenience markets have a tendency to attract more traffic and loitering; that the Police Department has had problems with convenience markets; that it is the Commission's business to make sure what is planned for the City has a chance to work; and that they must consider the welfare of the whole City. Commissioner Baker noted that the strip centers are a difficult place to market; that it is the applicant's responsibility to be aware of the market; that the applicant was made aware by the City; and he has decided to go with staff's recommendation. Commissioner Stracker stated that he was concerned about the amount of traffic generated by a deli included in a convenience market and loitering; suggested the applicant choose an upscale product to sell; that he would like to see the business succeed, but not at the expense of problems that could be created. Commissioner Kasalek stated that she was concerned about the changes which might occur due to demand from patrons; that what he is told today about improving the business might change in the future; that a commitment was given to the neighbors not to allow that type of business there, and that it is important to leave the type of business as is. Commissioner Butler moved to revise Resolution 3121 by placing restrictions on the applicant concerning hours of operation, no video or electronic games, no alcohol or soft drink dispensers, no deli items and restricting the Conditional Use Permit to this applicant only, in an attempt to approve the Conditional Use Permit. Motion died for lack of a second. The Director stated that a CUP could not be immediately revoked, due to a due process procedure which takes at least 30 days. John Shaw, City Attorney, stated that it was not possible to restrict the CUP to this applicant as a CUP runs with the land. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to adopt Resolution No. 3121, denying Conditional Use Permit 93-006. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 9 Commissioner Kasalek asked if the Chamber of Commerce works with new owners. The Director replied that the Chamber of Commerce referred businesses to the Orange County Small Business Center. Commissioner Butler suggested the applicant pursue an avenue of changing the definition of a convenience store. Commissioner Kasalek suggested contacting staff for guidance and options and wished them well. NEW BUSINESS: 5. Siqn Code Exception 92-007 APPLICANT: LANDOWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: TARBELL REALTY 1403 N. TUSTIN AVENUE SANTA ANA, CA 92701 MR. AND MRS. JAMES LONDON 1360 WEST 6TH STREET, #305 SAN PEDRO, CA 90732 12841 NEWPORT AVENUE PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) DISTRICT, NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311 (CLASS 11) TO PERMIT THE INCREASE OF THE MAXIMUM SIGN SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE TENANT SIGN AREA FROM SIX (6) SQUARE FEET TO A MAXIMUM OF 10.25 SQUARE FEET IN CONJUNCTION WITH A TENANT DIRECTORY MONUMENT SIGN Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Sign Code Exception 92-007 by adopting Resolution No. 3123, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Dan Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Weil asked if individual buildings would have numbers; and if they were not requesting separate signage. Staff affirmed. Commissioner Butler asked if a placket sign was acceptable. Staff member Fox affirmed and that window and directory signs are allowed. Commissioner Baker asked if there was a reason that the process was allowed 30 days; if the same person would be removing and installing the signs; and that building repair might necessitate 30 days. Staff member Fox replied that the original proposal was for 30 days due to possible rain delays, but could be changed. Maryanne Domico, representing the applicant, affirmed that the same company would be removing and installing the signage, all at once. Commissioner Weil stated that she was comfortable with the 30 days, and assumed the project would be finished as quickly as possible. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 10 Commissioner Kasalek was comfortable with 30 days. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to Exception 92-007 by adopting Resolution No. Motion carried 5-0. approve Sign Code 3123 as submitted. OLD BUSINESS: 6. Patio Home Development Standards Workshop Follow-up The Commission held a discussion with staff and Michael LeBlanc of the Irvine Company regarding decisions of the past workshop with the following conclusions: - That no more than 4 bedrooms would be acceptable. - That shared driveways would only be permitted at the end of private courts. By consensus, staff was instructed to schedule Draft Ordinance ZC 93-001, as revised, for future Planning Commission consideration. STAFF CONCERNS: 7. Report on actions taken at March 1, 1993 City Council meetinq Staff reported on the subject agenda. The Commissioners were reminded of a Beautification Committee meeting, March 9 at 6 p.m. at the Senior Center. Staff reminded the Commissioners that they should look over their materials for the upcoming League of California Cities Conference and that Rita Westfield would be accompanying them. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Weil - Commissioner Weil noted that she has been watching the activity concerning the E1 Toro closure list and wondered how the latest closures would affect it. Staff explained the latest mention on closures. Information on the actual closures would be forthcoming soon and would be given to the Commissioners when received. - Stated that she was recently informed that because of the narrowness and angle of the stairs at Sierra Vista in East Tustin and other three-story units there was little room to move large items like a refrigerator and large pieces of furniture, without the use of a fork lift; and wanted staff to be aware of these limitations for future policy making and standards. Commissioner Stracker - Noticed that a wall had been placed across from Tustin High School along freeway and wanted to know if some landscaping was planned to alleviate graffiti activity. Dana Kasdan of Engineering reported that the City has applied for State grants for trees and landscaping. - Mentioned that construction at Main and Prospect seemed to be going very smoothly for the traffic even with all the rain. He mentioned that staff has done a good job. Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1993 Page 11 Commissioner Butler - Asked who was in charge of choosing City Hall furniture. Staff responded that an employee task force had been in place for this purpose. Much of the existing furniture was being retrofitted for use and that product selection of the remaining furniture had been determined by the City staff with the input of the committee. Specifications were determined and all miscellaneous items were sent out for bid. The Commissioners were assured that the lobby waiting and entry area would be very pleasing to look at. Was concerned that there was no identification for staff at these meetings and wondered if this would be remedied with the move back to the permanent facility. Staff agreed that identification is desired and will look into acquiring this when the move is made. Commissioner Baker - Walt Fredrickson had called him today concerning the trailer and pipes placed next to the Hacienda buildings again. Dana Kasdan, Engineering Department, stated that Gary Veeh was already aware of the situation and that it would be eliminated by tomorrow. - Noted that staff planner, Sara Pashalides, had been written up for her good works in a copy of "Planner Today" and that he was very impressed with what she had accomplished. Commissioner Kasalek - In discussion brought about tonight concerning City Code and rock parking lots, she wondered how the schools fit into this situation. Staff stated that the schools are regulated by the State and that the City has no jurisdiction over them in this regard. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Baker moved, Butler seconded to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on March 22, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at the Tustin Senior Center, 200 S. "C" Street, Tustin. Marj6r~TKaS~I~ 2 - - Chairpe'~son Secretary