HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 09-26-88MXNUTES
TUSTIN PLANNING COlqHISSION
REGULAR I"IEETT NG
SEPTEHBER 26, 1988
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGXANCE/XNVOCATION
ROLL CALL:
PIJSLZC CONCERNS:
Present: Nell, Baker, Le Jeune, Ponttous, Shaheen
(Ltmlted to 3 mtnutes per person for Items not on the agenda)
IF YOU NISH 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.
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Pontious seconded to remove Item 2 from the consent
calendar for open discussion. Morton carried 5-0.
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 September 12, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting
Commissioner Ponttous moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve the remainder of the
consent calendar. Motion carried 5-0.
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
REQUEST:
Amendment to Design Review 87-18, Tentative Tract Map 13106, "Sevtlla" Project
THE FIELDSTONE COMPANY
14 CORPORATE PLAZA
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
LOT 6 OF TRACT 12763
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF MINOR ARCHITECTURAL
PERIMETER UNITS OF TRACT 13106.
ALTERATIONS TO
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2533 approving exterior architectural alterations to the "S, villa" project
originally approved by Design Review 87-18, as submitted or revised.
Resolution No. 2533 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING EXTERIOR BUILDING MODIFICATIONS TO
DESIGN REVIEW 87-18, A 110 UNIT PROJECT LOCATED ON LOT
6 OF TRACT 12763
Planning Commission Minutes
September 26, 1988
Page two
Staff established that the Irvine Company design review staff instituted the request
for these changes to improve the exterior views on the two exterior units.
The public hearing was opened at 7:06 p.m.
Molly Munch, representing the Fieldstone Company, noted that the proposed changes
will enhance the architectural view of the project and make it more compatible with
the surrounding projects. She stated that the cost to make the proposed changes
throughout the project would be cost prohibitive and the maintenance costs to the
Homeowner's Association could not be justified. She concurred with all of the other
conditions imposed by staff.
Commissioner Shaheen noted that if there are changes to the units specified, that all
of the units should be changed to obtain some consistency in architecture.
Ms. Munch noted that the porches are only decorative and the painting of the added
features would be prohibited.
Commissioner Well noted that she objected to the addition of extra balconies and
windows on the inner units. She asked if these proposed changes would be earthquake
safe. She also noted that the proposed materials and colors are consistent.
Commissioner Ponttous asked what the cost of the changes would be.
Ms. Munch stated that the additional building cost would be approximately $7,000 per
~6tt.
Commissioner Shaheen asked what the selling price per unit would be for this
project and what the square footage of the units would be.
Ms. Munch noted that she thought the sales price would be around $200,000 per unit,
having two units per building ranging from 1470 to 1770 square feet.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked how may balconies were effected by this proposed change.
Staff responded it might be as many as 36 units involved out of the 110 unit project.
The Director noted that the important issue is the private street and streetscapes
and to include the changes on the units immediately facing the main loop streets.
Commissioner Wetl noted that she felt unless the changes requested by the builder
effect the City in a health or safety way the City should not step in. She noted
that if these improvements were made on all of the units, the price tag would be
greatly increased.
Commissioner Baker clarified that the developer was just upgrading and that there
were no problems in obtaining approval of the original plans or design.
The public hearing was closed at 7:21 p.m.
Commissioner Ponttous noted her concern with the cost factor of imposing the changes
on all units and suggested that the change be made to the exterior units only.
Planning Commission Minutes
September 26, 1988
Page three
Commissioner Le Jeune noted that the ortglnal plan was suitable, the enhancements are
good and he felt that the changes dtd not need to be throughout the project.
Commissioner Well moved, Ponttous seconded to approve exterlor architectural
alterations to the "Sevtlla" project originally approved by Destgn Revtew 87-18 by
the adoption of Resolution No. 2533 revtsed to eliminate Sectton II. 1. Morton
carrted 4-1 No: Shaheen.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Use Permit 88-19
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
ORANGE COUNTY BUILDERS
1260 HEACOCK
ANAHEIM, CA 92807
ART AND ZENY REMIGIO
65 EMERALD
IRVINE, CA 92715
14752 HOLT AVENUE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
R-3 3000: MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT
TWO-STORY ADDITION TO AN
SQUARE FOOT LOT
A 3,326 SQUARE FOOT, 10 BEDROOM,
EXISTING SENIOR'S HOME ON A 12,220
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission either continue
the heartng on thts matter, or approve Use Permtt 88-19 by the adoptton of
Resolution No. 2532 wtth the conditions contained for redestgn of the second
story addition, as submitted or revised.
Resolution No. 2532
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA APPROVING USE PERMIT 88-19 FOR
A 3,326 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SENIOR
CITIZEN'S HOME AT 14752 HOLT AVENUE.
Presentation: Eric Haaland, Acting Assistant Planner
Commissioner Wetl questioned if staff had monitored the board and care home on Bryan
Avenue for parking related issues.
Staff responded that they had not visited that particular facility, however, they
visited other facilities with the type of use proposed by this application and found
that parking requirements are reduced.
The Director noted that the Bryan Avenue facility is more of an apartment complex
where this proposed use is more of a rest home.
Commissioner Pontious noted concern for weekend parking demands and accommodations
for family visitor parking.
Planntng Commission Minutes
September 26, 1988
Page four
Commissioner Baker asked what the total number of units will be when completed.
Staff responded that there would be a total of 15, posstbly fewer if the second story
is eliminated.
The Director noted that a few cars could park in the front turn around area.
Commissioner Shaheen asked how deep the lot is.
Staff responded that the lot is 188 feet deep.
Commissioner Wetl indicated that she did not like the long narrow driveway with 42
feet of blind space.
The Director recommended that appropriate signage could be conditioned for
installation on both ends of the driveway to caution users to be sure the drive is
clear before entering.
The public hearing was opened at 7:40 p.m.
Elizabeth (Ptnkerton) Kltne, 25400 Cart Road, Wtldomar, noted that she owned the
property directly south at 14762 Holt Avenue. She indicated that her property
received water from the subject property's laundry area and that the back yard of her
property is always wet due to this runoff. She indicated that she would like a block
wall between the properties; that she would not object to a second story if there
were no windows facing the south. She indicated that there are parking problems, and
there have been problems finding syringes in their front yard from the trash of the
nursing home. She noted concern about what this will do to the surrounding property
values. She indicated that the subject type of facility is greatly needed, however,
it should be a well run home and should not be a problem to the neighborhood.
Alfred George, manager of the apartment complex at 14762 Holt Avenue, noted that
there are six children in the apartment complex and was concerned about heavy
construction machinery working at the site and an inadequate or non-existent fence.
He also noted a step in the driveway at the site that would decrease the driveway
width to ten feet. He also noted that due to the red painted curb, there are many
times where the driveway to the apartments is blocked by visitor parking at the
senior home. He also noted that when he built his patio there was a setback
requirement of eight feet and asked if that would not also apply to the applicant.
He also noted that he felt there should be three parking spots for the caretakers.
Lyn Van Dyken 235 S. Main Street, responded that she felt the project needed more
than a chain ~ink fence on the south side and suggested a block wall similar to the
one on the north side of the project.
Julius Deocampo, representing Orange County Builders, noted that the owners decided
to remove the second story, install wood shingles all around, provide proper drainage
and have an enclosed trash dumpster.
Planning Commission Minutes
September 26, 1988
Page ftve
Commissioner Le Jeune confirmed that the trash dumpster would be enclosed, that the
roofing material would be of a fire retardant material and that the water run off
problem would be solved.
Mr. Deocampo confirmed that all of those problems would be resolved.
Commissioner Baker asked if a two foot step did exist, if there were gates on the
property and what the distance between the house and the street is.
Mr. Deocampo indicated that there would be no problem in removing the step and door
that it leads to and that the gate already exists and will remain.
Staff responded that the house is 35 feet from the street.
Commissioner Wetl noted that she shared the roofing concern, stating that she would
like to see something other than wood shingles used and have the house in front
reroofed to match due to the nature of the facility.
The Director noted that the materials used would have to be consistent with the
Uniform Building Code and its requirements for fire retardant treatment.
Commissioner Pontious indicated her concern regarding the lack of greenbelt areas and
asked if one parking space could be sacrificed to obtain more greenbelt and patio
area. She also asked if the second story could be removed.
Mr. Deocampo noted that a parking space could be deleted to obtain more landscaping
and that the second story could be eliminated.
Commissioner Shaheen indicated that he would like to see a fence, to protect the
privacy of both parties, that is more than just a chain link.
Staff responded that a condition to Resolution No.
that a 6 foot 8 inch high fence or block wall
southerly property line.
2532 could be added to indicate
shall be constructed along the
The Director noted that one way a block wall could work would be if the neighboring
property owner to the south would agree to allow access to the wall and have the wall
built on the property line.
Art Reml~to, applicant, noted that he did not want a block wall on the south side as
it would block air circulation and that he had plans to construct a chain link fence
with wooden inserts. He also noted that the residents of the senior home are quiet
and would not disturb their neighbors.
Commissioner Well noted that she felt the chain link fence is inappropriate for a
residential neighborhood and that wood would be more aesthetic.
Commissioner Baker asked what type of fence, if any, was there now.
Mr. Remt~to, responded that there were just posts for a chain link fence that is not
yet installed.
Planntng Commission Mtnutes
September 26, 1988
Page stx
Commissioner Baker asked about the awnings in the driveway.
Mr. Remigio said that the awnings could be removed.
Commissioner Shaheen asked Mr. Remiglo how he got along with his neighbors.
Mr. Remigio responded fine.
Commissioner Well noted concern regarding the safety features on the inside of the
building for walkers.
Mr. Remigio noted that he would provide whatever facilities that were required by the
State Health Department for licensing. He also noted that when the project is
finished the back kitchen would be for the guest home and the front kitchen would be
used for e~loyees.
Commissioner Shaheen asked if the facility will be sprinklered.
The Director stated that whatever is required by the Orange County Fire Department
would be provided.
Commissioner Well asked if all of the residents are ambulatory and if a nurse will be
on duty at all times.
Mr. Remigio noted that his wife is a nurse, however, the State does not require a
nurse and that some residents are ambulatory and some are not.
Zen¥ Remi~io, noted that she did not know if a nurse would be required but they would
conform with the State requirement.
Commissioner Well asked if the State inspects these facilities regularly.
Ms. Remigio indicated that they are inspected regularly by the State.
Mr. George, made mention of a situation that existed regarding the fence installation
and height.
The Director indicated that there were no existing building permits for the fence.
Ms. Kline noted that there was some disagreement regarding the fence, that she would
prefer a block wall but would not be against a wood fence.
Commissioner Shaheen asked Ms. Kline if she would pay for one half of the block wall.
Ms. Kline stated that she could not afford it and had already agreed to pay for one
hal( of a 6 foot 8 inch wood fence.
The public hearing was closed at 8:20 p.m.
Commissioner Le Jeune stated that he would like to continue this item until the next
meeting.
The Director asked the Commission for some direction.
Planning Commission Minutes
September 26, 1988
Page seven
Commissioner Le Jeune stated that if there was a block wall on the north side, there
should also be one on the south side, he wanted to see the best possible use of
roofing materials and to get the two roofs to match, and he was glad that the
applicant had decided to remove the second story and would like to see a finished
drawing on the project.
Commissioner Shaheen asked if the neighbor on the south side should pay for the
fence.
Commissioner Le Jeune stated that he didn't feel that was necessary.
The Director noted that if the applicant works with the property owner on the south
to install the fence on the property line there should not be a problem.
Commissioner Ponttous noted that considering the age of the house she would ltke to
see it reroofed with a matertal with a higher fire retardant rating.
Commissioner Well agreed that the house should be reroofed and would also ltke to see
parking made available on the street.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked for some background on the red curbs and new elevations.
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Wetl seconded to continue Use Permit 88-19 to the
October 10, 1988 meettng to enable the applicant more ttme to work wtth staff.
Morton carrted 5-0.
4. Use Permit 88-21
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
MR. JOHN REISIG
ON BEHALF OF THE RANCHO SAN JUAN HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION
RANCHO SAN JUAN CONDOMINIUMS, 13722 RED HILL AVENUE, AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF RED HILL AVENUE AND SAN JUAN STREET (LOT 1 OF
TRACT 11330)
R-3 1700 MULTI-FAMILY
THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 1) FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
TO EXTEND THE HEIGHT OF EXISTING MASONRY WALL PORTIONS WITH A 24
INCH WROUGHT IRON TOP.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use
Permit 88-21 by adopting Resolution No. 2534 with the conditions contained
therein.
Resolution No. 2534 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, APPROVING USE PERMIT 88-21 ALLOWING A TWO FOOT
HIGH EXTENSION TO PORTIONS OF A WALL AT THE RANCHO SAN
JUAN CONDOMINIUMS AT 13722 RED HILL.
Presentation: Bernard Chase, Planner
Planning Commission Mtnutes
September 26, 1988
Page etght
Commissioner Wet1 asked If Resolution No. 2534 1rem I. £. was an Inappropriate
ftndtng.
The Director noted that It was a normal condition and was not inconsistent.
Commissioner Shaheen noted that he felt thts was a necessary project.
Commissioner Baker asked tf the Ftre Marshal had seen thts request.
Staff responded that the project had gone through the prelJmtnary revtew process and
that staff w111 be sure that the plans get routed to them again durtng formal plan
check.
Commissioner Well noted that she had spoken with Acting Police Chief Wakefield and
that he did not feel that it would be a problem.
The public hearing was opened at 8:40 p.m.
Commissioner Le Jeune noted that people were surprised that the security fence would
not surround the property and asked what would happen around the wooden fence.
Kathleen Fernandez, 13722 Red Hill, Unit 57, Vice-President of the Rancho San Juan
Homeowner's Association noted that there was a misunderstanding, that there were to
be driveway and sidewalk gates but that it is necessary to obtain a fence height
variance before proceeding with that. She also noted that the wooden fence would be
extended.
The Director noted that it would be subject to the Design Review process and building
permits and that the application has been submitted. She also indicated that the
resolution would permit them to extend the height of the entire fence.
The public hearing was closed at 8:45 p.m.
Commissioner Well thanked the Homeowner's Association for bringing this to the
City's attention and felt that the higher fence is necessary and that she was in
favor of this project.
Commissioner Pontious moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Use Permit 88-21 by the
adoption of Resolution No. 2534 as submitted. Motion carried 5-0.
OLO BUSIMESS
5. Sign Code Amendment - Update
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
No Planning Commission action necessary.
Planntng Commission Mtnutes
September 26, 1988
Page nine
NE~ BUSINESS
STAFF CONCERNS
6. C1t¥ Council Actions taken at the September lg, 1988 meettng
Presentation: Christine Shtngleton
The following actions were taken at the September 19, 1988 City Council meeting:
Approval of Final Map 13556 - Market Place
Approval of the Construction of Jamboree
JWA Update
Appointed a five member Cultural Resources Advisory Committee
Density Bonus Policy continued
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Shaheen asked the status of the Right-of-way between Tusttn Meadows and
Peppertree homes.
The Director noted that there is a storm drain easement and that the Irvine Company
is doing research and will respond to the City's request as soon as they have
completed their research. She assured property owners that the recommendation will
not be for public use.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the residents are noticed of a public hearing.
The Director noted that the law requires the City to notice the property owner.
Commissioner Le Jeune noted wheel stops in disarray in the Red Hill Plaza parking
lot.
Commissioner Ponttous asked if there was going to be a joint meeting with the
Commission and Council regarding the color of the Market Place.
The Director indicated that if the Council desires to meet a special meeting will be
scheduled.
Commissioner Wetl asked the procedure on weekend code violation enforcement. In
particular she was concerned about someone selling rugs at E1 Camino Real and
Newport Avenue.
ADJOURI~IENT
At 9:05 p.m. Commissioner Well moved, Pontious seconded to adjourn to the next
regular scheduled Planning Commission meeting on October 10, 1988 at 7:00 p.m.
Motion carried 5-0.
Pe~nt Foley
Secretary