Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 01-12-87MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COI~ISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 12, 1987 CALL TO ORDER: 7:32 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: All present: Puckett, Wetl, Baker, Le Jeune, Ponttous arrived at 7:35 p.m. Also present: Christine Shingleton, Lois Jeffries, Laura Pickup, Mary Ann Chamberlain, Jeff Davis, Donna Orr. PUBLIC CONCERNS: None. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman Puckett pulled Consent Calendar item No. i from the Consent Calender for correction. 1. Minutes of December 22, 1986 Planning Commission Meeting. 2. Waiver of Undergrounding, 333 E1Camino Real 3. Final Tract No. 12759, Irvine Pacific 4. Final Tract No. 12732, Bren Commissioner Well moved, LeJeune seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Wetl moved, Baker seconded to approve the December 22, 1986 Planning Commission minutes with a correction to the public hearing on Use Permit 86-36 reflecting Commissioner Well's clarification on directional signs for parking across the street. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 1987 page two PUBLIC HEARXNGS 5. USE PERMIT 86-38 Applicant: Location: Request: Mr. James Kincannon on behalf of The Learning Village 150 E. First Street Authorization to install a preschool for 72 children in an existing building at 150 E. First Street Presentatl on: Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE USE PERMIT NO. 86-38 BY THE ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2384. RESOLUTION NO. 2384. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING A PRESCHOOL FOR 72 CHILDREN AT 150 E. FIRST STREET. Laura Pickup explained to the Commission that due to the lease expiration at UTT School The Learning Village is looking to relocate their business to 150 E. First Street. Formal Finding 86-1 requires a use permit to allow this type of use in a commercial district. Laura highlighted the disagreements between staff and applicant: 1) on-site trash enclosure required for all commercial purposes to be a 6' x 8' block wall type enclosure with a separate gate to include a 9 cubic foot bin; 2) landscape strip along southerly border of the property proposed to be approximately 3' wide with acceptable planting materials; 3) marbelite street light on the westerly portion of the lot facing First Street and some dedication and easement requirements. 4) The City Engineer further clarified and revised the dedication requirements of public right-of-way along First Street and Prospect. The City Engineer has devised a plan that will not require the applicant to install any improvements on site thereby causing further cost to the project. The applicant should provide a 2.5' dedication along First Street to bring the lot into conformance with the First Street improvement plan. There is an existing 5' wide landscape strip along Prospect directly adjacent to the curb line and then a 5' sidewalk portion which is actually on the applicant's property. The City Engineer agrees that an easement for that 5' portion on the applicant property would be acceptable but proposes an interim easement allowing access to the existing sidewalk which is currently private property. Laura further explained one of the major issues of the project is cost for the applicant because this is a small business and the War Memorial is a non-profit corporation. Laura further highlighted the changes to the resolution to reflect the landscape strip and sidewalk easement. Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 1987 page three Laura presented a slide presentation. Christine Shtngleton added corrections to the resolution: Exhibit A I.F.2. delete. And, 14. The last two sentences should be reworded: place a note on the landscaping plans that installation of all landscaping and irrigation should be in compliance with the approved landscaping and irrigation plans. Any field changes require approval of the Community Development Department. Chairman Puckett clarified the changes to the resolution and then opened the public hearing at 7:49 p.m. requesting people in favor speak first. James Ktncannon, Ktncannon Architects, commented this has been a very difficult project because originally the building was built in 1956 and the First Street Specific Plan was not in place at that time. They are reluctant to do the sidewalk and street light improvements due to the cost. The interim easement issue is important to them. The location of the trash enclosure would create problems because the truck would have to come completely on site with no exit so he would have to back out onto Prospect. An additional 3' landscape buffer zone next to an 8' wall is ludicrous, it will be 15 years before the trees have any affect on sound attenuation since they would have to plant new trees. The play area will be completely enclosed and 47' away from the entrance. The street light is a $1500 installation cost. He wondered why the requirement is being imposed on a project with only 1700' addition. Paul Coyne, Director of the preschool, informed the Commission they preferred to stay at their current location but Utt will need to be used for the new students generated by East Tustin. He made himself available for questions. Commission and applicant discussed the number of students, how many square feet they presently utilize, concerns with safety on a busy corner, and questioned any plans to expand the number of children. Ga¥1e Pierce, has a child in The Learning Village and is very satisfied. The noise generated by the school is a happy noise of children playing. George Theodorou, 130 S. Prospect, spoke in favor of the 3' landscape buffer for visual and noise attenuation and hopefully to help water drainage. Seeing no one further wishing to speak, Chairman Puckett closed the hearing at 8:12 p.m. Commissioner Well proposed raising the south 30" wall to 6'8" for safety to the children who may climb on it. Also, set up the trash enclosure at the front part of the driveway against the southern wall. Christine Shtngleton explained that the landscaping strip required in the Plan was really for aesthetic appearance of the parking lot. Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 1987 page four Staff has attempted to confine the perimeter landscaping to one location due to the shared parking. The 30" wall, if raised to 6' would represent a significant cost and would have to be structurally redesigned. A reasonable compromise might be to eliminate the trees along the building and to recognize that the landscaping strip can be bermed up and to install a 42" wood latice fence. Staff is not too concerned where the trash enclosure is located. It should be easily accessible to the trash company and not present a hazard to the children. On Prospect there was an original requirement for full dedication, staff disagreed with the Engineering department on this and worked closely with the applicant to try to keep the costs down. Street improvement costs could have exceeded $7,000 both on Prospect and First. Staff was able to get the Engineering department to reduce that requirement. The only way the Engineering department will accept the interim easement would be an acknowledgement that this use remains. It is practical that if the property sold they will want to apply the most current standards of development to the property. The light pole is a current standard and they will not recommend waiving it. Commissioner Well was against bermlng the landscaping and still wanted the wall raised. Laura Pickup referred to the site plan and informed the Commission the wall is actually located on the property to the south and not on the property line. Discussion ensued concerning the pick up and drop off procedures relative to supervision of the children. Further discussion ensued amongst the Commission, staff and Mr. Kincannon concerning trash pick up procedures, location of entrance and sand box, the level of the parking compared to the neighboring property and potential drainage problems. Commissioner Wefl moved, Pontious seconded to approve Use Permit 86-38 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2384 with corrections to Exhibit A as follows: 1.A. Dedication of two and a half (2.5) feet along First Street. 1.B. Provide an interim easement of five (5) feet along Prospect Avenue. 1.F.2. delete. 1.F.3. change number to 1.F.2. 3. Remove "at the southwest corner of the lot" at the end of the first sentence. 14. Delete last two sentences and put in: "Place a note on the plans that 'any field changes require approval of the Community Development Director. Installation of all landscaping and irrigation to be in compliance with the approved landscaping and irrigation plan'. Add 18. A minimum four (4) foot high solid wood or wood lattice fence shall be provided along the southerly property line for a distance of 55 feet from the required Prospect Avenue setback. This fence shall be installed next to the existing concrete block wall along the southerly property line and is subject to final approval of the Community Development Director. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 1987 page five OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS 0 DESIGN REVIEW 86-33, FAT FREDDIE'S RESTAURANT Presentation: Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner Laura Pickup presented slides of the existing site pointing out improvements that will be made. Commission discussion ensued concerning exposed neon tubing and the potential problems with weather on this type of lighting. Commissioner Baker pointed out that this is one of the entrances to East Tusttn and confirmed the project would not be affected by the widening of the freeway and widening of E1Camino Real. Further Commission and staff discussion ensued concerning the semi truck parking problem on the existing site. Commissioner Pontious moved, Baker seconded to approve Design Review 86-33 by the adoption of Resolution 2386. Motion carried 5-0. 7. PERMIT TO OPERATE A LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE, 13781 MARSHALL LANE Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner Mary Ann Chamberlain introduced an anonymous letter submitted in opposition to the large family day care home. Lois Jeffries, Deputy City Attorney, advised that since the letter is anonymous and doesn't request a hearing the Commission is not obligated to set a public hearing. Commission discussion ensued with questions of staff and applicant regarding potential parking problems and State licensing requirements. Commissioner Baker moved, Well seconded to approve a permit to operate a large family day care center by Minute Order. Motion carried 5-0. Bo PERMIT TO OPERATE A LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE, 14501WESTFALL ROAD Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner Mary Ann Chamberlain advised the Commission that no protests were received in this matter. Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 1987 page si x Laura Pickup informed the Commission that staff did a field investigation this date at 5:00 p.m. to determine any potential traffic problems with pick up and delivery of the children. No problems were noted. There were excess vehicles on the premises due to current construction. Commission discussion ensued concerning the fact the applicant is not the property owner. Staff advised that the applicant and the house is licensed; the applicant does not have to own the property. Commissioner Baker moved, Well seconded to approve a permit to operate a large family day care center by Minute Order. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS e REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS JANUARY 5, 1987 Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Wetl questioned the new legislation regarding construction fees and the potential impact by the Tusttn Unified School District. Christine Shingleton replied that she and the City Manager have referred the matter to the City Attorney office for opinion. Staff's initial analysis is that the district would be authorized to institute a fee of $1.50 per square foot for residential development and $.25 per square foot for commercial/industrial. Commissioner Baker questioned the status of the Bente satellite dish. Laura Pickup responded he has appealed and is awaiting a court date. Commissioner Baker further apprised staff of a satellite dish on a trailer at the Church of Sctentology on Irvine Blvd. Chairman Puckett congratulated the Tustln High School baseball team and announced they would be presented with a proclamation at the 1st Council meeting in February. ADJOURII~E#T Commissioner Wetl moved, Baker seconded to adjourn at 9:30 p.m. to the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting on January 26, Recordl ng Secretary rle~ularly 1987. Motion carried ,540~ E. PUCKETT, Chairman