HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 04-08-91 M I NUT ~ S
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 8, 1991
CALL TO ORDER:
7:02 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL:
Present: LeJeune, Shaheen (left at 9:10 p.m.),
Baker, Kasparian, Kasalek
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.)
1. Minutes of the March 25, 1991 Planning Commission meeting.
2. Final Tract Map 14188
APPLICANT/
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
STANDARD PACIFIC, L.P.
1565 WEST MAC ARTHUR BOULEVARD
COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626
LOTS 5 AND H OF TRACT 12870
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
THIS PROJECT IS CONSIDERED MINISTERIALLY EXEMPT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 15268(B) OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA).
AUTHORIZATION TO SUBDIVIDE 19.162 ACRES INTO 57
NUMBERED LOTS AND FOUR LETTERED LOTS TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF 57 SINGLE-FAMILY LOW-DENSITY
DWELLINGS.
Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution No. 2892, as submitted or revised, recommending
approval of Final Tract Map 14188 to the City Council.
Presentation: Paula Rankin, Associate Planner
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasa%ek seconded to approve the
Minutes from March 25, 1991 and to pull Item #2 from the Consent
Calendar for discussion. Motion carried 5-0.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 2
Commissioner Kasparian asked if the Irvine Ranch Water District
would be serving the area covered in the tract map since they
signed off on the map.
Staff affirmed.
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Shaheen seconded to approve Item #2 of
the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
3. Conditional Use Permit 90-30, Variance 91-05
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
MR. DALJIT SINGH
17292 MC FADDEN AVENUE, #A
TUSTIN, CA 92630
DE CLARKE PROPERTIES
c/o AMERILAND
1038 NORTH TUSTIN, SUITE 600
ORANGE, CA 92667
17292 MC FADDEN AVENUE, #A
RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-i)
THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3) PURSUANT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15303 OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
REQUEST: 1.
AUTHORIZATION FOR ON-SITE SALE OF BEER AND
WINE FOR CONSUMPTION ON THE PREMISES (ABC
LICENSE TYPE 41);
OUTDOOR SEATING; AND
VARIANCE FOR REDUCTION OF THE PARKING
REQUIREMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT
USE.
Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission 1.
Approve Conditional Use Permit 90-30 by adopting Resolution No.
2894, and 2. Deny Variance 91-05 by adopting Resolution No. 2895
as submitted or revised.
Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner
Commissioner Baker asked if
amplification would be allowed.
a live performance without
Staff responded that Item 2.9 indicates that if music,
entertainment, or dancing were provided, a noise analysis would be
required guaranteeing that the noise levels would not exceed City
standards; that a band would be considered a special event and
would require a noise analysis before the event.
Commissioner Baker asked how a noise analysis was requested.
The Director replied that through the special business license
process, a noise consultant projects by type of event the noise
levels expected; and that there is information available that
indicates the level of amplification created by certain types of
equipment; that no amplification is allowed, but other
entertainment requires a special business permit, and no such
activity shall occur without a noise analysis.
CommissiQner Le Jeune asked for a clarification of the seating·
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 3
Staff replied that the applicant would like to add 16 seats to the
patio, which would require a variance; and that the city would like
to approve the use of the patio.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if approval of the patio also approves
the additional parking spaces; or if they would only be approved
for seating of 18 as restricted by the six parking spaces provided.
Staff affirmed and noted that Condition 1.7 would allow only 18
seats without the variance.
Commissioner Shaheen asked if there was another restaurant at the
other end of the center, and if it was a sit-in or take-out.
Staff replied that it is a sit-in with a patio.
Commissioner Kasalek asked for a clarification of the parking/
seating ratio.
Staff replied that when this center was developed, they had to
comply with parking by providing 71 parking spaces for the amount
of square footage in the center, barely meeting code.
Commissioner Shaheen asked if the landlord's lease supersedes the
City's parking allocation.
The Director replied that the City does not get involved with the
transactions between the owners and their tenants; that, in terms
of use restrictions, the City Zoning ordinance provides the
maximum degree of authorization for the use; and that the owners
are notified of the hearings.
Commissioner Kasparian asked if Resolution No. 2895 ties together
reduction of parking from 11 spaces to six spaces, and provides for
an additional 16 seats.
Staff affirmed.
Commissioner Kasparian asked if the applicant would be willing to
take the additional 16 seats and leave the parking at 11 spaces.
Staff clarified the issue by stating that the applicant only has
six spaces now and that the variance is to allow the seating for 11
spaces.
¢o~miss~oner Kasalek asked if there was a shared parking option.
The Director replied that unlike the Irvine Business Center where
there are reciprocal parking agreements, the standard zoning
ordinance has no such provisions; and unless the Commission wishes
to make a finding to justify the variance, there is nothing in the
zoning ordinance to support the shared concept.
Commissioner Baker asked if there was a Conditional Use Permit on
this location at one time.
The Director replied that the police call-outs have been related to
alcohol abuse in the past; and that there may not have been abuse
of ABC requirements, but alcohol related disturbances on the site.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:18 p.m.
Commissioner Kasalek asked the applicant what the business
operating hours were.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 4
Mr. Daljit Singh, speaking on behalf of the Guru Palace, responded
that they were open for lunch from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.; closed
from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.; and open for dinner from 5:00 p.m. to
10:00 p.m. closing at 11:00 p.m.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:19 p.m.
Commissioner Shaheen indicated that he had no problem with them
serving alcohol since they serve food; that they should not have
additional parking since there may not be adequate parking if the
vacant stores were filled.
Commissioner Kasalek noted that it looks like a large parking lot,
but that there are a lot of vacancies; that a reciprocal agreement
might be a consideration, but, since he is allowed a limited number
of spaces per square foot, there is no option but to deny the extra
seating.
Commissioner Baker agreed with the CUP for the on-site beer and
wine consumption; but not the additional seating.
Commissioner Kasparian agreed.
Commissioner Le Jeune stated that there were no findings to grant
the parking variance.
Commissioner Shaheen moved, Baker seconded to approve Conditional
Use Permit 90-30 by adopting Resolution No. 2894 as submitted.
Motion carried 5-0.
Commissioner Shaheen moved, Kasparian seconded to deny Variance 91-
05 by adopting Resolution No. 2895 as submitted. Motion carried 5-
9.
4. Variance 91-03
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
MICHAEL PORTO
18195 MC DURMOTT EAST, SUITE C
IRVINE, CA 92714
WILLIAM H. LAUER
140 SOUTH "B" STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
140 SOUTH "B" STREET
THE NORTH PORTION OF THE
MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS
RESIDENTIAL (R-i)
PROPERTY IS ZONED
(R-3), AND THE SOUTH
ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY
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 TO ALLOW TWO GARAGES TO ENCROACH INTO
THE REQUIRED 5-FOOT SETBACK.
Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission
approve Variance 91-03 by adopting Resolution No. 2896, as
submitted or revised.
Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner
Staff made changes to Resolution No. 2896 by removing Item 2.7, as
the resident does not have to conform with parking standards since
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 5
he is not changing the residential property; and by changing Page
2, Item C.2, as moved.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked for a clarification of the elimination
of the five (5) foot setback for the new garage on the south side.
Staff replied that they want to eliminate the dead space; that the
Community Development Department requires a minimum turning radius
of 25 feet, and that he would only have a 20 foot radius otherwise.
Commissioner Kasparian asked if staff indicated that the applicant
is making the changes in preparation for making future changes.
Staff replied that, at this time, they only want to provide the
maximum parking possible at this time for their tenants.
Commissioner Kasparian asked if the changes were city-mandated or
based on the individual's request.
The Director responded that the applicant originally wanted to add
floor area, but that created significant non-conformities; and that
it was the applicant's choice to proceed with the garages only at
this time.
Commissioner Kasparian noted that it was difficult to turn around
now, that it would be worse with the additional buildings, but that
is the problem of the applicant. He also asked if the fire
department is involved.
Staff replied that the fire department signed off on the project.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:32 p.m.
Michael Porto, representing the applicant, asked if the Planning
Commission had any questions of him.
Commissioner Kasparian commented on the thoroughness of Mr. Porto's
letter to Daniel Fox.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:33 p.m.
~ommissioner Kasparian moved, Kasalek seconded to approve Variance
91-03 by adopting Resolution No. 2896 revised as follows:
Resolution No. 2896, Section C, Number 2 to read: "Granting
the variance will not convey a special privilege to the
property owner which is not enjoyed by other property owners
in the vicinity. Granting the variance will bring the parking
on the site into compliance with the Tustin City Code, by
permitting garage space for four additional automobiles."
Resolution NQ. 2896, E~hibit A, Number 2,7 to be deleted.
Motion carried 5-0.
5. Variance 91-02
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
QUALITY PROJECT COORDINATING
P.O. BOX 2653
COSTA MESA, CA 92628-2653
ELDORADO BANK
17752 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
17752 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 6
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
PLANNED COMMUNITY-COMMERCIAL (PC-C)
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11), SECTION 15311
1. TO ALLOW A WALL SIGN TO BE PLACED ON
2.
3.
A
BUILDING FASCIA;
TO ALLOW A MONUMENT SIGN WITH SUPPLEMENTAL
TEXT;
TO ALLOW A 30-SQUARE FOOT MONUMENT SIGN TO
ENCROACH 10~ FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 15-FOOT
BUILDING LINE SETBACK.
Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission
approve portions and deny portions of Variance 91-02 by adopting
Resolution No. 2893, as submitted or revised.
Presentation: Becky Stone, Assistant Planner
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:41 p.m.
June Hanssen of Eldorado Bank addressed the Commission noting that
the sign would be a monument sign; that the sign has been in that
location for 18 years with the additional text; that the additional
verbiage for the monument sign was necessary for the bank to
attract customers; that if the additional text was placed in the
window, as staff suggests, visibility would be limited by the berm;
that California Federal's sign is in the exact location that they
are requesting; that other signs in the area are like the one
proposed by Eldorado Bank; that if the sign was placed on the side
of the building it would be hidden by the berm.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked what the extra verbiage consisted of.
Ms. Hanssen presented a photograph of the signage.
The Public Hearing closed at 7:44 p.m.
Commissioner Baker asked if Tony Roma had a similar sign.
Staff replied that Tony Roma's does not have the same building
situation; and that the sign is technically below the roof eave
line.
The Director noted that the Planning Commission required Tony
Roma's sign to be placed below the roof eave.
Commissioner Le Jeune noted that the eave line is technically the
bottom of the roof line.
Staff affirmed and noted that the fascia is part of the roof
structure, with the eave being below the roof structure.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked for a consensus of the issues.
Commissioner Baker agreed with staff recommendation.
Commissioner Kasparian noted that they need a monument sign there
due to the driveway beyond the berm.
Commissioner Le Jeune questioned what the bank would do if they
decided to close on Saturdays; and noted that he realized they had
it on their previous sign, but that the current Sign Code adopts a
fairly strict policy.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 7
Commiss%oner Kasparian noted that he is in favor of being below the
roof line, and is against breaking the precedent by placing it on
the fascia.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if it is not permitted on the fascia
board, would it have to be attached to the wall or could it be hung
beneath the eave.
The Director replied that it could be parallel with the line of the
eave.
CommissioDer Le Jeune asked how high the letters are.
Staff replied that they are 18 inches.
Commissioner Shaheen noted that the sign committee is attempting to
clean up the signs throughout the City, but since the bank does a
professional job regarding its signage, they should be allowed to
integrate the additional text into the monument sign; and that all
three issues should be approved.
Commissioner Kasalek noted that if there is a strong position being
taken regarding these issues, it should be done immediately, and
that she is not in favor of including the additional text; that
even though California Federal was approved earlier, this is a
separate free standing building, and felt it would look better to
tie it in with a similar look; and that it should be approved.
Commiss$oner Kasparian noted that if the supplemental sign was
allowed a precedent would be set; and that he would deny the
additional verbiage.
Commissioner Le Jeune concurred with Commissioner Kasparian
regarding the supplemental text. He then asked for a consensus of
the placement of the wall sign.
The Director introduced the Resolution.
Commissioner Kasparian moved, Le Jeune seconded deny Items 1 and 2
and approve Item 3 of Variance 91-02 by adopting Resolution No.
2893, as submitted.
Motion dSd not carry and then was re-introduced.
The Director noted that there seemed to be a consensus on all items
except the fascia.
Commissioner Baker asked for suggestions for supplemental text
based on the new Sign Code.
The Director replied that the new Sign Code would allow
descriptions besides business identification, but would be limited
to 25% of the copy area and would be limited to the actual trade.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked for a consensus on Item 1, placement of
wall sign.
Commission discussion ensued. At the conclusion of the additional
discussion the Director noted that the outcome and direction the
majority of the Commission wished to go agreed with the original
motion that failed.
Commissioner Kasparian moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve portions
and deny portions of Variance 91-02 by adopting Resolution No.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 8
2893, as submitted. Motion carried 3-2.
and Shaheen voting no).
(Commissioners Kasalek
Commissioner Baker reminded the applicant that they have the right
to appeal to the City Council within seven (7) days.
6. Variance 91-07
APPLICANT/
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
CMS DEVELOPMENT
3199 A-3 AIRPORT LOOP DRIVE
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
14051 NEWPORT AVENUE
PLANNED COMMUNITY-COMMERCIAL (PC-C)
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11)
APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE EXCHANGE OF
THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ALLOW 75 SQUARE FOOT
SIGNAGE ON THE SIDE ELEVATION
Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission
approve Variance 91-07 for the exchange of allowable signage from
the front elevation to the side elevation by adopting Resolution
No. 2891 as submitted or revised.
Presentation: Beth Schoemann, Associate Planner
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if it was known who the tenant in Suite
A was; and if there were additional applicants on the same row of
buildings.
Staff replied that it would be "Quicksign"; and that there were no
others wanting reversal since they were approved in January.
Commissioner Baker noted that he felt this would reduce the glow of
lights into the residential area.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:02 p.m.
The Public Hearing was closed at 8:03 p.m.
Commissioner Kasalek moved, Baker seconded to approve Variance 91-
07 for the exchange of allowable signage from the front elevation
to the side elevation by adopting Resolution No. 2891 as submitted.
Motion carried 5-0.
OLD BUSINESS=
NEW BUSINESS=
7. Use Determination 91-01
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
MR. KEVIN B. KNOX
ERIN MADISON LTD., CONSULTING
2424 S.E. BRISTOL STREET, SUITE 220
SANTA ANA, CA 92707
420 'B' WEST SIXTH STREET
PM (PLANNED INDUSTRIAL)
THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 5) PURSUANT TO SECTION
15305 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 9
REQUEST:
TO DETERMINE THAT WHOLESALE IMPORTATION, QUARANTINE
AND INTERSTATE DISTRIBUTION OF FRESH WATER AND
MARINE FISH, AQUARIUMS, FILTERS, EQUIPMENT AND
SUPPLIES IS PERMITTED WITHIN THE PM (PLANNED
INDUSTRIAL) DISTRICT
Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission
adopt by Minute Order, a determination that wholesale importation,
quarantine and interstate distribution of fresh water and marine
fish, aquariums, filters, equipment and supplies is permitted
within the PM (Planned Industrial) District.
Presentation: Daniel Fox, Senior Planner
Commissioner ~aker asked for a clarification of "quarantine".
Kevin Knox, representing the applicant, replied that after leaving
customs, there was no special quarantine required for tropical
fish; and that the fish were only quarantined by Dr. Hsu to ensure
their health and determine that they are able to continue their
journey.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked how long they were quarantined.
Mr. Knox replied that unless they were ill, they would be
quarantined for no more than a few days to a week.
Commissioner Baker noted that it was just jargon, and asked if they
were diseased in any way.
Mr. Knox replied that they would not pass customs if they were ill,
but that did not prevent them from getting ill once they reached
Dr. Hsu.
Commissioner Kasparian asked how they dispose of dead fish.
Mr. Knox replied that they dispose of them in the trash.
Commissioner Kasalek asked if there was any odor involved with the
facility.
Mr. Knox replied negatively.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the business license indicated that
there would be no retail sales.
The Director replied that it was a wholesale business which would
be indicated on the business license if the use determination is
allowed.
Commissioner Kasparian asked what the concern was with the
wholesale requirement.
The Director replied that one (1) parking space is required for
every 500 square feet of wholesale space; and that one (1) parking
space is required for every 250 square feet of retail space; and
that the previous tenant may have been open to the public, but it
was categorized as wholesale.
Commissioner Baker moved, Shaheen seconded to approve by Minute
Order a determination that wholesale importation, quarantine and
interstate distribution of fresh water and marine fish, aquariums,
filters, equipment and supplies is permitted within the PM (Planned
Industrial) District. Motion carried 5-0.
i-- ~ IrT ~ .... Till
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 10
STAFF CONCERNS:
8. Report on actions taken at April 1, 1991 City Council meeting.
Staff reported on the subject agenda.
Commissioner Kasparian asked who monitors the TDM Ordinance to
determine compliance.
The Director replied that the owners would certify in the annual
report what their performance levels would be; that they are trying
to get them to a similar standard as the AQMD plan of an average
1.5 riders per vehicle; that if they are not reaching those levels
upon the second or third year, the City could require additional
implementation mechanisms; and that the annual report requirement
is necessary to determine the results of the efforts.
Commissioner Kasparian asked if the reports were approved at face
value.
The Director replied negatively; and that if compliance is not
obtained, there is a penalty fee paid by the applicant which will
go into the capital account to improve the major arterials.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked why Item 2 was appealed.
The Director replied that the owner appealed the dedication
requirement because he did not want to make an irrevocable offer to
dedicate any property.
Commissioner Kasparian asked when Colonial Bible Church's appeal
regarding the sidewalk would be before the Council.
The Director replied that it would be agendized for May 6.
9. Sign Code Review
No Planning Commission action necessary.
COMMISSION CONCERNS:
Commissioner Kasparian
-Asked the status of the apartments behind the homes on
Pasadena. The Director replied that all property owners were
noticed for the hearings on March 18 and April 1.
-Noted that the City had a banner up at Columbus Tustin Park
for an Easter Egg Hunt dated March 30 and that it should be
taken down.
-Asked why there were two Lee & Associates signs where the
Fireman's Fund building is. Staff responded that the lot is
divided into two parcels so two signs are allowed.
Commissioner Baker
-Referred to a seminar that he attended at the League of
cities Planning Commission Institute regarding the Brown Act
and questioned if speaking to an applicant that was calling
would be in violation of the Brown Act.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1991
Page 11
The City Attorney replied that opinions vary with attorneys.
Although there is no law against communicating with an appli-
cant, he advised that the Commissioners should be cautious in
speaking with an applicant and refrain from taking a position
on any issue.
Commissioner Kasalek
-Inquired about Mayor Edgar's concerns on the City Council
Action Agenda. Staff responded that the concern was related to
congestion related to the left turn at Nisson and the I-5
Freeway.
Commissioner Le Jeune
-Informed staff that mail and Federal Express boxes had been
moved onto Tustin Ranch Road and created a hazard with sudden
stops. Staff advised that this had not been authorized and
would pass the matter onto the Public Works Department.
-Noted that a center at McFadden and the 55 Freeway was 95%
neon. Staff replied that this was already on the Code
Enforcement list.
-Noted that there was no gate around the carwash site next to
the post office posing a hazard. Staff responded that there
should be a fence around the property and that the matter
would be referred to the Building Department.
-Noted that Toys R Us had a 45' trailer parked in their
parking lot.
~DJOURI~EB'T:
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Kasparian seconded to adjourn the
meeting at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried 4-0 (Shaheen absent).
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is on April 22,
1991 at 7:00 p.m. in the city Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way,
Tustin.
KATHLEEN CLANCY
Secretary