Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 07-13-92MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 13v 1992 CALL TO ORDER: 7:02 p.m., Tustin Senior Center PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Baker, Le Jeune, Kasalek and Weil Kasparian 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: (ALLMATTERS 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 June 22, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasalek seconded to approve Consent Calendar with the minutes revised as follows: the Page 5, Item #6, first commission comment is attributed to Commissioner Weil, should be Commissioner Kasalek. Motion carried 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2. Conditional Use Permit 92-019 APPLICANT: OWNERS: STEPHEN D. PAQUETTE 10542 GREENBRIER ROAD SANTA ANA, CA 92705 NORMAN FRITZ 15734 NEWTON STREET HACIENDA HEIGHTS, CA 91745 LOCATION: 135 SOUTH PROSPECT AVENUE ZONING: FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN - COMMERCIAL AS A PRIMARY USE ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 2 REQUEST: AMEND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-010 TO ALLOW FOR CHANGES IN OPERATING CONDITIONS Recommendation - At the request of the applicant, it is recommended that the Planning Commission continue this item to their regularly scheduled meeting of August 10, 1992. Presentation: Anne E. Bonner, Associate Planner Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Weil seconded to continue this item to the regularly scheduled meeting of August 10, 1992. Motion carried 4-0. 3. Large Family Day Care Home (LFD 92-002) APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: SOCORRO M. JONES 13022 RANCHWOOD ROAD TUSTIN, CA 92680 ROBERT G. DAWSON 5171 VIA MARCOS YORBA LINDA, CA 92687 13022 RANCHWOOD ROAD R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO OPERATE A LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME Recommendation - It is recommended that the Commission approve LFD 92-002 by adopting Resolution No. 3056, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Anne E. Bonner, Associate Planner Commissioner Le Jeune asked counsel for opinion of letter received dated July 9. John Shaw, City Attorney, replied that he had reviewed the letter but not the CCRs and would like to review them; he recommended continuing the item so that he could evaluate the case authorities cited; and to provide time for a written legal opinion. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:09 p.m. Duane Patterson, 13152 Laburnum Drive, expressed his support for the applicant by noting that the children were well-behaved and constantly supervised; that parking problems were exaggerated; that the Barrett's driveway was never blocked; that the speeding vehicles were unproven as clients of the applicant; and that the children are not climbing the fence or running in the street. Christina Rose, 16331 Mc Fadden Avenue, #3, stated that she is content with the service; that she has been harassed by the neighbor; had to leave her car on the street in front of the neighbor's house when she had car trouble; that she drops off her child and leaves; and wants this day care center to continue. Susan Kenison, 13031 Ranchwood, owns property nearby, stated that she has never noticed a problem; that the house is well-kept; the kids are never outside and never create noise; would want someone like Ms. Jones if she needed a sitter; and the children seem happy; and that the neighborhood has forgotten how important a good child care center is for the children. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 3 Ernest Barrett, 13032 Ranchwood Road, Tustin, stated that he is a 23 year resident; that he lives next door to the applicant and purchased his house in a residential neighborhood; presented photographs of activities at the applicant's including a garage sale with a "thrift store atmosphere," four (4) vehicles in the driveway blocking the garage door which is designated as a fire escape, and more than one client dropping off children at one time; he complained about the garage being filled with commercial merchandise and being used as a warehouse; that the City Code requires: off street parking for two (2) cars per lot; that the operator provide an immediately adjacent parking zone drop- off/pick-up and one (1) space for each employee which are not available. He continued with stating that there are cars parking immediately in front of his property, leaving oil in the street; that drop off's have blocked his driveway; that this hearing is being held due to complaints of the neighbors because this has become more than a nuisance, that it is now an intolerable situation and that the City Code provides that the City will not license an operation that is a nuisance to the neighborhood; that the neighbors should have had the opportunity for a hearing before her license was granted; and that there is no evidence that the building is in compliance with the fire code. Susan Wilson, 2353 Paseo Circulo, Tustin, stated that she has been using the applicant for seven (7) months; that she received information about her service from City of Tustin mailer regarding child care services; that she is there for five (5) minutes in the morning and afternoon; that the children are well-behaved; and she is happy with their care. Janet S. Hart, 13042 Ranchwood Road, Tustin, stated that she lives two doors down from the applicant, and that she chose the neighborhood for the family character and pride of ownership; that the issue is not the quality of care but commercial use of private property; that her concern is increased traffic flow and speed as referred to in her letter of July 6; that children are playing in the neighborhood at risk due to the traffic; that there are 65 child care services in the 92680 area and 10 in 92705 which constitute other choices to this location; and that her driveway is not available for parking and that the staff report offered parking three and four doors down without courtesy of a public hearing notice to those residents. Celia Valencia, 13122 Dean Street, Mrs. Jones daughter complained abut the neighbors' behavior towards her; that the many of the items in the garage are her personal items and that she will be moving shortly. Robert Dawson, 5171 Via Marcos, Yorba Linda, 92687, owner of the property, stated that he lived there for 12 years and is aware of the CCRs which have been inconsistently applied; that his property is managed by a professional service and is checked frequently; that he provided his complete support for the tenant; and that he did not feel it was the day care that was at issue, but the number of cars in the driveway and garage sales. He continued with stating that the applicant has rented for over one (1) year and up until two months ago, he never received any complaints about the tenant; that he has never seen cars in front of the adjacent property on driving by at least one and one-half times per week; that he had to evict the previous tenants due to sanitary conditions, non-payment of rent, and destruction of property without complaint from the neighbors; that the applicant's previous neighbors were sorry to see her leave which speaks well of her character; that she keeps the property clean and it would be Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 4 unfortunate for her to lose her license and have to move over a perceived inconvenience. Shelly Anderson, 1777 Mitchell Avenue, #57, Tustin, stated that the applicant has cared for her two (2) children for two years; and felt that eleven cars in the morning and evening would not make a difference on the flow of traffic in that neighborhood. Gerald Feldman, 13191 Wickshire Lane, Tustin, Chairman Bellewick Community Association, commented on the CCRs of the Association by stating that the applicant was informed that garage sales of commercial goods each weekend were not allowed and that she ceased her weekly sales; that a recent sale may have prompted the latest complaint; that the driveway is sometimes full, sometimes empty, depending when driving by; that the Association follows the City of Tustin's guidelines for home businesses; that people must obtain a business license; cited Resolution 3065, Article I, Section D, and noted that it does not address a possible diminution of property values which might be considered a nuisance; that for the size of the house, six (6) children might be a better number. Walter Domino, 13041 Ranchwood, stated that he was against this business since this is a residential neighborhood; and that this type of business should be located in a commercial neighborhood with adequate parking. Socorro M. Jones, 13022 Ranchwood, applicant, stated that this meeting was not due to the day care service, but that a neighbor stated on June 27 that "she had no business living in that house, and should move, because she was a renter." That she has been harassed and that the problem is a racial discrimination and not related to the day care. Jeff Richardson, stated that he lives at the property with his wife, the applicant's daughter; that cars are allowed to be parked in the driveway; that they have never done anything to bother the neighbor; that they are near Irvine Boulevard and the traffic problem is due to other vehicles, not the day care clients. Janet Hart rebutted Mrs. Jones comments, and stated that her only meeting with her was to discuss the garage sale issue and commercial use of property. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:58 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune asked about the City's rules regarding garage sales. Staff replied that garage sales are allowed four (4) times in the calendar year on not more than two (2) consecutive weekends; that they respond on a complaint basis; and that there is no record of a problem at this location. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that there are many day care issues, and that the state encourages homes for day care use; that the traffic issue seems to be more of an enforcement problem than an issue against the day care center; that there is nothing specific that would preclude him voting for the applicant; and would want staff to address the enforcement issues. Commissioner Kasalek stated that many of the issues presented were not day care issues, but code enforcement items that should be worked out with the neighbors; that the street is for public parking; and that a day care is to be considered a residential use. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 5 Staff affirmed that State codes indicate that the City cannot require a day care to obtain a business license. John Shaw stated that the State Code considers this a residential use; and that he wants to respond in writing, but that the State law will probably pre-empt the City. Commissioner Kasalek continued with indicating that the traffic problems may be due to cut-through traffic; and that the garage sale business is separate from the day care use. Commissioner Weil stated that the State has mandated that they allow large family day care centers in residential neighborhoods; that a major issue seems to be traffic; that the applicant has a family to provide residence for due to the economic climate; that people may not be comfortable with the situations, but cannot turn their children into the street; that applicant should show sensitivity to the neighbors when clients arrive; that some of the traffic may not be due to the day care; that many of the problems are unrelated and a good day care center is hard to find; and that due to the State stipulations, there was no evidence presented to vote against the day care. Commissioner Baker stated that he sat out in front of the house to watch the activity; has been a child care user in the past; that there was no complaint about noise; that the complaints have been about traffic and antagonism between the neighbors; that they are mandated by the State, with little decision making power; and that it behooves the applicant to be a good neighbor. Commissioner Weil noted that it may be an asset, not a detriment, to a property to have a local day care center in the neighborhood. Commissioner Le Jeune suggested ruling on this and making it a consent calendar item instead of continuing it. John Shaw, stated that it could be continued or a decision could be made based upon an affirmative legal opinion. Commissioner Baker asked if the neighbors present would need to return to the next meeting. Staff replied that they could notify those who spoke and anyone who leaves their name and address. Commissioner Weil and Baker asked for clarification of the decision. John Shaw replied that final decision should be rendered this evening, subject to the provision that the matter would be brought back if counsel renders legal opinion that finds that the CCRs constitute an impairment to the Commission's decision making authority; and that the appeal should be postponed until the opinion is written and Commission is notified. Commissioner Baker clarified the issue by stating that the item would be voted on, subject to Counsel's opinion to the contrary, and an opinion would be published within the next two weeks and brought back as an Old Business Item. Commissioner Le Jeune asked when counsel would have an opinion rendered. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 6 John Shaw replied that it would be written by the end of the week, and would then be able to advise the residents. Staff stated that residents would have up until July 20 to appeal the decision; that it must be filed with the Community Development Department at the City Offices at 15222 Del Amo, written or in person, without a fee. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasalek seconded to approve LFD 92-002 by adopting Resolution No. 3056 subject to City Attorney opinion. Motion carried 4-0. 4. Conditional Use Permit 92-020 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: RICK HARRINGTON 8622 ORANGE AVENUE ORANGE, CA 92667 PHILIP COX PO BOX 10 MYERS FLAT, CA 95554 425 EL CAMINO REAL C-2(P) AND CR (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH COMBINING PARKING DISTRICT AND CULTURAL RESOURCE DISTRICT) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) SECTION 15301 PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUEST: 1. AUTHORIZATION TO SELL BEER AND WINE FOR ON- AND OFF-SITE CONSUMPTION (ABC LICENSE TYPE 41) IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COFFEE HOUSE; AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE LIVE ENTERTAINMENT AND TO PROVIDE AN OUTDOOR SEATING AREA Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 92-020 by adopting Resolution No. 3057 as submitted or revised. Presentation: Anne E. Bonner, Associate Planner Commissioner Weil asked how this business fits into the RU/DAT program. Staff replied that the intention of the RU/DAT is to create ways to encourage people to use the downtown area. Commissioner Kasalek asked why the applicant is requesting off-site alcohol sales; and how would outside drinking be monitored. Staff replied that a Type 41 license would allow on- and off-site sales; and that this applicant wishes to have flexibility to sell fine wines from his collection; that this property does not meet requirements for outside consumption; and signs would be posted and the operator would be responsible for monitoring. Commissioner Weil asked the hours of operation; and was concerned about the seating and parking with entertainment. Staff replied that they would be opening early, but referred to the applicant. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:28 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 7 Gayle Ackerman, 14752 Foxcroft, speaking for Assistance League of Tustin, stated that they were in favor of his business; informed the Commission that the Assisteens and other classes meet in the evenings, and asked if the youths would be excluded from frequenting the business if alcohol were served on evenings that it was not prohibited; stated that they were concerned about the amount of parking; that it is a long walk to the City lot. She continued with requesting staff review the prospect of creating a walkway to the City lot through City-owned property at 434 E1 Camino Real to make it more accessible. Rick Harrinqton, applicant, 8622 N. Orange, Orange, stated that the student evenings would be provided as an alternative entertainment spot for young people, and would be willing to comply with restrictions to ensure alcohol not be served and provide supervision; that the other businesses in the center will close prior to 8:00 p.m. which will free up spaces as well as on-street parking; that he would be willing to make lease arrangements with the City for parking in the City lot, but asked if the monthly payments would be waived. Staff indicated that the waiver of parking fees was to be discussed with the Redevelopment Agency. Commissioner Weil asked the hours of operation. Mr. Harrinqton replied that the restaurant would be open from 6:30 to midnight or 1:00 p.m.; most entertainment would be on Friday and Saturday with long hours; and would be available at least one night per week for young people. Commissioner Baker asked if they would have video machines; and about off-site sale of liquor. Mr. Harrinqton replied negatively to video machines; and that he would like to sell fine wines. Commissioner Weil stated that off-site sales usually accompany full-scale restaurants; and that he is asking for special consideration by not having to prepare foods on the premises. Mr. Harrinqton replied that he will now be preparing foods on the premises and serving a modest breakfast, lunch and dinner. Commissioner Kasalek asked about bathroom facilities; and asked staff for a clarification of access to the parking structure via the City-owned property. Mr. Harrinqton replied that there will be two (2) handicapped bathrooms; and that Health Department-required plan changes will be submitted within approximately three (3) days. The Assistant Director replied that there were no plans at present for access, and it would be premature to answer. Commissioner Baker asked the cost of ten (10) spaces at the City parking structure. Staff replied that it was based on the assessed value of the land but other leases cost approximately $35 per month per space; the applicant is requesting a waiver of the fees; and that the RU/DAT indicated that the parking structure must be more accessible. T · -r ........... . -~r Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 8 Commissioner Weil asked how to prioritize the development of improved access. Staff replied that it requires money and there is a budget crisis. Commissioner Baker suggested the applicant and neighbors contact the City Council with their concerns. Commissioner Kasalek suggested additional location of the public parking lot. signage indicating Mr. Harrington asked for a clarification of available street parking; and noted that he hopes to help stimulate business in the area. Commissioner Weil replied that the City was concerned with future growth and noted that each applicant would have similar requests. Ms. Ackerman stated that the Assistance League utilizes the parking spaces in the center, on the street, and in the public lot many nights during the week. Commissioner Kasalek asked for a clarification of the off-site sales proposed, and if it would be restricted to fine wines. Staff replied that a restriction could be imposed. Commissioner Le Jeune suggested that it be specific, as with the Greek Restaurant. Commissioner Weil suggested restricting off-site sales; requested hours of operation be added; and that a sign be required indicating additional parking at the public lot. Commissioner Kasalek asked about hours of entertainment. Mr. Harrinqton replied that he would like to be open from 6:30 until 2:00 a.m.; and that entertainment would cease around midnight. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:55 p.m. Commissioner Kasalek asked if the Commission should require a sign be installed prohibiting outside alcohol consumption, or if it was an ABC requirement. Staff replied that it was an ABC regulation. Commissioner Weil stated that this is a Conditional Use Permit and suggested neighbors call with complaints. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Weil seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 92-020 by adopting Resolution No. 3057 revised as follows: Exhibit A, Page 1, Add Item 1.6 to read: "Applicant shall provide signage within the tenant space advising patrons of the availability of parking in the City's parking structure." Exhibit A, Page 2, Add additional sentence to Condition 3.3 to read: "The menu of the coffee house shall consist of foods that are prepared on the premises." Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 9 Exhibit A, Page 2, Add Condition 3.10 to read as follows: "Sale of alcohol for off-site consumption is limited to the sale of wine. This use permit shall not authorize the sale of beer for off-site consumption." Motion carried 4-0. 5. Conditional Use Permit 92-022 APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: THE IRVINE COMPANY PO BOX I NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8904 TUSTIN RANCH PROJECT AREA PC - EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) SECTION 15311 PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO AMEND THE MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE TUSTIN RANCH PROJECT ARE PROVIDING FOR THE PLACEMENT OF FLAGS AT NEW MODEL HOME AND APARTMENT SITES Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 92-022 by adopting Resolution No. 3058 as submitted or revised. Presentation: Anne E. Bonner, Associate Planner Commissioner Baker asked if continuing the discussion would require another CUP. apartment flag Staff replied that it will be renoticed, but will not require another CUP; and that it would be brought back August 10 as an amendment. Commissioner Weil asked for revisions to the resolution limiting height, size and number of flags. Staff revised the resolution regarding size, height, and number of flags, as moved. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:05 p.m. Norm Smith, Irvine Company, 550 Newport Center Drive, agreed with the changes proposed. Commissioner Le Jeune asked how many complexes would be affected. Mr. Smith replied that there are currently 7-8 home and 4-5 apartment sites. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:07 p.m. Commissioner Weil stated that she was in favor of the application; and that it was good for the Company, City and prospective buyers. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that the current Sign Code prohibits flags on a permanent basis. Staff replied that the City's Code would limit use on a temporary basis of 180 days. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 10 Commissioner Baker asked if this was a special privilege. Staff replied negatively; and that the Irvine Company was only requesting the flags on a larger scale than already allowed. Commissioner Weil moved, Kasalek seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 92-022 by adopting Resolution No. 3058 revised as follows: Exhibit A, Page 1, Add condition #3.3 to read as follows: "Conditional Use Permit approval authorizes the display of decorative flags measuring eighteen (18) square feet, attached to nineteen (19) foot high poles in groupings of a maximum of six (6) per project site." Motion carried 4-0. 6. 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. 2985 to allow a six-month extension of Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 by adopting Resolution No. 3054, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner The Public Hearing was opened at 9:10 p.m. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:11 p.m. Commissioner Kasalek considered this a reasonable request due to the amount of money tied up in the project. Commissioner Baker asked if there were any pending projects in the same situation. Staff replied that the Tustin Ranch Plaza would also be requesting a continuation, citing market conditions for the delay. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Weil seconded to approve a modification to Condition No. 1.1 of Resolution No. 2985 to allow a six-month extension of Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 by adopting Resolution No. 3054, as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. 7. Conditional Use Permit 92-017 APPLICANT: CHEVRON U.S.A, INC. P.O. BOX 2833 LA HABRA, CA 90632 REPRESENTATIVE/ AGENT: BURKE ENTERPRISES 16182 GOTHARD #M HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647-3642 LANDOWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: WILDE MANAGEMENT GROUP ONE CIVIC PLAZA, SUITE 150 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 17241 SEVENTEENTH STREET RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-l) DISTRICT Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 11 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 (CLASS 3) REQUEST: TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A VSAT ANTENNA (COMMUNICATION DISH ANTENNA) Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 92-017 by adoption of Resolution No. 3055, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Weil asked if there was any response to notice. Staff replied negatively. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that the Commission had previously suggested staff process these applications. The Assistant Director replied that the recommendation would require a code amendment which they have not had time to process. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:14 p.m. Stewart Gelfand, representing Burke Enterprises, introduced himself. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:15 p.m. Commissioner Weil stated that she was in favor of the item as it was similar to previous requests. Commissioner Kasalek moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 92-017 by adoption of Resolution No. 3055 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. OLD BUSINESS: NEW BUSINESS: 8. Design Review 92-033 APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA 1156 NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE P.O. BOX 670 UPLAND, CA 91785-5008 LOTS 7 & 8, TRACT 13627 EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) APPROVAL OF MINOR ALTERATIONS TO THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Design Review 92-033, amending Design Review 91-014, by adopting Resolution No. 3059, as submitted, or revised. Presentation: Anne E. Bonner, Associate Planner Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 12 Commissioner Weil approved the simpler architectural lines presented. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasalek seconded to approve Design Review 92-033, amending Design Review 91-014, by adopting Resolution No. 3059 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. STAFF CONCERNS: 9. Report on actions taken at July 6, 1992 City Council meetinq Staff inquired if there were any questions about the subject agenda. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Le Jeune -Inquired about pole signs at bank on First Street and Newport Avenue. Also, commented about the number of directional signs and the identification sign for Sun West bank in the vicinity of First Street and Centennial Way. -Inquired about the status of restriping at the Alpha Beta center on Red Hill Avenue. -Reported on a gas station with a large amount of advertising signage. Commissioner Kasalek -Inquired about bike lanes for Red Hill Avenue between the 5 Freeway and Edinger Avenue Commissioner Weil -Gave article from The Register to staff regarding tall shelves in stores and warehouses. Requested that this be addressed in the seismic element of the General Plan or other appropriate document. -Inquired about a liquor license for DIHO Market. Chairman Baker -Inquired about painting of the antenna at the Police Department. -Invited and reminded everyone about the Taste of Tustin on July 26. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 1992 Page 13 ~JOURNMENT: Commissioner Weil moved, Le Jeune seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:28 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on July 27, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. in the Tustin Senior Center at 200 "C" Street, Tustin, CA 92680. A: L.' ~ker Chairman Kathleen Clancy Secretary