Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC RES 3724 RESOLUTION NO. 3724 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF 3 TUSTIN, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITION 1.1 OF RESOLUTION NO. 3695 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-005 AND 4 DESIGN REVIEW 97-009 EXTENDING THE DATE OF EXPIRATION OF s THE PROJECT APPROVAL TO DECEMBER 1, 2000 6 The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: ? I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: 8 A. That a proper application to amend Condition 1.1 of the amendment to 9 Conditional Use Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 was filed by ~0 Greg Bennett on behalf of the property owners, Howard Ferrand, Ramesh Bajaria, and Rekha Bajaria requesting an eighteen (18) month extension of ~1 the expiration date for Conditional Use Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 from June 1, 2000, to December 1, 2001. ]2 13 B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application on April 24, 2000, by the Planning Commission. 14 ~s C. That according to Condition 1.3 of Resolution No. 3534, approved by the Planning Commission on November 11, 1997 and upheld by the City ~6 Council on December 1, 1997, substantial construction was to be underway ~7 by December 1, 1999, or the project approval would be null and void. ~s D. That on October 11, 1999, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3695, conditionally approving a six (6) month extension of the expiration ~9 date for Conditional. Use Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 from 2o December 1, .1999, to 'June 1,2000, pursuant to Condition 1.3 of Resolution No. 3534. 21 E. That on March 16, 2000,' the applicant submitted a request to amend 22 Condition 1.1 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3695 to allow an 23 extension of the expiration date for Conditional Use Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 from June'l, 2000, to December 1,2001. 24 2~ F. As of the date of this resolution, the applicant has not obtained building permits for construction of the project and substantial construction is not 26 underway. 27 28 29 Resolution No. 3724 Page 2 3 G. That the extension of the project expiration date by eighteen (18) months to 4 December 1, 2001 may, under the circumstances of this case, be 5 detrimental to the health, safety, or gener~al welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, and be injurious or 6 detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood 'of the ? subject property, or to .the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the .following findings: 1. That granting an eighteen month extension may result in a lengthy 9 pedod of inactivity on the site. While the Planning Commission ~0 originally granted a six month extension period to commence construction, the applicant has not yet begun construction. ~2 2. The approved expansion to the Vons supermarket adjacent to the subject property and the need to coordinate site improvements 22 between the two projects does not exist. The plan check for the ~s Vons project has been approved and permits may be issued. 3. That the need to delay the project to address remediation of soil and 24 groundwater contamination on the site does not exist. The Orange 25 CountyHealth Care Agency, which regulates soil contamination and remediation issues, would not object to the City issuing building ~6 permits for the development. 4, If construction did not begin until Fall 2001, the original 27 environmental documentation for the project may be outdated. 2s Typically, environmental documents that approach five years should be reviewed and, if necessary, revised to reflect current conditions. 20 H. That the extension of the project expiration date by siX (6) months to December 1, 2000 will' not, under the circumstances of this case, be :1 detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor 22 be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the 23 neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the following findings: 24 25 1. Granting an extension of six (6) months would likely spur the applicant to complete the plan check process in a timely manner. 26 2. Granting an extension of six (6) months rather than eighteen (18) months would spur demolition and construction activity to commence 27 in a timely manner and promote coordination with the Vons 28 expans. ion project which is scheduled to begin shortly. 3. Construction may proceed despite potential contamination.' 29 Resolution No. 3724 2 Page 3 3 4. Granting an extension of six (6) months would likely spur remediation 4 of existing property maintenance code violations. 5 5. If construction did not begin until Fall 2001, the original environmental documentation for the project may be outdated. 6 I. This project was addressed in a Negative Declaration for Conditional Use ? Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009, certified by the City Council on s December 1, 1997. 9 II. The Planning Commission hereby approves an amendment to Conditional Use ~0 Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 to extend the expiration date of said project approval from June 1,2000 to December 1, 2000, subject to the conditions 2~ contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. ~2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular ~3 meeting on the 24th day of April, 2000. ~5 /S~ZAK 16 27 Chairperson 18 ELIZABETH A. ~9 Planning Commission Secretary 20 2] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 22 COUNTY OF ORANGE ) '23 CITY OF TUSTIN ) 24 I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning 25 Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3724 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin 26 Planning Commission, held on the 24th day of April, 2000. 27 I FZLIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary' EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT TO CUP 97-005 AND DR 97-009 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 3724 GENERAL *** 1.1 Condition 1.1 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3695 shall be amended to read: "The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for. the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway by December 1, 2000." (1) 1.2 With the exception of Condition 1.1 of Resolution No. 3695, all remaining conditions of approval contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3533, 3534, 3535, 3695, City Council Resolution Nos. 97-114, 97-115, 97- 116, and those contained in the Amendment to Design Review 97-009 approval letter dated February 2, 1999 shall continue to apply to this project. *** 1.3 The property owner shall deposit with the City a refundable performance bond in the amount of $55,000 to ensure that the asphalt/concrete parking areas and drive aisles on the site are properly replaced with new materials as approved by the Community Development Director, should the project approvals expire. The .property owner shall be responsible for any costs over and above the amount of the initial deposit. The bond shall be submitted to the Community Development Department by May 1, 2000, or the project approval shall become null and void. In the event the project approvals expire, the bond shall be used to install replacement paving on the entire site. *** 1.4 The property owner shall maintain the property in such a manner as to keep the property free from weeds, trash, refuse, dead vegetation, etc. Further, the property owner shall also maintain the site in such a manner as to prevent further violations of the TUstin City Code regarding, but not limited to, such issues as signage, parking compliance, inappropriate uses, and noise. Finally, the property owner shall maintain the improvements on the site to prevent further. occurrences of cracked pavement, faded parking lot striping, cracked or peeling paint/building finish, broken or dilapidated signage, inoperative parking lot lighting, graf~ti, and all other standards contained in the City of Tustin Property Maintenance Ordinance. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (2) CEQA MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (4) DESIGN REVIEW (7) PC/CC POLICY *** EXCEPTIONS Exhibit A Resolution No. 3724 April 24, 2000 Page 2 (1) 1.5 Any violation of any of the conditions im posed is subject to the imposition of a civil penalty of $100.00 for each violation and each day the violation exists. (1) 1.6 The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with any further code enforcement action. (1) 1.7 The applicant shall hold harmless and defend the City of Tustin from all claims and liabilities arising out of a challenge of the City's approval for this project. (1) 1.8 Approval of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning, by May 1, 2000, an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Director of Community Development.