The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Minutes 01-25-88MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING CONMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 25, 1988 CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Puckett, Well, Baker, Le Jeune, Ponttous 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 January 11, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting Commissioner Puckett moved to approve the minutes, Baker seconded subject to the following changes: Page 3, paragraph 6 should read: "Ron Wolford, Engineering Services Manager, responded that construction on Bryan Avenue would be completed shortly and construction on E1 Camino Real should begin in May." Also the number in paragraph 8 should be "150 feet". Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS OLD BUSINESS 2. Street Improvements Presentation: Bob Ledendecker, Director of Public Works/Engineering Bob Ledendecker gave a summary of regional/local transportation projects as they relate to the City general guidelines with respect to scope and scheduling for each of the projects. Commissioner Well asked if it were possible for Caltrans to make the I-5 less than 12 lanes. Mr. Ledendecker answered that they would have no reason to. Commissioner Puckett asked if the road behind Peppertree would be connected to Tustin Ranch Road. Planning Commission Minutes January 25, 1988 Page two Mr. Ledendecker noted that there were no plans to date to extend Tustin Ranch Road however, it is still in the Master Plan. In order to extend Tustin Ranch Road through to Edinger Street it would be necessary to obtain approximately 5 acres from the Marine Corps to accommodate the intersection. A general discussion between the Commission and Mr. Ledendecker ensued clarifying the changes in the I-5/I-55 interchange. Christine Shin9leton requested that Item No. 5 be taken at this time, out of order. NEW BUSINESS 5. Larwin Square, Removal of Gazebo Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner Commissioner Puckett asked if the Commission hadn't previously approved the moving of the gazebo. Staff responded that a Use Permit to allow a bank in the gazebo location was denied by the City Council. Mr. Ted Fessler, representing Larwin Square, noted that the space behind the gazebo has been vacant for the past year. There are many major tenants that are interested in the site, providing that the gazebo is removed in order to give them adequate exposure. Commissioner Baker asked if there was enough parking for the larger tenants. Commisioner Wetl noted that there was adequate space for parking but it needs to be utilized. She asked of the possiblities of putting a door on the First Street side to utilize the parking on the north side of the center. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the water puddle in front of Winchells could be remedied. Mr. Fessler noted that there was a possibility of access on the north side to utilize the parking and that the owner is in favor of restoring the parking lot in the future. He also noted that there is an engineer working on the puddle problem and it should be fixed shortly. Commissioner Puckett moved, Le Jeune seconded to recommend the approval of the removal of the gazebo to the Redevelopment Agency. OLD BUSINESS 3. CC&R Presentation: Motion carried 5-0. Provisions Christine Shlngleton, Director of Community Development Planning Commission Minutes January 25, 1988 Page three The Director noted that on page I Item E (1), line 3 should be changed to "evenly cut, evenly edged, free of bare or brown spots, free of". Commissioner Baker questioned the time schedule on Item G. A general discussion regarding recreational vehicle parking followed. Commissioner Well questioned the wording in Item E (3), asked why Item L is important and asked if the original Noise Study could be attached to the CC&R's. The Director noted a change in Item J, first line between the words "separate" and "television" add the word "external" The Director also noted a change in Items H and M, in both instances remove the last words "shall be included within the CC&R's." Commissioner Le Jeune asked if Section I and J was applicable to condos and apartments. The Director responded they were for condos only. Commissioner Le Jeune noted that Section L should require the names of the managers and one other name such as a board member. Mr. Jerry Feldman, 13191 Wickshire Lane, Santa Ana, Ca. 92705, commented that in general the City involvement should be minimal and should get involved only when someone is causing harm. He also agreed with Section B, noted that in Item E the length of a lawn is not enforceable, in Item G there should be a mechanism to protect property value, and noted that there needs to be some flexibility in the hillside projects. Mr. Steve Lefever, representing the Irvine Company noted that some flexibility was needed for hillside projects and would encourage the City to have minimal involvement in enforcing CC & R's. Commissioner Well asked if the Commission felt that the CC&R's should be a part of the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Ponttous suggested that some direction should be obtained from Council. The Director noted that the East Tusttn EIR specifically references CC&R's. She also noted that as a group, the Commission shoud be involved in the CC&R's and then they should be referred to the City Council. Commissioner Well noted that when the guidelines are finalized the Commission should send a memo to the City Council with the guidelines as an alternative. Commissioner Le Jeune suggested that the Specific Plan be reviewed to verify whether the City is required to be involved in CC&R's. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Baker seconded to continue the CC & R discussion until the February 8, 1988 meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes January 25, 1988 Page four 4. 1988 Goals and Objectives Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the garden center on Newport is included in the Newport and Main Street Redevelopment Area. He also inquired about power outages in the Old Town area. No Commission action necessary. 6. City Entrance Signs Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development Commissioner Well indicated that she thought the City seal was appropriate for the signage. Commissioners Baker, Le Jeune and Puckett agreed. Commissioner Pontious noted that she wanted to see as much uniformity as possible. No Commission action necessary. 7. Joint meeting of South County Planning Commission and Community Development Directors Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development Chairman Well will be attending the January 28th meeting wi th either Commissioner Baker or Commissioner Puckett and a member of the Community Development Staff. 8. Report on City Council actions taken at January 18, 1988 meeting Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development The following actions were taken: 1. Contract with the County for $15,000 to construct the Senior Center parking lot 2. John Wayne Airport Noise Update CO~qNISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Baker asked to be provided with more information regarding the San Diego Pipeline. Commissioner Well asked staff to research developer fees for school construction. Planning Commission Minutes January 25, 1988 Page five AD~OURtIHE#T At 10:17 p.m the meeting was adjourned by informal unanimous consent to a meeting on February 4, 1988 at 6:00 p.m. in the Chambers Conference Room. Kathy Wei 1 Chairman Penni Foley Secretary