Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 11-23-92 MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 23~ 1992 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., Tust±n Senior Center PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Kasalek, Baker, Butler, Stracker and Weil PUBLIC CONCERNS: Absent: None (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 November 10, 1992 Planninq Commission meetinq. 2. Final Parcel MaD 91-265 APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: KEMPER REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT 3002 DOW AVENUE, SUITE 220 TUSTIN, CA 92680 ATTENTION: MR. STEVEN M. DUNN a PORTION OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 90-292 (JAMBOREE PLAZA) PLANNED COMMUNITY INDUSTRIAL THIS PROJECT IS CONSIDERED MINISTERIALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15268(b) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO CREATE NINE (9) NUMBERED LOTS AND FIVE (5) LETTERED LOTS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No.4010 recommending to the City Council approval of Final Parcel Map 91-265, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 2 Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to approve the Consent Calendar with the following correction to the minutes: Should read: "Commissioner Stracker asked if there would be windows on the north elevation. Staff noted that there would not be windows." Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Conditional U~ Permit 92-044 (Modificat$oD to Conditional Us~ Permit 91-00~ and Desiqn Review 90-23) APPLICANT: LAND OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL 655 B STREET TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 2111 BRYAN AVENUE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS-. REQUEST: THIS IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). AUTHORIZATION TO MODIFY THE SITE PLAN FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TEMPLE AND EDUCATIONAL FACILITY LOCATED AT 2111 BRYAN AVENUE. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 92-044 to authorize the modification to the site plan previously approved by Conditional Use Permit 91- 002 and Design Review 90-023 by adopting Resolution No. 4005, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Commissioner Weil questioned whether the Commissioners' plans had been updated regarding hydroseeding; and asked about the security lighting on the north elevation. Staff replied that the Conditions of Approval identify the compro- mise between the congregation and homeowners; that hydroseeding was considered low maintenance; that there will be one door with a downward-directed security light, possibly with a motion detector; and that the lighting meets the City's minimum requirements. Commissioner Strac~er asked if parking lot lighting was included. Staff affirmed, except for one parking area north of the multipurpose building where they may install decorative bollard lighting if photometric plans show the necessity. Commissioner Kasalek asked if the neighbors and congregation had met since the letter of November 19 that was in their packet. Staff replied that they met on the evening of the 19th and also the 22nd of November. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:06 p.m. Michael Schneider, chairman of the building committee of B'Nai Israel, complemented Sara Pashalides for her excellent and hard Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 3 working efforts and the Monterey Homeowners Association and resi- dents for their open-minded, cooperative attitude; that they have worked toward an agreeable conclusion. He continued with stating that they agreed to the hydroseeding; that they may install 4-5 foot pillar security lighting with possible motion sensors; that the drop off area is longer for a greater number of cars to queue; that they have eliminated the parking on the north side; that an official acoustical analysis had been performed; that they will have their landscaping and lighting plans in conformance with the requirements; and that the two-week delay was beneficial for all. Douq Wride, 2052 Burnt Mill Road, stated that he does not represent the Homeowners Association, only the concerned homeowners that back up to the temple; suggested that Attachment A was mistitled and should not refer to Monterey Homeowners Association; complemented the temple and the Commission for the two-week delay; that he agreed with Mr. Schneider and noted that they are content with the changes; and that communication had been built with the delay. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:14 p.m. Commissioner Weil stated that she was impressed with the communi- cation and consensus reached by those involved; and that she wished the whole world could be that way. Commissioner Stracker stated that he felt it was exciting when people discuss a project with a positive outcome; and that the homeowners should be enthused as they watch the temple being built. Commissioner Baker stated that it is not the 6-9 months during construction that is important, but the lifetime that they will live in their homes and the temple. Commissioner Butler agreed. Commissioner Kasalek stated that she was impressed with the temple's extremely generous attitude; that they have tried to start out being good neighbors. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 92-044 to authorize the modification to the site plan previously approved by Conditional Use Permit 91-002 and Design Review 90-023 by adopting Resolution No. 4005, as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. 4. Conditional Use Permit 92-043 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: VIVA BURRITO OF TUSTIN, INC. 17632 SEVENTEENTH STREET SUITE 104 TUSTIN, CA 92680 ATTN: TOM SERRAO NAKAI SHOJI USA CORPORATION % BRANDY FAKIER SEELEY/WOLFF 2020 QUAIL STREET NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92660 17582 SEVENTEENTH STREET, SUITE 104 PC-C (PLANNED COMMUNITY - COMMERCIAL) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3) PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15303 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 4 REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION FOR THE ON-SITE SALE OF BEER AND WINE FOR CONSUMPTION ON THE PREMISES (ABC LICENSE TYPE "41") IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT USE. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 92-043, requesting authorization for the on-site sale of beer and wine for consumption on premises only, by adopting Resolution No. 4009, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Butler asked why this location was not approved for an alcoholic beverage license upon initial opening. Staff replied that the current tenant took over the operation from the previous owner who did not have an alcoholic beverage license. Commissioner Stracker asked if tables would not be located outside. Staff affirmed. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:18 p.m. Tom Serrao, Operator of Viva Burrito, 17582 Seventeenth Street, Suite 104, stated that customers may eat by the big tree, but there will not be outside tables; that he is there from opening to close, six days per week, and there will be an employee over 21. Commissioner Baker asked if the hours of operation of 11-9 would be restricting in the future. Mr. Serrao replied that he does not intend to be open any later than these hours. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:20 p.m. Commissioner Strac~er noted that the adjacent businesses had the same license. Commissioner Baker stated that they were also for on-sight consumption. Commissioner Baker moved, Weil seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 92-043, requesting authorization for the on-site sale of beer and wine for consumption on premises only, by adopting Resolution No. 4009, as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. 5. Code Amendment 92-005 APPLICANT: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: SMART SMR OF CALIFORNIA, INC. 1335 SOUTH ACACIA FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 ATTENTION: ERIC MEARS CITYWIDE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL (PM) AND INDUSTRIAL (M) DISTRICTS; PLANNED COMMUNITY - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) TO AMEND THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATING TO PLANNED INDUSTRIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, AND PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR TWO INDUSTRIAL AREAS TO ALLOW ANTENNAS THAT ARE OPERATED FOR A USE NOT GRANTED A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY BY THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PERMITTED OR CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES Recommendation - Pleasure of the Commission Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Weil asked if these antennas were for cellular phones or if they were "generic." Staff replied that these would not be limited to cellular, but also for two-way radios; and that the amendment the operator was proposing was more for cellular and would be similar to monopoles proposed by PacTel. Commissioner Weil asked if these would be for sending and receiving; and how these antennas would affect the dish antenna guidelines. Staff affirmed and replied that the dish antennas were for individual users; that this is for communication companies who provide services, i.e., trucking companies and paging networks. Commissioner Stracker asked where the antennas would be located. Staff replied that the applicant is looking at a site on Myford Road; but that the amendment would make available the industrial district. Commissioner Stracker asked who would utilize this service; and if franchises are provided. Staff referred to the applicant. Commissioner Baker noted that Channel 40 transmits from the industrial district along Myford; and asked if these antennas would look similar; and if a 65 foot lattice-type structure could be installed within 100 feet of a residence. Staff replied that they envisioned the antennas to be similar to what is already installed, and not large satellite dishes; and that a lattice or mono-pole structure is a function of the structural integrity. Commissioner Butler asked for a clarification as to whether they would only be approved at the Community Development level if they are not visible; asked how the FCC is involved in the height limits; and if there are other cities where these antennas have been approved. Staff affirmed that, under the staff approval process, they could not be visible from street right-of-way unless approved through the conditional use permit process; that the Browning Corridor has a 50 foot height limit which requires the military's input into the process; and that some other cities either treat these antennas as a public utility, or do not regulate them. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:30 p.m. Eric Mears, representing Smart SMR, 1335 S. Acacia, Fullerton, stated that they lease or sell service of the antenna system to trucking systems, taxi companies, tow trucks, and ambulances that have a two-way communication system; that the antennas would be similar to those used by PacTel; that they do not currently use microwave dishes, but that they were included in the illustrations Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 6 to indicate types of communication that might be used; and that they hook directly into a laid line telephone. Commissioner Bu~e~ asked about the reference to a hum in the system; and asked staff if approval of this would allow any type of humming equipment, or could it be denied based on noise. Mr. Mears replied that they do not propose any antennas that hum; that a hum usually comes from a microwave dish. Staff replied that they would have to meet the City's Noise Ordinance; and that a Condition of Approval would allow the Commission to condition or mitigate the noise; that the hum would probably not be audible off the premises since there is a 100 foot separation required. Commissioner Butl~ stated that this applicant's equipment sounds harmless, but was concerned about others. Commissioner Baker stated that a receiver should not consume a great deal of energy. Mr. Mears replied that they would be able to transmit and receive; and operates on a very low power. Commissioner Wei~ asked if they anticipated any TV, radio, or telephone interference. Mr. Mears replied that they operate on their own frequency band which makes it impossible to interfere; and that they are prohibited by the FCC to interfere. Commissioner Stracker asked if they were looking at any current sites in Tustin. Mr. Mears replied that they were looking at a site on Myford Road, which they may not pursue; that they are interested in the code amendment for future needs; and that their system is planned for a 20 year growth rate. Commissioner Stracker suggested that their technology might be outdated within 20 years. Mr. Mears replied that they are using state-of-the-art equipment and do not foresee technical changes, but will respond to changes, as necessary. Guido Borges, President of Laurelwood Homeowners Association, stated that they were not specifically concerned with the proposed use, but with the vagueness of the code amendment; that 65 foot antennas 100 feet away from residences will tower over the community; that cellular phone antennas in commercial areas are fine, but Laurelwood and Peppertree are adjacent to the industrial complexes; and that this code amendment does not address the residents' concerns. He continued with stating that the code does not address the issue of the antenna being within view of homeowners; that there is a concern of electromagnetic fields since there is to be substantial electrical use; that there is a reference to possible severe noise levels; that the code amendment would allow humming antennas; that the community has not had enough time to digest this issue; and would like the item to be continued to allow the residents to address the issue. Commissioner Butler asked what would be a comfortable distance separation requirement. Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 7 Mr. Borges replied that it would depend upon the type of antenna; that an antenna deep within the industrial area would not be seen or be a problem; but that the wording allows the City full reign to approve any type of antenna; that since he is not an engineer, he hesitated to give an allowable distance; and stated that the ordinance is too vague. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:46 p.m. Commissioner Stracker stated that he was concerned with changing the zoning code for future uses that may or may not happen; that he was concerned with the 100 foot distance within the residential area; and suggested continuation with a discussion or workshop. Commissioner Weil agreed that the Community has not had time to digest the item; that the dish antenna guidelines were worked out for weeks; that the new Council is dedicated to communicating with the Community and that their concerns need to be addressed; and suggested continuing the item to inform the Community. Commissioner Butler asked staff if the Commission still has the right of design review for visible towers. Staff clarified that the proposal is for an antenna that is not visible from the public right-of-way to be considered a permitted use with the ability to be approved at staff level through the plan check process; but where an antenna is visible from a public right- of-way, the design criteria would be subject to the Conditional Use Permit process requiring a public hearing and notification. Commissioner Butler asked if language could be added so that humming would be subject to a certain distance; suggested that would be a possible reason for continuing the matter; and noted a typing error on Page 4, Section 2 A of Exhibit A. Staff replied that they were not prepared to offer appropriate language; and noted the error. Commissioner Baker agreed with Commissioners Weil and Stracker; noted that what is not seen will not hurt, but only two people spoke on this issue out of 1000 possible; that more Community representation is needed. Commissioner Kasalek agreed and stated that the necessary communication was not made; that she is concerned with the possibility of the antennas being visible from balconies or second floor windows, even though not officially visible from the street; that she was not convinced that the eighth page ad was sufficient; that people adjacent to the industrial district were concerned that they were not notified; that 100 feet from the residences is not adequate; that there are concerns mentioned in the EIR; that a Conditional Use Permit may be necessary on all applications; and suggested continuing the item until the industrial owners and residents have had time to review the matter, unless a CUP is required for each case. Commissioner Weil suggested continuing the matter until the next meeting; and asked if there was an antenna manufacturers' association to provide technical information. The Public Hearing was re-opened at 7:58 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 8 Eric Mears stated that there are several manufacturers, but was not sure about an association; and stated that it could be researched; and that PacTel or LA Cellular are possible sources for information. Commissioner Stracker asked if they applied for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. Mr. Mears replied that they are not manifested under the Public Utilities Commission; noted that anything visible would be subject to Planning Commission approval; and that 65 feet is relatively short, although the visual impact is important. Commiss3oner Kasa%e~ stated that she was concerned that the wording in the amendment is insufficient. The Public Hearing was re-closed at 8:02 p.m. Commissioner Weil asked if this project could be started without the code amendment. Staff replied negatively; and noted that PacTel is licensed with the PUC and has the right to install in any district without a CUP. Commissioner Baker noted that they are dealing with the comfort level of the Commission; and that dialogue needs to be provided to allow for answers for a decision. Commissioner Stracker stated that they are a sounding board for the Council, and, at this point, have too many unanswered questions. Commissioner Kasalek asked if it was possible to notify residents individually or if it would be a major expense; and was concerned that the agendas homeowner presidents receive may be too vague to indicate the impact of the matter. Staff replied that it would be a large undertaking that would need to be done consistently; that they are dealing with four different project areas, of which some could be removed from the ordinance; that it would take time for the applicant to provide labels for individual mailing; that it would be unlikely to receive anything before January; and that some information could possibly be provided for the December 14 meeting. Commissioner Baker asked if the Marine Base considers this compatible with their requirements. Staff replied that the military was comfortable with the amendment so long as they have the same review authority through the CUP. Commissioner Kasa~ asked for a consensus regarding notification of the homeowners. Commissioner Baker agreed with notification of the homeowners. Commissioner Weil asked if the staff report or agenda only is received. Commissioner Kasa%ek asked if all association presidents receive the agenda. Staff replied that there are many homeowners groups within the city, but only a few receive a copy of the agenda, upon request. The Public Hearing was re-opened at 8:09 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 9 Mr. Borqes stated that he only received the agenda, which listed the applicant, but not the potential mitigations or impacts; that the staff report he picked up was deficient; that the affected homeowner associations should be notified and receive the staff report; that the agenda does not cover the consequences and impacts. The Public Hearing was re-closed at 8:10 p.m. Commissioner Baker suggested notifying the affected homeowners associations and continue the item for two weeks. Commissioner Kasalek asked if there were any homeowner association located downtown; and if the newspaper would be renoticed. Staff replied that there would be no further notice of the downtown area since they will not renotice the newspaper if it is continued to a date certain. Commissioner Weil asked if a condition could be made to require the antenna to be located close to the freeway. Staff replied that the Commission could require that; and suggested agendizing for the first meeting in January; and that this would not have a significant impact on this applicant. Commissioner Butler suggested directing staff to investigate an acceptable distance from homes; that there are many places to locate without being within 100 feet of residences; that language could be added to limit regarding line of sight; and that the code amendment should cover all industrial areas. Commissioner Kasalek wanted assurances that there are no unhappy residents; and that they need to communicate. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to continue this item to the January 11, 1993 Planning Commission meeting due to Laurelwood Homeowners Association protest. Motion carried 5-0. OLD BUSINESS: 6. Status Report Receive and file Commissioner Butler asked about the 16 units on the reserve lot as noted on page 4. Staff replied that there is a reservation lot needing to be released, that is held for flood control and Browning overcrossing; that the Browning overcrossing looks unnecessary, but will be part of the General Plan Update. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to receive and file the subject report. 7. Eastern Transportation Corridor Update Mr. Ledendecker reported on the subject project. Commissioner Weil asked what type of toll booths would be installed. Robert Ledendecker replied that they would be the smart card type; that the transportation agencies awarded the contract to Lockheed; Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 10 and that cars will be equipped with transponders to register the toll. Commissioner Butler suggested renaming the northwest and east legs; asked if the east leg will continue past the 133 to the 405; and if all land was acquired. Mr. Ledendecker stated that the leg names were for convenience of agencies and that each route will have a State route number and name; that it will turn into the 133 and interchange with the 405; and that the land will be acquired when environmentally cleared. NEW BUSINESS: 8. Sign Code Exception 91-01 APPLICANT: CHEVRON U.S.A, INC. P.O. BOX 2833 LA HABRA, CA 90632 REPRESENTATIVE/ AGENT: GREER ENGINEERING CO. 2323 W. LINCOLN AVENUE #119 ANAHEIM, CA 92801 OWNER: CHEVRON PRODUCTS INC. P.O. BOX 2833 LA }{ABRA, CA 90632 LOCATION: 14082 NEWPORT AVENUE ZONING: COMMERCIAL RETAIL (C-i) DISTRICT REQUEST: TO MODIFY THE SIGN CABINET NONCONFORMING POLE SIGN OF AN EXISTING Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny Sign Code Exception 92-008 by adopting Resolution No. 3100, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Weil stated that the freeway frontage road should allow the station to have a freeway sign. Staff replied that the site is not technically adjacent to the freeway. Commissioner Baker asked for a clarification of changing of copy as opposed to changing the sign. Staff replied that change of the plexiglass constitutes change of copy versus change of sign cabinet. Bob Fiscus, 2050 S. Santa Cruz, Anaheim, stated that revision of the sign was to reduce the size and amount of signs by 30-40% and reduce sign pollution; that the business is dependent upon freeway access, location and traffic; that this would be an opportunity to do the citizens a favor by reducing the sign size. Commissioner Kasalek asked if the pole would be visible from the freeway if reduced to 24 feet. Mr. Fiscus replied that it was visible prior to the modification of the freeway, but not now. Commissioner Weil stated that this may not technically be a freeway sign, but the height needs to remain due to the sound walls which are cutting Tustin off from the freeway; that this is an unusual circumstance; that semantics are involved regarding the structural Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 11 change; that she was willing to go along with the applicant; and that the business environment needs all the help it can get. CommissioDer Ba~er stated that he appreciated staff's opinion, but would approve the sign reduction and retain the height, since the applicant would keep the pole height, no matter what. Commissioner Butler stated that he was in support of Chevron's willingness to reduce the sign size; that a new cabinet would be more expensive than plexiglass, but would vote for a new sign. Commissioner Stracker stated that he recently challenged Chevron to keep up beautification of their stations and work with the City; that he does not like the sign litter around the City; but that this should be considered an assistance to the motoring public. Commissioner Kasalek stated that she was generally for reducing sign height, but felt that this would be worthless if reduced. Staff suggested continuing the item to the next meeting to provide necessary language for approval. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to approve Sign Code Exception 92-008. Staff will bring a resolution of approval back to the Commission at their next meeting. Motion carried 5-0. 9. Design Review 92-049 APPLICANT/ LAND OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: HOBIE DESIGNS, INC. 1030 CALLE SOMBRO, #B SAN CLEMENTE, CA 92672 14312 CHAMBERS ROAD PLANNED COMMUNITY INDUSTRIAL THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AUTHORIZATION TO DEVIATE FROM THE IRVINE INDUSTRIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND TO CHANGE THE USE RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY AS ESTABLISHED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1538. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Design Review 92-049 to deviate from the landscape requirements and to change the use of the property by adopting Resolution No. 4008, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Commissioner Stracker asked if this was the same owner that had the original project. Staff replied negatively and noted that the owner was unaware of the deed restriction. Jeff Alter, Hobie Designs, Inc., representing Hobie Alter and Robert Driver, stated that they were unaware of the problem. Commissioner Kasalek asked if they anticipated any problems from the neighbors regarding the landscaping since this was not noticed. MF. ~lter replied that much of the landscaping is not required and could be thinned. Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 12 Commissioner Butler asked if this was being designed to sell. Mr. Alter replied that they are designing it to be leasable; that a 24,000 square foot building only allowing 21 employees is unleasable; that they discovered the deed restriction upon title search; and that it has been vacant for a couple of years. Commissioner BakeF was concerned about the elimination of the eucalyptus trees, but felt it was necessary in this case. Commissioner Stracker asked if the dumpster would be repaired. Mr. Alter replied that the dumpster would be repaired as well as the parking lot; that he appreciated the support; and asked if they could bond around the requirement to install a sidewalk. Staff responded that, so that sidewalks are not installed on a piecemeal basis, the City Council has taken an action to request owners enter into an agreement which may require an assessment district; and that the installation requirement is relaxed at this time so the owners can enter into the agreement. Commissioner Stragker asked if it was possible to condition this item so the applicant could not protest an assessment district. John Shaw, City Attorney, replied negatively. Commissioner Stracker asked which two front parking spaces would be eliminated; if the others would be handicapped spaces; and requested positive guidance of striping. Staff replied that there would be one off of each side on the north and side property lines; affirmed regarding handicapped spaces; that there is not adequate separation in the drive aisle; that the landscaping needs to be eliminated adjacent to the property line and the building; and that fire zones would be red striped. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded to approve Design Review 92-049 to deviate from the landscape requirements and to change the use of the property by adopting Resolution No. 4008, as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. 10. NCCP Update Receive and file. Commissioner Butler asked if there was any progress with the delayed property development. Staff replied that there would be no progress until the mitigation measures were prepared to deal with the subregion; and that Peter's Canyon Regional Park may be able to serve as the regional area for the birds. Commissioner Weil asked if the City anticipates any costs or manpower hours required. Staff replied that there would be no cost involved, but some manpower to coordinate the agreements. Commissioner Weil moved, Baker seconded to receive and file the update. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 13 ST~,FF CONCERNS: 11. Report on actions taken at November 16, 1992 ¢%ty Council meeting Staff inquired if there were any questions about the City Council Action Agenda. Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to cancel the second meeting in December. Motion carried 5-0. CO~MISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Butler -Inquired about faulty street lights and if they could affect a radio. Staff informed the Commission that the street lights were the property of Edison and that they would be notifying them of any faulty lights. Staff also noted that the lights have no affect on radios. Commissioner Baker -Informed staff that the property on the corner of First Street and Newport Avenue is in a state of disorder. Staff will follow up on code enforcement of the property. -Wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. Commissioner Stracker -Inquired about parking on the Christmas tree lot at the Auto Mate site on Nisson and Red Hill Staff noted that vehicles will be parking off of Nisson Road at the backside of the lot. Commissioner Weil -Asked staff to set up a joint meeting with the City Council to discuss items of policy and general concern. Commissioner Kasalek -Noted that she did not receive a copy of City Council report on an item where she was directly concerned until after the meeting. Robert Ledendecker apologized to Commissioner Kasalek for the oversight. AI)JOU~NT: Commissioner Baker moved, Kasalek seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. There is a Planning Commission General Plan Workshop scheduled for November 30th at 5:30 p.m. at the Tustin Senior Center. Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992 Page 14 The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on December 14, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. in the Tustin Senior Center at 200 S. "C" Street, Tustin. ~a ~ ~r ~e/~ s a~l~ v _ Cha i rpeY~s o n Ka'thleen Clancy Secretary