Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 05-09-88MINUTES TUSTIM PLANNING CO)IMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 9, 1988 CALL TO ORDER: Workshop at 5:30 p.m., City Council Chambers Conference Room Adjourned to the regular meeting at 7:35 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Puckett, Well, Baker, Le Jeune, Pontlous 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 April 25, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Puckett seconded to approve the minutes of the April 25, 1988 meeting with the following change: on page 8, it was Commissioner Le Jeune that inquired about Steelcase, not Commissioner Baker. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Extension of a Temporary Use Permit APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: REQUEST: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: JOHN KELLY 330 EL CAMINO REAL TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 165 EL CAMINO REAL TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 C-2 CENTRAL COMMERCIAL EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY USE PERMIT CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION (CLASS I) CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FROM REQUIREMENTS OF THE Recommendation: Planning Commission action as deemed appropriate, by minute motion. Presentation: Christine Shlngleton, Director of Community Development Planning Commission Minutes May 9, 1988 Page two Commissioners Weil and Puckett clarified with the Director that an application for a temporary use permit for banners has been submitted to staff. The Director noted that she can approve the permit for banners for 30 days and that the item before the Commission was specifically the extension of the Use Permit for the building use. She indicated that the banners was a separate temporary use permit application. Commissioner Wetl clarified that the applicant has complied with the building safety improvements required by the City. The Director clarified that the substandard portions of the building are not accessible and only the commercial frontage could be used for the temporary occupancy. The public hearing was opened at 7:44 p.m. Mr. Gregory Hile, Attorney, 1174 S. Coast Hwy., Laguna Beach, representing Mr. Kelly, noted that the building use is the issue and that Mr. Kelly has complied with the requirements. He also indicated his concern with the constitutionality of the City's Sign Ordinance. Commissioner Well stated that testimony regarding the inappropriate at this time. Sign Ordinance was Mr. Htle stated that the validity of the Sign Ordinance should be addressed by the Planning Commission. Lois Jeffrey, Deputy City Attorney, asked Mr. Hile to put his information in the form of a letter to the Planning Commission and to forward a copy to her. Commissioner Le Jeune noted that Councilman Kelly is aware that the City Sign Code is being reviewed. Mr. Hile indicated that he felt the City's enforcement is unfair to Mr. Kelly. The public hearing was closed at 7:47 p.m. Commissioner Baker clarified that all building and safety requirements had been complied with as requested. The Director affirmed that the requirements had been met, that the extension of the temporary use permit was under the discretion of the Planning Commission and that the permit can be granted for up to six months. The public hearing was reopened at 7:48 p.m. Mr. Hile suggested a six month extension of the permit or seven days after the primary. Commissioner Wetl moved, Pontious seconded to approve, by minute order, the extension of temporary use of 165 E1Camtno Real for a period seven days after the primary or June 13, 1988. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes May 9, 1988 Page three 3. Modification of Use Permit 87-14 APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL 13918-13922 NEWPORT NEWPORT AVENUE C-1 RETAIL COMMERCIAL AVENUE AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BONITA AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT MODIFICATION OF USE PERMIT 87-14 TO AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OVERHEAD CANOPY Recommendati on: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2496 approving modification to Use Permit 87-14, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Christine Shlngleton, Director of Community Development Commissioner Baker asked if any complaints were received from the neighboring residences. The Director indicated that there had only been one concern and that had been resolved. Commissioner Well asked if the supports of the canopy were adequate for the structure. The Director noted that the plans were in plan check and the resolution of approval requires compliance of all of the Building Official's requirements. Commissioner Well asked if this needed an environmental analysis. The Director noted that the project needed a Negative Declaration as there is no category to exempt it from environmental review. Commissioner Le Jeune inquired why another public hearing was needed after the original use permit was approved. The Director clarified that a public hearing was needed for the modification of this project to notify the neighbors of a change in the project. The public hearing was opened at 7:55 p.m. The public hearing was closed at 7:56 p.m. Commissioner Pontlous noted that the applicant had originally indicated the desire for a canopy and she had no problem with the modification. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the canopy would block out sun light from the surrounding residences. The Director indicated that there is a 40 foot separation between the properties and that the canopy would be a maximum of 17 feet high. Plannlng Commission Minutes May 9, 1988 Page four Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the alley was designated as one-way. The Director indicated that it is up to the City Engineer to make that determination. The project is not conditioned to the one-way designation. Commissioner Puckett moved, Pontious seconded to approve the modification to Use Permit 87-14 by adoption of Resolution No. 2496. Motion carried 5-0. 4. Use Permit 88-8 and Design Review 88-4 APPLICANT: OWNER: THE COLLINGS COMPANY, INC. dba COLCO, LTD. 1400 DOVE STREET; SUITE 120 NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92660 ST. JAMES PARK CO. % JAMES SSUTU 350 S. FIGUEROA ST; SUITE 270 LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 LOCATION: VACANT LOT ON SOUTH SIDE OF SEVENTEENTH STREET CENTER WAY AND PROSPECT PC-C: PLANNED COMMUNITY: COMMERCIAL ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS REQUEST: BETWEEN ENDERLE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DESIGN REVIEW OF A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL CENTER APPROXIMATELY 62,000 SQUARE FEET TO INCLUDE RETAIL AND OFFICE USES. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit 88-8 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2493 and approve Design Review 88-4 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2494. Presentation: Christine Shlngleton, Director of Community Development Commissioner Le Jeune asked the size of compact parking spaces and where they were 1 ocated. Staff pointed out that compact spaces were 8 feet by 16 feet and indicated the location on the site plan. The Director noted that parking requirements would permit up to 30% compact parking. This project is, however, only proposing 15% compact spaces. Commissioner Baker asked how far the monument sign on Seventeenth Street was from the sidewalk. Staff indicated that there is a 10 foot visual clearance for safety purposes. Commissioner Baker asked if there was any exposed neon. Staff indicated that there have been no submittals as yet. Commissioner Wetl asked if any traffic studies had been completed. Planning Commtssion Minutes May 9, 1988 Page five Staff responded that a very detailed traffic study had been completed, that there is no proposed major impact on the area and the project will have plenty of parking. Commissioner Well noted that the reciprocal parking access is a good idea. She also asked if the City restricts all PR Districts from having medical uses. Staff responded that the need for excess parking for medical uses is the reason for restricting medical use from the PR District. Commissioner Wetl asked if the applicant could restripe the parking lot and put medical offices at this location. Staff responded that they could request medical office uses but the conditional use permit requires the return to the Planning Commission for modification of the use permit. Commissioner Well asked for clarification regarding the trees on Seventeenth Street. Staff indicated that there will be six large street trees in tree wells, some of them will be new, to meet the standard distance requirements per lineal foot for landscaping. Commissioner Baker noted that the brick treatment looked dark and asked how it compared to the color of the Fireman's Fund building. Staff noted that it is just a bit darker and more brown than red. Commissioner Puckett asked how much of the retail space is designated as a restaurant. Staff responded that there is no specific restaurant planned, however a restaurant must be parked at one space per three seats. The applicant could not accommodate a large restaurant on the site. The public hearing opened at 8:24 p.m. Mr. Jim Coilings, representing Colco, offered to answer any questions the Commissioners might have. The public hearing was closed at 8:25 p.m. Commissioner Puckett noted that staff did an excellent job, the project was compatible with the surrounding area and he was very pleased with this project. Commissioner Pontlous added that this was an excellent project with the exception of her concerns regarding the signs and the color palette. Mr. Collings noted that they tried to limit the colors. He has found that most tenants make their sign a single color. He doesn't encourage multi color signs but he wants to offer a wide range to his tenants. He indicated that he would be happy to work with staff on the sign colors. Planning Commission Minutes May 9, 1988 Page six Commissioner Le Jeune agreed with Commissioner Pontious on the colors. He indicated concern with the number of colors as well as the different shades of color. Mr. Collings indicated that he wouldn't allow a tenant to erect a multi-color sign. Commissioner Le Jeune clarified with Mr. Collings that there would only be one shade of each color throughout the center. Mr. Collings agreed. Staff noted that the specific name and number of each color can be controlled by the sign package. Commissioner Wetl indicated that if the turquoise and pink were eliminated from the package she would have no problem with it. Commissioner Puckett agreed that the first six colors would be adequate, that there was no need for the turquoise and pink. Mr. Colltngs indicated that those two colors were not that important to the program. Commissioner Wetl indicated that on Resolution No. 2495, Exhibit A, page 6, item 6.13 the second sentence should be changed to read "Address numerals shall be prominently displayed and a minimum of 6" in height." Commissioner Le Jeune indicated the desire to eliminate trimming sign lettering with gold trim. The Director suggested the following wording for item 6.12 "All signs shall be in accordance with the sign program provided by the applicant with the exception that the colors in the proposed color palette shall be limited to a total of 6 colors with the deletion of turquoise and pink and all accent trim is to be in the same color with no outlining in an alternate color. Any major modifications to this program shall require Planning Commission approval." Commissioner Le Jeune supported staffs recommendation to the ivory color background and the additional brick facing on the back of the building. Commissioner Puckett moved, Pontious seconded to approve Use Permit 88-8 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2493. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Puckett moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Design Review 88-4 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2494 as revised with modification to conditions 6.12 and 6.13. Motion carried 5-0. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS May 9, 1988 Page seven STAFF CONCERNS 5. Report on actions taken at the May 2, 1988 City Council meeting Presentation: Christine Shtngleton, Director of Community Development The following actions were taken: Zoning Ordinance Amendment 87-4 was continued until June 3, 1988 Final Tract Map 12870 was approved Audit committee appointments were made The Joint Planntng Commission/City Council meeting is comfirmed for May 16, 1988. COM#ISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Baker asked for an update on the Exxon station at Red Hill and Nisson. ADJOURNMENT At 8:45 Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Baker seconded to adjourn to a Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop on Monday, May 16, 1988 at 5:00 P.M. at the Barn Restaurant and then to the next regular scheduled meeting on May 23, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Chairman Secretary