Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 09-23-91MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNINg COMMISSION REgULAR MEETINg SEPTEMBER 23~ 1991 CALL TO ORDER: 7:01 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEgIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Kasparian, Le Jeune, Kasalek and Weil Absent: Baker 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 jurisdic- tion 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.) Commissioner Kasparian offered congratulations to Dan Fox for passing his AICP exams. 1. Minutes of the September 9, 1991 Planning Commission meetinq. 2. Conditional Use Permit 91-16 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: OKA-PROTHERO, ARCHITECTS 1920 E. KATELLA AVENUE, SUITE S ORANGE, CA 92667 WALLACE ENDERLE TRUST 14032 ENDERLE CENTER DRIVE, 3110 TUSTIN, CA 92680 14082 ENDERLE CENTER DRIVE PLANNED COMMUNITY - COMMERCIAL (PC-C) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) TO AMEND CUP 74-9 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING LOT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ENDERLE CENTERAND VANDENBERG LANE WHERE ANOFFICE BUILDING WAS PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 91-16 by adopting Resolution No. 2947 as submitted or revised. Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 2 Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Weil seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 3. Conditional Use Permit 91-21 APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: KEY INN c/o THEOPACIFIC CORPORATION 210 W. MAIN STREET, SUITE 103 TUSTIN, CA 92680 SIXPENCE INN OF TUSTIN, LTD. SIXPENCE LODGE OF TUSTIN, LTD. c/o 210 W. MAIN STREET, SUITE 103 TUSTIN, CA 92680 KEY INN MOTEL 1611 EL CAMINO REAL CENTRAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) TO ALLOW THE DISPLAY OF TWO TEMPORARY BANNERS TO CONTINUE UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE RED HILL AVENUE OVERCROSSING, INCLUDING ALL ON- AND OFF-RAMPS, IN APPROXIMATELY OCTOBER OF 1992. Recommendation - Pleasure of the Planning Commission. Presentation: Paula Rankin, Associate Planner Commissioner Weil asked if there was any response to noticing. Staff replied negatively. Commissioner Kasparian asked if approving the banners for six (6) month sequences over a one or two year period could be construed as giving the applicant permanency of the banners. Staff replied negatively due to there being an expiration date. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:06 p.m. Mr. Denney Disney, General Manager of Key Inn, stated that they would like the permit extended six (6) months or until the exits are open at Red Hill; that they have experienced a 30-35% business loss; and noted that the bed tax helps the City. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:08 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune did not object to the directional signs, but that the pricing signage was irrelevant. Commissioner Kasalek felt that they should be sensitive to the slow economy and the position of many businesses and approve both banners, but that they should be maintained. Commissioner Weil felt that both banners are appropriate; that the condition requiring the banners was thrust upon the applicant; and suggested rewording the banner for clarity; and suggested changing Resolution No. 2951 C.I., as moved. Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 3 Commissioner Le Jeune asked if they would be setting a precedent by extending the pricing information. Staff replied negatively. Commissioner Weil asked if the findings support granting the pricing banner. Staff replied that findings are sufficient. Commissioner Kasparian stated that the hardship is self-evident; and that the public needs an inducement to make the effort to come back to the business. Commissioner Kasalek moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Resolution No. 2951 approving Conditional Use Permit 91-21 revised as follows: Item C, No. 1: after "off-ramps." change the period to a comma and add "or until October 31, 1992. Motion carried 4-0. 4. Zone Chanqe 91-01 APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: FOOTHILL COMMUNITY BUILDERS P.O. BOX I NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8904 ATTENTION: MR. DAVE CONLEY LOT 11 OF TRACT 13627, NORTHWEST CORNER OF JAMBOREE AND PIONEER ROADS PC-RES (PLANNED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL), LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AN ADDENDUM TO EIR 85-2 HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15164 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AMEND THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP CHANGING THE LAND USE CATEGORY FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN THE VICINITY OF LOT 11 OF TRACT 13627 Recommendation - Pleasure of the Commission. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Weil referred to Page 4 of the staff report and asked if the projects that had been changed from detached to attached had been approved by the Commission; and asked how this would affect the grading plan. Staff replied negatively; that lots 8 and 28 were previously approved, but never constructed; that lot 13 was never approved, and still requires Planning Commission and City Council approval; and that the grading technique in an attached product should have less grading due to clustering and leaving the hillside more intact. Commissioner Weil asked what was proposed for the 115 foot wide easement; and if there was any response to the noticing. Staff replied that the easement was the primary access point to the lot; that there are four (4) water lines in the easement;that no structures, and possibly trees would be allowed; that it would be for parking and greenbelt; and that there was no response to noticing. Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 4 Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the other lots were changing from the original plan. Staff affirmed, but stated that it would be consistent with the present land use designations. Commissioner Kasparian asked about Item 19 of Page 6 of the EIR regarding additional parkland. Staff replied that the parkland has already been dedicated for East Tustin including this parkland; that the actual number of acres of parkland is based upon the number of units developed; and that additional land across the street is a reservation site for parkland. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:28 p.m. Norm Smith, Irvine Company, noted that in Phase III where they are changing the product from detached to attached, the builder sites were already zoned attached; and still doing less attached in Phase III than allowed; that there will be 80% detached and 20% attached in Sector II; that the pipelines in the easement are 60-85 inches; and that there will be some landscaping restrictions of the easement. Commissioner Kasparian asked if it was easier to put in a condominium because the footprint would be smaller than a single- family home. Mr. Smith replied that the footprint for a condominium provides a much easier site with more open space and being able to deal with the setbacks and sideyards differently. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:33 p.m. Commissioner Weil stated that she looked at the area and realized that flexibility was necessary; and requested staff to make arrangements for a tour of the area with the Irvine Company. Commissioner Kasalek agreed; noted that she would like to head towards less density, but that this lot needs more flexibility. Commissioner Le Jeune agreed and noted that this was a good decision. Commissioner Weil moved, Kasalek seconded to recertify the Final Environmental Impact Report 85-2 with Addendum 91-01 for revisions to the trip generation rate summary related to Zone Change 91-01, as required by the Environmental Quality Act. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Weil moved, Kasalek seconded to recommend to the City Council approval of Zone Change 91-01 to amend the East Tustin Specific Plan Land Use Map to change the land use category in the vicinity of Lot 11 of Tract 13627 from low density to medium density residential with a maximum density of ten dwelling units per acre. Motion carried 4-0. 5. Code Amendment 91-02 APPLICANT: CITY OF TUSTIN 15222 DEL AMO AVENUE TUSTIN, CA 92680 Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. TO REPEAL CHAPTER 4 OF ARTICLE 9 OF THE TUSTIN MUNICIPAL CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND TO ESTABLISH NEW PROVISIONS AND REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission: A. Adopt Resolution No. 2949 certifying the final Negative Declaration as adequate; and B. Adopt Resolution No. 2950 recommending to the City Council adoption of Code Amendment 91-02 establishing new provisions and regulations for signs. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Commissioner Le Jeune referred to "Bus Shelters" on Page 33 and asked if staff would set up guidelines outside of the Sign Code. Staff affirmed. Commissioner Weil commended Sara Pashalides on the fabulous job on the report. Commissioner Kasparian asked about Section 9257. Staff replied negatively, and noted that the concept was incorporated in the Sign Code on Page 43; and that they are working on a separate amendment for other zoning. Commissioner Le Jeune asked about the handout that was suggested; and that they should be given to the Chamber of Commerce. Staff replied that they are preparing a number of public information brochures. Commissioner Kasparian congratulated Sara Pashalides. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:55 p.m. Angie Kardashian, Owner of Angie's Cuisine Italiano and President of the Tustin Chamber of Commerce noted that they worked hard with the Commission; thanked staff for their cooperation; and that the Sign Code was very agreeable to the businesses and the City. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:56 p.m. Commissioner Weil suggested some minor changes, as moved; and suggested eliminating letter styles and sign shape on Page 30, paragraph 2 a for flexibility and efficiency. The Assistant Director stated that she had researched the original draft and that letter style and sign shapes had been in the concept since 1987; that they would not have any criteria to base applications on without letter size or sign shape; suggested adding the wording "compatible"; that nothing in the master sign program prohibited the owner from proposing various types of lettering; that there is flexibility and it is not as structured as the wording seems; that they have given the property owners more specificity; and that staff can help the applicant to design a more flexible master sign plan. Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 6 Staff noted that the sign program is prepared by the property owner and could be general or detailed at the applicant's discretion; and that the intent of the Sign Code is to provide compatibility and they all work to achieve a uniform goal. Commissioner Weil stated that the approach at the Market Place encourages individuality and creativity which should attract business; and feels strongly about eliminating letter styles and sign shapes from paragraph a. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that when an owner wants something specific it should be allowed; and asked if a master sign plan comes before the Planning Commission or if staff can make changes. Staff replied that in most cases it is approved by staff, depending upon their conditions of approval. Commissioner Kasparian stated that they do not want a master sign plan where all signs look the same; and suggested removing the word "similar" which suggests that all signs should look the same. The Assistant Director provided some suggested wording: Signs shall reflect a common theme which may incorporate compatible design elements. Commissioner Weil stated that she preferred Kasparian's suggestion; and that the Assistant suggestion makes paragraph B redundant. Commissioner Director's Commissioner Le Jeune agreed with removal of "similar." Commissioner Kasalek agreed. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that a sixteen (16) foot sign was unnecessary for a professional office sign. Commissioner Kasalek stated that enforcement of removal of the larger signs should continue; and that she would like to retain the compromise that was already made. Commissioner Weil agreed with Commissioner Kasparian that the community has gotten used to seeing certain size real estate signs and that six (6) feet would be too small. Commissioner Kasparian agreed and noted that there have been a number of compromises. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that this process was a good experience for him and that the staff was outstanding on this project. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasparian seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2949 certifying the final Negative Declaration as adequate. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasparian seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2950 recommending to the City Council adoption of Code Amendment 91-02 establishing new provisions and regulations for signs. The Ordinance was revised as follows: Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 7 Page 1, 9401 Purpose, line 7, after "visual" add: "and economic" Page 6, Freeway Sign, at the end of the sentence add: "right of way, or separated from the right of way by a frontage road." Page 30, 2. Master Sign Plan Criteria, item a.: delete "similar" Motion carried 4-0. OLD BUSINESS: 6. Status Reports Received and filed. 7. Amendment to Design Review 91-07, Monument Sign Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve the Amendment to Design Review 91-07 by adopting Resolution No. 2954, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Le Jeune asked if this was a discretionary item of the Planning Commission. Staff replied that the Commission was requested to approve a height increase from six (6) feet to eight (8) feet and the sign area from 32 square feet to 64 square feet for a combined monument sign for two (2) tenants; that each property by itself would not be entitled to a monument sign; and that the lot consolidation was approved by the City Council. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if this action would ensure one (1) monument sign. Staff affirmed. Commissioner Weil asked if the car wash has a wall sign. Staff affirmed, and noted that it is located over the trellis. Commissioner Kasparian asked if based on the criteria that two businesses were allowed 64 square feet, would three businesses be allowed 96 square feet; and what is the limit. Staff replied that they are required to have 150 feet of street frontage for a monument sign; that the First Street Specific Plan allows the bonus of consolidation for allowance of a monument; that the development bonus is at the discretion of the Commission; and that with the City Council's request to move the sign back two (2) feet from the sidewalk, the applicant has requested the height to increase to eight (8) feet. Commissioner Kasalek asked for a clarification of the change in height. Staff replied that the City Council's request that the sign be narrowed from ten (10) feet wide to eight (8) feet changed the configuration. Commissioner Kasparian asked if the ratio would be 60/40 for the auto wash over the tire center. Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 8 Staff replied that the sign area for the tire center would be 2 feet 4 inches tall by 8 feet wide. Commissioner Weil stated that the tire center feels they need copy on the monument sign because they are hard to see, which is a self- inflicted hardship of the situation; and that they already have a 64 square foot wall sign facing the same direction of the monument sign; suggested a 48 square foot monument sign; that 64 square feet is too big for this small area; and that the City should not be burdened with the tire center's hardship. Commissioner Kasalek stated that a 6 foot by 8 foot sign is sufficient; that First Street is not a fast moving street due to the congestion at that location; and that those types of businesses are destination oriented. Commissioner Le Jeune stated that he would go with a 48 square foot sign, but that the direction of the City Council is instructing them to approve a 64 square foot sign. Commissioner Weil discretion. commented that the Commission still has Commissioner Kasalek asked if there would be sufficient room on a 6 by 8 foot sign for all of the state required information. The Assistant Director stated that on an 8 foot by 8 foot sign there is only 50 feet of copy area; that a 6 x 8 foot sign would have a decorative trim and that there would be approximately 36 square feet of copy area which might not be sufficient for state requirements. Commissioner Weil suggested that the sign be redesigned. Staff replied that staff could look into the matter; that the auto wash and pricing could be accomplished in 40 feet in the original proposal, without the tire center; that legibility would be compromised; that they would be requiring the monument sign be reduced by two (2) feet; and that the Resolution would have to be changed. Commissioner Kasparian stated that after the car wash is established, the sign will be unnecessary; that an 8 foot by 8 foot sign is huge and only two (2) feet from the sidewalk where the speed is only about 10-15 miles per hour; suggested taking off area from the pedestal base and auto wash sign; that changes could be made to reduce copy and still be within the state regulations; and suggested staff reconsider a design for a sign 8 feet wide and 6 feet high. Staff provided language, as moved, to change the height of the size of the sign to 48 square feet. Commissioner Weil moved, Kasalek secoDded to approve the Amendment to Design Review 91-07 by adopting Resolution No. 2954 revised as follows: Page 2, II., fourth line: change "64-square foot" to "48-square foot (6' in height and 8' in width)" and delete "to stand at a maximum height of eight feet". Motion carried 3-1 with Commissioner Le Jeune opposed. NEW BUSINESS: Planning Commission Minutes September 23, 1991 Page 9 ST~FF CONCERNS: 8. Report on actions taken at Septembe~ 16, 199~ City Council meeting Staff reported on the subject agenda. 9. Scheduling of General Plan Workshop Staff suggested the workshop be held on October 21, 1991 at 5:00 p.m. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Weil -Inquired about a sign for Shipley's at the Newport Avenue entrance to Larwin Square. Staff replied that it was a Code Enforcement issue that was being handled. Commissioner Kasparian -Commented on the progress of the day care center on Main Street. Asked about any State Codes regarding covering of the fencing. Staff stated that there are no codes regarding covering of the fencing, only height which is being met in this case. -Asked about status of removal of the kiosk in the downtown area. Staff replied that the issue would be covered in conjunction with revitalization plans for Old Town. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasalek seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:02 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on October 14 1991 at 7:00 p m. in the City Council Chambe. rs, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. ~. L. ~aker Chairman Ka%hleen Clancy Secretary