Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 10-26-88MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 26, 1988 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., Ctty Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Well, Baker, Ponttous, Shaheen Absent: Le Jeune 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 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 October 6, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting 2. Minutes of the October 10, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting Commissioner Wetl moved, Ponttous seconded to approve the consent calendar. Motion ~arried 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Variance 88-7 APPLICANT: OWNER: DAVID E. SOSIN, M.D. HEADACHE TREATMENT CENTER OF ORANGE COUNTY 14111 NEWPORT AVENUE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 DAVID E. SOSIN, M.D. 14111 NEWPORT AVENUE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 LOCATION: 14111 NEWPORT AVENUE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNEROF NEWPORT MITCHELL AVENUES PLANNED COMMUNITY-COMMERCIAL (PC-C) DISTRICT ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) TO PERMIT A BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AND Planning Commission Hlnutes October 26, 1988 Page two Recommendation: That the Planning Commission deny Variance 88-7 by adoptton of ~esolutlon No. 2538. Resolution No. 2538 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, DENYING VARIANCE NO. 88-7 FOR THE HEADACHE TREATMENT CENTER OF ORANGE COUNTY (DAVID E. SOSIN, M.D.) AT NEWPORT AND MITCHELL AVENUES. Presentation: Ron Reese, Associate Planner Commissioner Baker asked if there were any medical professionals in the area ~6m~lalnlng aou-b-6-~--~he sign. Staff responded that there had been four or five complaints from medical professionals in the area. The public hearing was opened at 7:10 p.m. Myra Sostn, 14111 Newport Avenue, co-owner of the Headache Treatment Center, spoke in favor of the variance. She noted that the Headache Treatment Center, while being a professional medical practice, is a business that is entitled to visible identification. She cited sections of the Tustin Municipal Code relating to the Sign Criteria. She also noted that it was her feeling that the approval of Variance 88-7 would not set a precedent because of exceptional circumstances. She also noted that the facility had been a private home that they had converted into office use which was given a beautification award by the City of Tustin. She indicated that their business brings people into Tustin. Ms. Sosin displayed a board with pictures and diagrams depicting her calculations regarding how much identification exposure their business has under current circumstances. She also noted that they wanted the same privileges enjoyed by their neighbors, that of visibility. She stated that their sign was not visible. She cited problems obtaining clarification of staff statements and with the Alta Dena Diary trucks blocking the sign when they are parked. Dr. Ketth Kausler, owner of a Chiropractic practice on Newport Avenue spoke in opposition of the sign. He noted that he felt the sign was too large and was an eyesore. He also indicated that if this variance was approved, he intended to use the variance as a precedent in obtaining a similar sign for his business. Dr. Sosin, 14111 Newport Avenue, noted that the sign was not an eyesore and that the whole area was polluted by signs. He suggested that Dr. Kausler's opposition was due to professional jealousy. He indicated that he was not in co~etttton with the Chiropractor and asked what other medical professionals complained. Staff responded that they were not at liberty to divulge that information. At 7:35 p.m. Commissioner Well asked that the Commission break for five minutes to review Ms. So~in's diagram and pictures. Commissioner Baker agreed. At 7:40 p.m. the meeting reconvened. Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1988 Page three Commissioner Ponttous noted that there were other ways for the applicant to advertise and stated that she was concerned that granting the variance, even for a short period of time would set a precedent. Commissioner Wet1 noted that she had watched the progress of the building and that it dtd deserve the beautification award. She stated that signs were for identification, not advertising. She also indicated that the problems with the truck parking at Alta Dena were self-inflicted as the dairy was there when the $ostn's bought the property. She asked if the $ostn's were aware of the sign code when they purchased the property. Mr. Sostn indicated that they were aware of the Sign Code. Commissioner Well noted that she regrets any misunderstandings the Sostn's might have had with members of the staff. She also noted that she would have trouble justifying a hardship to grant this variance, that the case was borderline. She also asked if there were address numbers on the building or the sign. Dr. Sosln noted that the address Is not on either of the signs. Ms. Sostn asked tf having the numbers on the butldtng Is tncluded as part of the square footage of the allowable slgnage. Staff responded that the Fire Department requires a minimum 6" high address numbers on the buildings and that those numbers are not counted in the allowable sign square footage. Commissioner Wetl suggested that the address numbers be placed on the building. Commissioner Shaheen noted no problems in identifying the building. He indicated that the sign couid be trimmed down by eliminating the logo and enhancing the "Headache Treatment Center" portion of the sign. Commissioner Baker noted that staff could answer any technical questions the applicant might have. Commissioner Wetl moved, Pontious seconded to deny Variance 88-7 by the adoption of Resolution Nb~ 2538. Motion carried 4-0. Lois Jeffrey, Deputy City Attorney, indicated to the applicants that they had the r~ght to appeal to the City Council within seven days. Mr. and Mrs. Sosln indicated that they understood that right. NEll BUSINESS 4. Comments on Draft Air Qualtt¥ Management Plan Recommendation: For review and comment. Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1988 Page four Commissioner W..e_il noted that she was very upset with SCAG as this is the second powerful problem they've presented to local jurisdictions which are not able to be implemented. She indicated that SCAG should be lobbying Washington. She stated that EPA had taken away the power of local jurisdictions to regulate vehicle emissions; presented extremely unrealistic goals that can not be implemented. She suggested that in an attempt to control particulate matter, an effort should be made to regulate leaf blowers and to require trucks hauling dirt and gravel to be covered with tarpaulins. She stated that this was just another growth control issue that would create a financial disaster for the State. She felt that people can not be denied the ability to open a business in this state; that was possible in Russia, but not in the United States. Commissioner Shaheen agreed wi th Commissioner Wetl. Commissioner Baker agreed also, adding that SCAG was crossing from need to fantasy. He also questioned SCAG's statistics and tactics of removing authority from the local jurisdiction. Commissioner Pontlous noted her strong objections to the Plan. No Planning Commission action necessary. 5. Draft Grading and Excavation Code and Grading Manual Recommendation: Receive and file. Instruct staff to agendize for next Planning C6mm)ssion meeting and schedule a workshop session regarding the attached documents. Report was received and filed. At the November 14, 1988 meeting a date for a workshop will be set, giving the Commission ample time to review the ordinance and manual. STAFF CONCERNS 6. Report on Ctt¥ Council Actions - October 19, 1988 Presentation: Steve Rubtn, Senior Planner The following Council actions were taken: Denial of Vacation of San Juan Final Tract Map 13106, Parcel Maps 87-201 and 88-206 were approved Draft Political Sign Ordinance was introduced JWA Status Report was received and filed Staff introduced Daniel Fox, Associate Planner as the newest addition to staff. Planntng Commission Minutes October 26, 1988 Page five C(IMMI SS[OIl CONCERNS Commissioner Ponttous noted that her microphone needed to be fixed and that she would be unable to attend the November 14th meeting. She also asked staff to encourage the Orange County Ftre Department to enforce the stze of address numerals. Commissioner Shaheen asked for a stop sign at Fig and Alder Lanes. Commissioner Baker asked if the red curb could be extended on the north s~de of Bryan Avenue, west of Red Hill Avenue. AI)~IOURI~EIIT At 8:30 p.m Commissioner I~eil moved, Pontlous seconded to adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting on November 14, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. In the City Council Chambers. Motion carried 4-0. r ~~A~- L. ~ker ~ Chatrman Penni Foley Secretary