Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-09-92H'r NUT E S TUSTIN PY.,~ING COI~SS~ON RE~UI.~RHEET~N~ M~RCH 9, 1992 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Baker, Le Jeune, Kasparian, Kasalek 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 SEPARATE ACTION.) Glenn Riley, 1432 S. E. Skyline Drive, requested ability to split a house on Green Valley into 2 units. The Director suggested that it would not be appropriate to discuss the details of the case since a public hearing may be necessary; that she is not familiar with the particulars of the case and will meet with the applicant. 1. Minutes of the February 24, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasparian seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2. Extension of Temporary Use Permit 92-001 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: MC WHINNEY BERRIES P.O. BOX 2526 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA. 92647 ED PANKEY TRUST 320 WEST MAIN STREET TUSTIN, CA. 92680 RED HILL PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER C-1 (RETAIL COMMERCIAL) Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 2 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 OF AN EXTENSION OF A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR AN ADDITIONAL THREE MONTHS RESULTING IN AN EXPIRATION DATE OF JUNE 19, 1992, FOR THE SALE OF STRAWBERRIES IN AN OPEN-AIR STAND. Recommendation - Pleasure of the Commission. Presentation: Anne Bonner, Associate Planner Commissioner Kasparian asked if the non-profit status was of concern to the Commission. Staff replied that the status could not be considered with this applicant. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:02 p.m. Alicia Capler, representing McWhinney Berries, stated that the project is going well; is in conjunction with Food For All; and that they would not put up a stand unless it was associated with a non-profit group. Commissioner Kasparian noted that the back of the stand looks better. Ms. Capler responded that it is now painted green in the back and that they are in compliance with the Sign Code. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:04 p.m. Commissioner Weil asked about a stand located near the Barn Restaurant. Staff replied that the permit for that location has not yet been issued, but that it is anticipated that the permit will be ready March 10; and that they will be before the Commission in the near future. Commissioner Kasalek stated that she approved of the extension considering that the rain may have limited their sales. The Director added modifying language to the Resolution, as moved. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasalek seconded to approve an extension of a temporary use permit for an additional three months resulting in an expiration date of June 19, 1992, for the sale of strawberries in an open-air stand. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Variance 92-002 and Conditional Use Permit 92-002 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: DORIS MAXWELL 13664 F EAST RED HILL AVENUE TUSTIN, CA 92680 SAME 1702 NISSON ROAD R-3 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO THE Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 3 REQUEST: PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO VARY FROM SECTION 9271i(1) (a) OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE TO ALLOW A NINE (9) FOOT, SIX (6) INCH IN HEIGHT CONCRETE BLOCK WALL TO THE REAR OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK LINE; AND AUTHORIZATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PURSUANT TO SECTION 9271i(1) (d) TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX (6) FOOT, EIGHT (8) INCHES TO ERECT A NINE (9) FOOT, SIX (6) INCH IN HEIGHT CONCRETE BLOCK WALL TO ENCLOSE AREAS ON THE REAR HALF OF THE LOT Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Variance 91-20 and Conditional Use Permit 91-31 by adoption of Resolution No. 3011. Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner Staff made revisions to Resolution No. 3011, as moved. Commissioner Le Jeune asked why the applicant required a 9 foot 6 inch fence; that the landscaping required would leave spaces for graffiti; and if the construction had begun. Staff replied that the Police Department believes that anything over 8 feet will be an enhancement to security and it may reduce noise and pollution; that the vines between the shrubs should alleviate graffiti problems; and that the permits have been issued for a 6 foot 8 inch wall. Commissioner Weil asked if the footings for a 6 foot 8 inch wall would be sufficient for a 9 foot 6 inch wall; and if it is reinforced. Staff replied that it must meet the structural requirements of the Building Code; and that it is reinforced. Commissioner Kasparian stated that he was concerned visibility; and the structural soundness for wind loading. about Staff replied that there are no units facing the wall; and that the Uniform Building Code would require wind load factor calculations. Commissioner Kasparian was concerned about the wall surrounding the door. Staff replied that the glass door would be replaced and a wooden piece would be installed over the door to meet the height of the surrounding walls; and that it would be painted to match the concrete block wall. The Director stated that modified language would be provided to require that the structural details regarding attachment to any door installation be submitted subject to approval of the Plan Check Engineer. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if a 9 foot 6 inch block wall had been approved anywhere in the City. Staff replied that an 8 foot wall was approved at the adjacent apartments, but that there had been no approvals for a 9 foot G inch wall in the City, to her knowledge. Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 4 The Public Hearing was opened at 7:18 p.m. Doris Maxwell, owner of the property and part owner of Blue Buoy Swim School, stated that since their parking lot has been raised by Caltrans, the height of the wall from the parking lot is only 8 foot 4 inches, and is 9 foot 6 inches from the pool deck; that it looks small in comparison to the Caltrans wall. She continued with requesting limiting the width of the planters since 3 feet wide would infringe on their parking area. The Director responded that the vines need a minimum 3 foot planter and that the site plan indicates that 3 feet would be available; and that staff would work with the applicant regarding the available land. Commissioner Weil suggested changing the wording to indicate "approximately" 3 feet. The Director affirmed. Ms. Maxwell requested that they not be required to install the curbing along the landscaping since they already have parking bumpers. The Director replied that the wheel stops could be removed if the curbing is installed; that the curbing is required for retaining moisture in the planters which undermines and deteriorates asphalt; and that it is pursuant to a standard applied to all properties on commercial sites. Ms. Maxwell asked if having their irrigation controls inside the fencing would be considered a "lockable housing." The Director affirmed. Commissioner Baker stated that the rear wall seemed to be about 6 to 6 feet 8 inches; how tall the building was; and about the lighting for the parking lot. Ms. Maxwell stated that the carports are higher as is the office building. John Johnson, representing Blue Buoy Swim School, stated that part of the wall will drop down and meet the height of the building; that the wooden fence is 8 feet; that the sidewalk from the parking lot is not built up and will match the building; and that they are replacing the lighting for the parking lot. Commissioner Kasparian asked if there had been any vandalism or people jumping over at the rear of the facility. Mr. Johnson replied that the wall at the rear belongs to the apartments and that they would like to raise it; and that they do have problems with people jumping over. Commissioner Baker asked if the height of all of the walls was 8 feet. Mr. Johnson affirmed; noted that they would be fashioning the wall like those in Tustin Ranch with a red cap and bougainvillea; and would be planting bougainvillea along the back, also. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:32 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 5 Commissioner Le Jeune stated that he was concerned about setting a precedent by approving a fence exceeding 8 feet; and suggested removing one (1) level of cinder block. Staff noted that removing one (1) level of $ inch block would bring the height below 8 feet. Commissioner Kasalek felt that the reason for the height was justifiable, as seen from the street. Commissioner Kasparian asked if they were approving the application based on the drawings done by a structural engineer; and noted that many of the walls with caps have loose pieces, which should be considered by the engineers; and that if it was approved for safety, he would approve of it. Staff replied that they would be approving the height variance, which would be reviewed at plan check for structural requirements; and that loose cap pieces are due to moisture problems. Commissioner Weil noted that Tustin Meadows and Laurelwood pools were being vandalized; was in favor of the Resolution. Commissioner Baker noted that he was in favor of the wall as long as it was not 9 foot 6 inches from the street. The Director made revisions to the Resolution, as moved. Commissioner Baker asked the cost of a bond. The Director replied that staff would accept the applicant's information on the cost of installation of landscaping, which would be refunded upon completion of the landscaping. Commissioner Weil asked if it was normal to require a bond. The Director replied that the original building permit did not require any landscaping, and they would have no ability to impose a condition on that permit; and that they are identifying the landscaping as a mitigation measure for the additional height. Commissioner Kasparian asked when the lighting was required. The Director replied that the Security Ordinance requires that the parking lot be lit to one-foot-candle on a 24-hour basis; that the existing wiring with bulb lights were adequate and that a similar system could be installed. Commissioner Baker asked the applicant if she understood the changes. Ms. Maxwell affirmed. Commissioner Kasparian moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Variance 91-20 and Conditional Use Permit 91-31 by adoption of Resolution No. 3011, revised as follows: Page 3, II, add a comma after "Road" and insert the following: "subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached and incorporated herein by reference." Exhibit A, Page 2, 2.1: insert "approximately" before "three (3)" I- '--I1' IlS ! t "1' Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 6 Exhibit A, Page 3, Insert Item 2.14 to read: "Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant will be required to post a bond in the amount of the required landscape and irrigation improvements in an amount to be determined by the Community Development Director." Exhibit A, Page 3, Delete Item 4.2 and move Item 2.1 from page 1 to page 3 and renumber as 4.2. to read: "Structural information and details on the relationship of the proposed concrete block wall to the existing stucco structure and the entrance door shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval of the City's Plan Checker. The subject concrete block wall shall be painted to match the concrete block wall, subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director." Motion carried 5-0. 4. Conditional Use Permit 92-004 APPLICANT: OWNER: DONAHUE SCHRIBER on behalf of KARATE MASTERS USA, INC. 3501 JAMBOREE ROAD, SUITE 300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 IRVINE RETAIL PROPERTIES COMPANY 2 PARK PLAZA, SUITE 300 IRVINE, CA 92714 LOCATION: 2923 AND 2925 EL CAMINO REAL ZONING: PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC), MIXED USE LAND USE CATEGORY, EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 (CLASS 1) TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MARTIAL ARTS STUDIO USE Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission Approve Conditional Use Permit 92-004 by adoption of Resolution No. 3010, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Joann M.S. Perry, Associate Planner Staff made changes to the staff report by stating that the business hours on pages 1 and 3 should be "Open Saturday and Sunday 10-5 p.m.; and made changes to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 3010, as moved. Commissioner Kasparian asked why 70 dBa was allowed. The Director replied that 55 dBa was the residential requirement, and that 70 dBa was standard for commercial centers. Commissioner Weil asked if no more than 50 people were allowed at one time; if they would be having matches; and that she was concerned about having only 16 parking spaces. Staff replied that the Uniform Building Code provided information regarding the number of people that the square footage would allow; and that there is ample parking in the center. Commissioner Kasalek asked if the parking is figured within sections near the business or based on the whole Market Place. Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 7 Staff replied that the summary breaks down and separates the Village, but includes the whole Market Place; and that the customers could use the parking in the north area around the clothes retail section. Commissioner Le Jeune asked about the 'no loitering' sign. Staff replied that they are concerned that loitering children would cause a problem with traffic flow; that they want to be sensitive to other retail uses. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:55 p.m. Paulette Alexander introduced herself as a representative of Donahue Schriber. Commissioner Weil asked if matches would be held; and noted that she was concerned about the parking. Michael Boldinq, Karate Masters, U.S.A., stated that there would be no matches at this location; that tournaments would be held at hotels, or gymnasiums. Commissioner Baker noted that the small class sizes would require less than 20 cars to park at one time; but he was concerned with children being dropped off and running across the parking lot. Mr. Boldinq replied that they encourage parents to stay during the lessons; but if they are dropped off, they try to teach the children not to run out, and to exercise self-discipline; and that the children must wait in the lobby area until parent arrives. Ms. Alexander suggested use of the loading area by the theaters, and to encourage use of the cross walk and loading area. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:02 p.m. Commissioner Weil stated that it was a good use for the area. Commissioner Kasparian stated that they could not mandate the safety of the children to others, that it was not necessarily the job of the applicant; that he was more concerned about dropping them off at the theater area; and that he liked the 'no loitering' sign. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the parking spaces noting a 15 minute parking area were enforced by the City or the property owner. The Director responded that the property owner was responsible. Commissioner Kasalek stated that parking is a problem, but the use is good. Commissioner Baker stated that as professionals, this applicant should have loitering problems under control. Commissioner Weil moved, Kasalek seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 92-004 by adoption of Resolution No. 3010, revised as follows: Page 2, Number 5: change business hours for Saturday to "Saturday - Sunday 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m." Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 8 Exhibit A, Page 1, Item 2.3: change business hours for Saturday to "Saturday - Sunday 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m." Motion carried 5-0. 5. Variance 92-001 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: GERALD MINICH GPA, INC. 5100 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 101 ANAHIEM, CA 92807 MONSOOR ROSHAN 4299 MACARTHUR BOULEVARD, SUITE 220 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 15491 PASADENA AVENUE R-3 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 01) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM CITY CODE SECTION 9297, "PARKING SPACES", RELATING TO THE INSIDE CLEAR AND UNOBSTRUCTED DIMENSION FOR COVERED PARKING OF AUTOMOBILES, ALLOWING A REDUCTION OF THE REQUIRED TEN FOOT (10'- 0") MINIMUM WIDTH TO EIGHT FEET, EIGHT INCHES (8'-8") IN WIDTH TO REPLACE CARPORTS WHICH WILL BE DEMOLISHED FOR FREEWAY WIDENING AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15491 PASADENA AVENUE Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Variance 92-001 by adopting Resolution No.3012 as submitted or revised. Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner Staff added additional language to Resolution No. 3012, as moved. Commissioner Kasalek asked if there was a problem with the layout of the land that Caltrans was providing as a replacement for the land that was acquired. Staff affirmed, and noted that the carports being taken were only 8 feet wide. Commissioner Weil asked if the applicant was requesting garages to replace the lost carports. Staff affirmed. Commissioner Kasparian suggested that Item I.C of Resolution No. 3012 should refer to Pasadena Avenue, not Nisson Road. Staff changed I.C of Resolution No. 3012 to 15491 Pasadena Avenue, as moved. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:11 p.m. Gerald Minich, architect for the project, stated that Caltrans has already acquired and demolished 15 carports; that they have been without 12 carports for approximately 3-4 years; suggested they be replaced with 13 compact garages at $ feet 8 inches wide. Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 9 Commissioner Kasparian asked if the tenants would have to walk a distance if they have a compact car. Mr. Minich stated that he nor the owner had a problem with tenants having to walk. The Director stated that the width is the same, but the length is reduced when allocating for compact cars. Commissioner Baker asked how long the space is between the new garages and the old carports; and noted that upon inspection, he found 12 cars parked in the fire lane, with many open stalls available. Mr. Minich replied that it was 29 feet 10 inches; that the cars are parked in the fire lane due to the spaces being eliminated. Commissioner Kasalek asked about the temporary parking that Caltrans was providing. Mr. Minich replied that the temporary parking area would be available after the agreement is approved. Commissioner Weil stated that she preferred carports; that the size of the garages were limiting; and that she was concerned that people would use the garages for storage and park on the street. Commissioner Kasparian asked why more spaces have not been moved towards the exit; and asked if any residents were present. Mr. Minich replied that the area was landscaped; and that no residents were present. The Director responded that that area was the front yard setback. Bill Bangert, manager of Las Casas Apartments, stated that the vehicles in the fire lane were there due to not having an assigned space; that they are not policing the area; that Caltrans did not leave an adequate fire lane in the rear; that they were not notified that Caltrans was intending to take part of their land; and that he has reported the problems to the Fire Department. Rick Roshan, property supervisor of Las Casas Apartments, stated that the rental agreements do not allow tenants to store items in the carports or garages, except in the enclosed cabinets. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:23 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that he was not in favor of compact parking spaces; and that he agreed with staff recommendation. Commissioner Kasalek agrees with staff if it is a closed garage, or 13 open carports. Commissioner Kasparian agreed and asked if there would be enough spaces for all tenants. The Applicant affirmed. Commissioner Weil agreed with a 3-sided carport; that people share the space between car stalls; that locked storage could be provided; but was not in favor of project as submitted; and would reluctantly agree with staff recommendations. Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 10 The Director stated that the Police Department reviewed the project as part of the Community Improvement Partnership Program and were concerned about open carports; should not be acted upon without Police Department comment and the building official; and would need to be delayed 2 weeks. Commissioner Baker asked for a consensus regarding carports. Commissioners Weil, Kasalek, KasDarian, and Le Jeune were interested in the carport option with further information provided. Commissioner Baker asked the applicant if the condition should be continued. Mr. Minich replied that they would rather decide this evening and accept 12 garages. The Public Hearing was reopened at 8:32 p.m. Mansour Roshan, owner of the property, stated that Caltrans took the spaces without notification and permit from the City; that parking is a problem along Pasadena Avenue; that one extra space means a lot to the tenants; that he would rather have 13 open spaces than wait for 12. The Director replied that the Commission had the authority to act this evening, but that staff would not support the action without adequate information from the Police Department. Commissioner Kasalek asked if the City had authority to request Caltrans provide the temporary parking as soon as possible. The Director replied that there is an ongoing coordination problem with Caltrans; that they ignored the City's request to comply with the current parking requirements and not to create any non- conformities that did not exist prior to the freeway taking; that the City has been the last to know about interaction problems with property owners; that 18 months ago the City sent letters to all property owners along the freeway that there was likely to be takings and that property owners should contact the City; that the City is doing its best to clean up Caltrans problems. Commissioner Kasparian asked if the Police Department's interest is the same as the owners'; that this is a difficult time for the owners. The Director replied that the Police Department looks at it from the perspective of what it costs to provide service to the area; that 60-70% of the police resources are concentrated in this area; and are looking at issues that might create problems for them. Commissioner Baker asked the owner if he wanted to continue the item to allow the Police Department an opportunity to review. Mr. Roshan replied that he has suffered enough over the past three years; and that he would accept 12 garages or 13 carports. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:39 p.m. Commissioner Weil stated that continuation, so their choice applicant's request. the Director's input required was for 12 garages to meet the Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 11 Commissioner Kasparian was empathetic to the owner's problems; that it should be continued for Police Department review, but since the decision must be made this evening, he voted for 12 garages. Commissioner Kasalek opted for staff recommendation. Commissioner Le Jeune asked how wide the carports would be on center; and opted for 13 carports this evening. The Director replied that if there was an area separation wall, the size and location of structural poles would have to be evaluated. Commissioner Baker opted for staff recommendation. Commissioner Kasalek moved, Kasparian seconded to approve Variance 92-001 by adopting Resolution No. 3012, revised as follows: Page 1, Item C: change 1702 Nisson Road to "15491 Pasadena Avenue" Page 2, Item II, add at end of paragraph "subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto." Motion carried 5-0. OLD BUSINESS: 6. Left Turn Arrows Commissioner Kasalek asked for a clarification of increase vs decrease of pollution while idling; why so many other cities are changing their signal systems if more accidents occur. The Director replied that removal does improve traffic flow, but increases the risk of accidents. Commissioner Baker commented that there was a left arrow at Farmington, but not one at Main and Newport. The Director replied that they may be installed upon request. Received and filed. ~q~w BUSINESS: STAFF CONCERNS: 7. Report on actions taken at March 2, 1992 City Council meeting Staff reported on the subject agenda. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Le Jeune -Noticed Crab Cooker opening on March 21st. Asked if the landscaping was finished. -Asked if City cleans up graffiti on private property. -Asked about the status on the bus shelter issue -Asked if the City has any recourse on the two violations in the shopping center where McWhinney Berries has located. '-I! I tml I 'T T ...... '~ Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1992 Page 12 -Commented that the city should be careful with studios locating in smaller centers. Commissioner Kasalek -Asked if the electrical box at the CMS Development project could be moved since it blocks tenants' spaces. -Asked about the status on the rail stop. Commissioner Kasparian -Asked who Caltrans is dealing with on acquisitions. -Noted a power box on Walnut and another on Tustin Ranch Road in a state of disrepair. -Noted that an H & H Service sign on Prospect was in a state of disrepair. -Asked about liability for palm trees -Asked about encouraging developers to locate grocery stores in Market Place Chairman Baker -Noted an article in Success magazine he copied regarding customer service during the recession. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasparian seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on March 23, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. A. L.'~er Chairm Secretary