Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 02-24-92MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 24v 1992 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Baker, Le Jeune, Kasparian, Kasalek and Well 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 C~LENDAR: (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 February 10, 1992 Planninq Commission meetinq. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Weil seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2. Conditional Use Permit 92-003 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: MR. MARVIN ROWLAND 166 NORTH JETTY DRIVE ORANGE, CA. 92668 MR. WILLIAM ZAPPAS 3922 EMERALD TORRANCE, CA. 90503 640 EL CAMINO REAL ZONING:C-2 (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A PAWN BROKER BUSINESS IN AN EXISTING TENANT SPACE ~ecommendat~o~ - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 92-003 by adopting Resolution 3008, as submitted or revised. Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1992 Page 2 Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director Commissioner Kasparian asked if this was the first pawn broker in the City; and if pawn brokers necessarily produce problems, i.e. break-ins, police activity, etc. The Director was not aware of any specific previous cases. Problems associated with pawn brokers are generally related to the operation of the facility which is tied to the license and hearing board provisions of the Tustin City Code; and that the Commission is only being asked to deal with the land use issue. Commissioner Weil asked if the Police Department had seen this report and noted any problems in the report; and if the applicant will be using roller gates for security. The Director responded that the Police Department has seen the report and will see it again and has recommended specific conditions in Attachment A; she referred the Commission to the applicant regarding security gates. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:06 p.m. Marvin Rowland, 166 N. Jetty Drive, Orange, replied that he would be using roller gates or security bars, whichever the City prefers. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the gates would be inside. Mr. Rowland affirmed; and noted that his is not the first pawn brokerage in the City; that there is one (1) other and two (2) other use permits. Commissioner Kasparian asked the level of traffic expected. Mr. Rowland replied that he expected one (1) person at a time, not a high volume. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:09 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if there were any other types of businesses that are subject to this level of Police Department screening. The Director replied that there are a number of resale and second hand businesses that must be screened by the Police Department, and that she would provide a list of such businesses, if desired. Commissioner Weil moved, Kasparian seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 92-003 by adopting Resolution No. 3008 as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. OLD BUSINESS: 3. Development and Code Enforcement Status Reports The Director stated that this is the first report from the new computer system. Commissioner Weil asked for a clarification of transfers in the report. The Director responded that the maximum dwelling unit total in each sector is capped by the Specific Plan and that she would provide a technical description of the program. Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1992 Page 3 Received and filed. 4. Large Family Day Care Home (LFD 92-001) APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: CYNTHIA SUE BIERY 1792 LANCE DRIVE TUSTIN, CA 92680 1792 LANCE DRIVE R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) 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 Chairman inquire if any person in the audience wishes to submit a protest, and then accept any protests submitted. If a valid protest is lodged, then the matter should be continued and scheduled for a public hearing at the next available Commission meeting. If a protest is not filed, it is recommended that the Commission approve the subject application by adopting Resolution No. 3009, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director Ralph F. Porter, 1791 Andrews, stated that he owns the adjacent property; that he is concerned about his loss of privacy; that he would not have purchased his home if he was aware of a day care center next door; and that his property value will suffer. He continued with noting that there seems to be a lack of supervision and that it was unreasonable to double the amount of children that they are responsible for; that he spoke with Mr. Biery in the past with no cooperation regarding privacy; and has submitted a signed petition from the neighbors. The Director responded that the Deputy City Attorney feels that this is a valid protest and suggested the Commission continue the matter to the second meeting in March with a Public Hearing notice. Commissioner Baker asked if anyone in the audience was a renter that would like a notice. Carol Sorcibel protested the day care center. Commissioner Kasparian asked about a cover letter with regards to discrepancies. The Director responded that the fire assigned to the building officials, responsibility of the Fire Department. safety issues shall be and are no longer the Commissioner Kasparian asked who conducts the inspections. The Director replied that it would be the Building Division. Commissioner Kasparian asked if a statement rescinding the permit was needed. The Director replied that there was no ability to impose conditions if the findings were met; but will respond at the Public Hearing. Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1992 Page 4 Commissioner Le Jeune moved. KasDarian seconded to continue the item and schedule a public hearing for the March 23rd Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried $-0. So Chamber of Commerce Request to Temporarily Allow Unrestricted Temporary Siqnage Presentation: Community Development Staff Commissioner Le Jeune stated that the original meetings with the Chamber of Commerce were held at the beginning of the recession; that the City's banner ordinance is extremely generous; that it would be difficult to determine the ending of the recession, but that perhaps if the City Council suggested a six (6) month period, that would be acceptable; that he hoped a relaxed code would not be like the example at Newport and Walnut; that parking is a major problem in some centers; that Tustin Market Place has taken some business from the local stores; and asked if the walls along the 5 Freeway would be extended to the 55 Freeway; and that they tend to obscure the City. The Director responded that the heights along the freeway will vary and will provide some visibility. Commissioner Le J~n~ continued with suggesting setting up a task force consisting of a few of the staff, Planning Commission, City Council, and Chamber of Commerce to look at different methods of increasing business; that an informal poll netted information that the residents do not realize that the City receives some of the sales tax money. He also stated that the Chamber of Commerce, the newspapers, the cable station, and the mayor could help inform the residents about the importance of shopping and dining in Tustin for the sales tax, and send out a mailing informing the residents how the tax program works. He suggested that one banner pole and the entry signs to the City could emphasize shopping and dining in the City; and that temporary signs could be placed around town encouraging shopping in Tustin. Commissioner Kasalek stated that she was concerned about the proposed sign program being open ended; that parameters are needed to clarify the limits; that when banners are up too long, they tend to be ignored; that banners may help, but people are not eating out and spending as much, right now; that the City now has a generous banner program; that waiving of fees is a possibility; and that she would like to help the businesses. Commissioner Baker suggested that the $50 security fee is appropriate, but should drop the level of the other fee; that banners become ineffective; that part of Tustin is becoming an island, especially First Street; that freeway signs are directing traffic onto Fourth/Irvine prematurely and that those areas need to be assisted with directional signs; that shops need to give good service; and that the Sign Code is good, that the fees could be reduced a bit, but otherwise should remain as it is. Commissioner Kasparian stated that as a customer, banners signs do not attract him; that he relies on mailings, newspapers, and window signs; that deteriorating banner signs are reprehensible to the aesthetics of a store; that the City has other priorities than policing banner signs. He continued with noting that Commissioner Le Jeune's suggestions to promote business within the City were appropriate; that a lot of thought went into the Sign Code, and that the mechanics should not be changed; that it was established by a committee of the Planning Commission, the Chamber of Commerce Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1992 Page 5 and members of the Community; that the City has the most liberal sign code; and suggested that waiving the fee may not be significant to businessmen. Commissioner Weil asked how many ramps are closed in the City. CommissioDer Le Jeune suggested that it depends which way you are travelling, and when. Commissioner Weil continued with suggesting that the businesses, Chamber of Commerce and newspapers could make accessibility to businesses be better known; that the Planning Commission's responsibility is limited. She also stated that freeway signs could be added stating 'Tustin Next 4 Exits', etc.; that the fee could be relaxed to $25 for six months; that the refundable assurance fee should be kept at $50; and that she agrees with the rest of the Commission in that banners are designed for effectiveness, which would be lost if left up for extended periods. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the Sign Code was relaxed, how would the Chamber of Commerce notify the Community; and asked the Director's comments regarding what could be done. The Director replied that an urgency ordinance would not require any Planning Commission review, if desired by the City Council; that the program would be similar to the business license amnesty program, with a limited time period. Commissioner Weil stated that she was concerned that the City would look like it was 'wallpapered' with banners and that it would affect the image of the City; that it will be detrimental to the businesses, because it will look like the City is out of control. Commissioner Baker asked about the temporary sign code at the Auto Center. The Director replied that prior to the installation of the permanent sign, they are allowed temporary banners, which are restricted in size and content; and that the temporary sign program for special events is very liberal, and concessions have been granted. Commissioner Kasalek asked if the Chamber of Commerce was looking for specific changes. The Director replied that she expected to get more input at the next City Council meeting, and that she had no previous contact with the Chamber of Commerce prior to the last City Council meeting; that the Chamber is primarily looking for time extensions, and possibly a temporary increase in window signage. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that there are currently 13 violations of temporary signs on the Code Enforcement report, but that there are actually many more; that this indicates that the City is not harassing the businesses. The Director stated that they are targeting zones, at this time. Commissioner Weil noted that there was not a profusion of requests for banners. The Director replied that there has been an increase in requests; that there have been press releases and the sign industry is promoting banners. Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1992 Page 6 Commissioner Kasparian stated that he was against a 12 month continuous extension; that the determination of the ending of a recession is subjective; and that this is not a valid consideration. The Director commented that the Chapman University Center for Economic Research indicates that the total sales tax for the period 1992-1993 would only increase about 3%, and would be erased with inflation; that not more than 10% increase is expected between 1993-1996. Commissioner Le Jeune asked for a clarification of 'special signs' as noted in the last page of Angie Kardashian's letter. The Director replied that she would provide a clarification of that statement. Commissioner Le Jeune determined the consensus of the Commission to be against changing the Sign Code. Commissioner Kasparian referred to a comment in the report noting that Tustin gave approval to relax the Sign Code. The Director responded that that comment was being circulated by the sign industry and that it was commending the Commission. STAFF CONCERNS: 0 Report on actions taken at February 18, 1992 City Council meetinq Staff reported on the subject agenda. Commissioner Baker asked what department was responsible for handling the loan/grant programs. The Director replied that it would be the Community Development Department. Commissioner Weil asked if the loan programs would help the Housing Element. The Director replied that it would provide a credit towards the Housing Element because it would be restricted to the fair market rent levels. COI4~ISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Kasparian -Informed staff of a home business sign posted at Miller and Prospect. Commissioner Le Jeune -Reported graffiti at Christian bookstore by freeway. -Inquired if two pole signs at Newport Avenue and First Street were approved. -Asked if Nisson Car Wash was permitted to post signs advertising prices. Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1992 Page 7 -Asked if the permit was issued on the McWhinney Berry stand. Indicated that the owner of shopping center has two code violations dating back to August of 1991. Commissioner Kasalek -Asked if the berry stand construction was finished. Has sheet metal along the back and looks unfinished. -Inquired about status of the left turn report. Chairman Baker -Commented that the auto mall sales tax increases were high. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasparian seconded to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on March 9, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. ~a~a~k~er Kathleen Clancy ~ Secretary