Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 10-09-89MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COI~ISSION REGULAR I~ETING OCTOBER 9, 1989 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Pontious, Le Jeune, Baker, Shaheen, Kasparian PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda) IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE 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 OISCUSSION 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 September 25, 1989 P. lannin~ Commission meetin~ e General Plan Con.sistenc~ Determination for La Colina - Red Hill Flood Control Channel LOCATION: NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF BRYAN AND BROWNING AVENUE REQUEST: DETERMINATION OF GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FOR PROPOSED FLOOD CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission deter,nine that the proposed improvements to the La Colina - Redhill Channel are in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan by adopting Resolution No. 2681, as submitted or amended. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner 3. Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map 13030 APPLICANT: WESTERN NATIONAL PROPERTIES LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF JAMBOREE ROAD AND BRYAN AVENUE - LOT 14 OF TRACT 12763 MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: THE PROJECT IS COVERED BY A PREVIOUS EIR (85-2) FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN. NO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT ~tAP 13030 TO OCTOBER 7, 1990. Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1989 Page two Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve a time exten- sion for Tentative Tract 13030, by adoption of Resolution No. 2683, as submitted or revised. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Shaheen seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried'~-O. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. Conditional Use Permit 89-31 and Variance 89-13 APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: KINCANNON ARCHITECTS/JUDY KINCANNON 13691 RED HILL AVE. TUSTIN, CA 92680 ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF TUSTIN/DELORES HOSKINS P.O. BOX 86 TUSTIN, CA 92681 441 EL CAMINO REAL CENTRAL COMMERCIAL (C2) AND CULTURAJ_ RESOURCE OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15303 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A THRIFT SHOP AND SOCIAL HALL AND TO PROVIDE LESS THAN THE 33 PARKING SPACES REQUIRED BY THE ZONING CODE. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2684 approving Use Permit 89-31 for the Assistance League thrift shop and social hall and approving Variance 89-13 to allow less than the required 33 parking spaces. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Staff made corrections to the Resolutions, as moved. Commissioner Le Jeune asked for a clarification of the parking requirements. Staff replied that since the office is open at the same time as the social hall or with the thrift shop, either 18 or 21 spaces would be in operation. Commissioner Kasparian asked if the approval of the use permit could be rescinded if traffic problems arise within the next three (3) years, and the alternatives proposed for easing the problems are ineffective; he felt that once the approval is granted, traffic will not be a sufficient reason for closing down the operation of the facility. Staff replied that they could explore other options, if necessary. The Director commented that staff desires to recommend approval of the variance and provide monitorin§ devices to mitigate problems that might arise over time; this is not an unusual condition; the two examples are provided as available alternatives for the applicant in the Cultural Overlay District. Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1989 Page three Con~nission Kasparian commented that the conditions note that there will "never" be activities within the social hall at the same time that the store is open; he felt that it would never be policed, but would have to rely on the integrity of the people. The Public Hearing was opened at /:15 p.m. Delores Hoskins, President of the Assistance League, addressed the Commission. Commissioner Baker asked the League was taking over the whole location; and if she felt any changes to the Resolution ere needed. Ms. Hoskins affirmed that they will be utilizing the entire building; and commented that since the t~rift shop is operated by the members, it is closed during the meetings. Judy Almquist commented that the Assistance League is not new to the community; they have been at their present location for 12 years; because of their hidden location, they have desired to obtain a better location; they have been looking in the Tustin area for a number of years for a building that would suit their needs; in Downtown Tustin it is hard to find a place with 33 parking spaces; they have wanted to expand, but since they were unable to purchase additional land, they opted for this building which provides additional parking; it may not meet all of their requirements, but they have access to additional parking; they turn all monies back into the community; and they will advise their members of the limited parking. Commissioner Shaheen asked if there were any objections. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:20 p.m. Commissioner Baker asked if the applicant had to pay a fee for the variance; and if wording could be' included in the statutes waiving the fee for non-profit organi- zations. The Director noted that only the City Council would have the ability to waive fees. Lois Jeffrey noted that the City Council has the authority to establish fees; if a request was made for an exception, they would have the ability, even after the fact; the fee is for processing the application, and non-profit organizations still require processing time. Commissioner Baker noted that he was concerned about the parking, but he would ~ike to see a full parking lot in the downtown area; and asked if the applicant would have to have a new variance for compliance with the parking ratios with conversion of the office to retail areas. The Director replied that they have other options under the Cultural Resources Overlay District without going through the variance procedures; if problems result, there are monitoring devices; and in the future, there may be parking restrictions along E1Camino Real. Commissioner Baker asked for a clarification of the "Comprehensive Parking Demand Study". Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1989 Page four The Director replied that the study would not be done automatically in three years, but would be at the discretion of the Public Works Director or Community Development Director if there were identified problems. Commissioner Kasparian commented that nothing would transpire unless there were complaints. The Director clarified that it would require the Public Works or Community Development Directors to identify a parking problem. Commissioner Le Jeuene asked if there would be a hardship if the parking issue was resolved after one year instead of three. The Director replied that it was up to the Commission, but that the decisions would be based upon history, and that three years was an adequate time period. Commissioner Baker moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Use Permit 8g-31 by the adop- tlon ot Resolut'ion No. Z6~3~, revised as tollows: Page one, title, line two, delete "conditionally:. Page two, II. line three replace "and to provide" with the word "with". Motion Carried 5-0. 5. Variance 89-14 and Modification of Design Review 89-02 APPLICANT: OWNER: ART KENT HARRIS ARCHITECTS 2727 WEST NEWPORT BLVD., SUITE 211 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 DAVE WILSON 1400 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE ORANGE, CA 9266/ LOCATION: LOT 1 AND 2 (45 AUTO CENTER DRIVE), TRACT 13834 ZONING: PC (PLANNED COMMUNITY) MIXED USE DESIGNATION, EAST SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: TUSTIN THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 5) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15305(A) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. 1. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO UTILIZE THE PARKING PROVISIONS OF THE PC-AUTO CENTER DISTRICT ON LOTS I AND 2 OF TRACT 13834 AND TO ENCLOSE A PORTION OF THE REQUIRED AUTOMOBILE PARKING SPACES TO NOT BE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE ON LOT 2 (45 AUTO CENTER DRIVE); AND 2. MODIFICATION OF DESIGN REVIEW 89-02 TO PERMIT MODIFICATION OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND DELETION OF CONDITIONS 3.1.B OF RESOLUTION 2574. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Variance 89-14 and modification of Design Review 89-02 by adoption of Resolution No. 2682 as submitted or revised. Presentation: Christopher Jackson, Associate Planner Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1989 Page fi ve Commissioner Kasparian asked why the applicant is required to have some parking spaces open for the public. Staff replied that the East Tustin Specific Plan requires a certain number of spaces in the PC mixed use district; the staff feels that they should be open to the public as compared to the auto center parking which could be used for employees and be enclosed. The Director summarized the Resolution by noting that they are referring to acces- sible versus secured parking for employees; Lexus will have more than ample parking; but the staff is trying to accommodate their need for secured areas; they would like to eliminate some landscaping; since it is an Auto Center dealership, the same con- cessions should be granted; the only reason the properties were not rezoned to Auto Center status was for expediting purposes. Commissioner Baker asked for a clarification of Exhibit B; and asked if there was a great amount of employee parking in CL-5 between Pontiac and Lexus. The Director noted that it was submitted by the dealership, but that it should show Toyota, not Mitsubishi; and that the dealers have an option of providing employee parking in a ratio of 11 spaces per acre either on-site or in the parking lot that is maintained by the Association; there are no more remaining spaces to be assigned in that lot, therefore, all future construction will have to provide employee parking on-site. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:35 p.m. Art Kent, Harris Architects, addressed the Commission. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:36 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune had no disagreement with the program. Commissioner Pontious felt that it was extremely fair and proper, given the circum- stances. Commissioner Baker moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Variance 89-14 and modifica- tion to Design Review 89-02 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2682. Motion carried 5-0. OLD BUSINESS 6. Conditional Use Permit 89-25 and Design Review 89-66 Presentation: Dan Fox, Acting Senior Planner Commissioner Baker asked if there was a possibility of customers exiting the car wash and crossing traffic to turn left or make a u-turn. The ~r.a.ffic .~n~ineer, representing the applicant, fe~t that it was not a possible move, and that they would make a u-turn at Centennial. Commissioner Shaheen asked for the traffic count at First Street. Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1989 Page si x The Traffi~ ~n.gineer replied that it was listed in Appendix B of the staff report. During the morning peak hours the west bound total was 85g cars per hour and the east bound traffic total was 631 cars per hour. Commissioner Kasparian noted that the report did not address t~e bottleneck of traffic in front of the Post Office; and that even with the increased driveway width and red curbs for traffic exiting the facility nothing has been done to mitigate traffic problems; and asked how close the car wash driveway was to the Post Office entrance. The Traffic Engineer noted that during their observations in front of the Post Office, they decided that people backing-up were not enough to cause significant conflicts with the car wash; the red curb will improve the traffic entering the Post Office; the driveway would be about 85 feet from the Post Office entrance, which would be about four (4) car lengths. Commissioner Shaheen felt that the red curbing in front of the car wash, along with the ingress and egress of the Post Office, will create a lot of congestion; asked how many cars they anticipated washing; and asked if the applicant has attempted to create another access. Henry Kuma~ai, applicant, replied that they estimated 450 vehicles to be the maximum number; and noted that no matter what type of business was developed on the site, there would be traffic going in and out. Commissioner Shaheen commented that an office facility would have significantly less traffic than a car wash; even though the driveway is widened, there will still be traffic problems; and he had not seen a car wash with a shared entrance and exit. Mr. Kuma~ai replied that there would be 200-400 cars per day; and that the original plan was to have two driveways, but it would have conflicted with the Post Office. He presented a drawing showing a maximum of 31 cars on the car wash at one time. Commissioner Pontious noted that the Tustin Car Wash had one driveway. Commissioner Baker asked how long it took for a car to be detailed complets the wash process. Mr. Kuma~ai stated that it would take 10-12 minutes; and with the inclusion of a second dryer it will cut the drying time down. Commissioner Baker noted that it would be able to handle 120 cars per hour. Mr. Kuma~ai replied that the Laguna Hills Car Wash, which is the busiest in the state, washes 800 cars per day; a normal car wash would wash about 400 cars per day. Commissioner Pontious asked staff for a clarification of the Commission's required actions; commented that she felt that the changes were positive; and that the changes proposed would make it a better project. The Director replied that the Co~nission's views need not change and that no further action was required by the Commission review and report on potential revisions for the report. Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1989 Page seven Commissioner Kasparian asked if there was a possibility of requesting the Post Office to red-curb their frontage. He felt that if the entire area could be red-curbed, then he would consider it a more viable project. Commissioner Pontious noted that it would be an excellent addition. The Director commented that red-curbing in front of the Post Office would be a separate issue, but could be referred to the Public Works Director for further study. Commissioner Kasparian commented that he attended the City Council meeting at the time of appeal, and noted that not one of the City Council members addressed the problem of the possibility of making traffic problems worse on First Street. He feels that the City Council should address the traffic problem. Commissioner Le Jeune was concerned with customers leaving the premises during the cleaning time, which would cause a back-up of stacked vehicles; and wondered if the conditions could reflect wording to request that customers remain on the premises while their vehicles were being washed. The Director commented that staff believes that there will still be a stacking problem even though it has been improved to the best extent possible; and that the origina~ issues and concerns sti~l apply. The Director included Item 4.6, as moved, to require patrons to remain on premises. Commissioner Baker felt that there will be a problem of customers pulling across traffic to turn into MacDonald's or make a u-turn. The Director noted that a "right-turn only" sign could be posted. Commissioner Le Jeune inquired about the deed restriction on the property. Mr. Kuma~ai replied that it was required by MacDonald's. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Pontious seconded to forward the revised conditions to the City Council with the following revisions: *** 4.6 Notices shall be posted on the site requesting that all patrons please remain on the premises until the vehicle is finished. Exact copy and location of such notice shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department with the final working drawings. *** 4.7 A "right turn only" sign shall be posted on the inside of the front perimeter wall for exiting traffic. Exact details and location of said sign shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department with the final working drawings. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1989 Page eight STAFF CONCERNS ® Development Status Report Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development No Planning Commission action necessary. Actions of the October 2, 1989 City Council Meeting Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development No Planning Commission action necessary. CO~[ISSIO~ CONCER~S Commissioner Shaheen asked that "No Parking" signs be placed on Alder Lane for street cleaning. The Director suggested that the Homeowner's Association look into the problem and forward their desires to the Public Works Department. Commissioner Kasp.arian asked that staff look into the unkept sidewalk on the west side of Prospect between the Gerber Day Care Center and Anglin Drive. Staff responded that the area might be in the county but staff would follow-up. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the October 16, 1989 City Council Workshop dealing with the Council Chambers remodel was a public meeting. He also noted concern about the status of the B&J Tree Service on E1Camino Real; Simone's Place on First Street; encouraged the placement of "Buckle Up" signs in our new retail areas; asked the status of the Nisson property on Walnut and Red Hill and noted that the Register's Community section still notes that Planning Commission meetings at 7:30 p.m.. The Director responded that the workshop is a public meeting; that a Notice to Vacate the property on E1Camino Real was being drafted last week. Regarding Simones' there has been a preliminary proposal submitted and returned to the developer with comments. The Nisson property is receiving a new facade after removing five feet from the front of the building and there is also an addition going onto the back of the house. ADJOURNMENT At 8:25 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Baker seconded to adjourn to the next regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission on Monday, October 23, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Penni Foley Secretary Leslie Anne Po6'tious Chairman