Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 01-07-80TUSTIN PLANNING AGENCY MINUTES OF REGULAR A/EETING January 7, 1980 The Planning Agency held a regular meeting Monday, January 7, 1980 in the Council Chambers of the Tustin City Hall, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. The meeting was called fo order at 3:10 p.m. by Chairman Schuster. The Pledge of Allegiance fo the Flag was led by Mr. Sharp and the invocation was given by Mr. Saltarelli. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Schuster; Agency Members Sharp, Saltarelli, Kennedy, and Welsh Absent: None Also present: Mike Brotemarkle, Community Development Director Dan Blankenship, City Administrator Tom Woodruff, Deputy City Attorney Midge Mehl, Recording Secretary Other staff members: 4 General public: 35 MI NUTES The minutes of the regular meeting held December 17, 1979 were approved as written, with the inclusion of Mrs. Kennedy's request regarding study of al- ternatives to open space waivers, including open space "in lieu" fees on property transfers in the ordinance amendment for condominium conversions. /V~s. Kennedy also requested staff to include a study of providing open space af other locations and possible charges for inadeauafe open space. The read- ing of the minutes was waived. pUBLIC HEARINGS Permit 79-24 and Tentative Tract Map No. 10852 Applicant: Location: Request: The Wellington Group 14751 Plaza Drive To construct an office condominium project of 27,500 square feet and approval of Tentative Tracl No. 10852. Mr. Brotemarkle said the basic request was for a two-story 27,500 souare foot office condominium prelect. He wanted fo point out that in the staff report the problems relative to residential privacy to the west of the subject prop- erfy had included a discussion of windows with a transom or clerestory height. He said staff didn't mean to infer' fhaf the final plan had to include those types of windows as the only solution; that other solutions such as opaque windows, landscaping, parapet walls, efc. could be submitted with final plans. Chairman Schuster declared the public hearing open and asked if there was any- one fo speak in favor or opposition to Use Permit 79-24. Mr. GeraldL. Rewers, president of the Wellington Group agreed with the recom- mendations of approval as listed in the staff report. Chairman Schuster asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak in favor or opposition to Use Permit 79-24 and/or Tentative Tract Map No. 10852 and hearing no response he asked the pleasure of the Agency. MOTION by Kennedy, SECONDED by Welsh, to close the public hearing and approve Use Permit 79-24 by the adoption of Resolution No. 1867 and recommend approval fo the City Council by adoption of Resolution No. 1868 on Tentative Map 10852. AYES: NOES: Sharp, Salfarelli, Kennedy, Welsh, and Schuster None Planning Agency Minutes January 7, 1980 page 2, Variance No, 80-~ Applicant: Location: Request: James Nowell 195 Myrtle Street To vary with 12,000 square foot minimum lot size for a second single-family residence on a 50' wide, lZ,692 square foot parcel, Mr. Brotemarkle said under tho provisions of the R-1 zone, if a property has ~2,000 square feet or more a second unit may be permitted on the property by a use permit. This property has ~,692 square feet, or short 508 square feet. He said the original tract was subdivided in ~922 and for some reason the properties on fha Myrtle side are 233 ~/3 feet deep and fha properties on Pacific, behind them, are 243 feet deep. He said fha area does have inade- quate water for fire protection so residenfialsprinkler installation is one of the conditions of approval. Also, a condition to be imposed, if approved, requires a covenant be filed on the property fo maintain it as a single lot and meet subdivision and zoning requirements if considered for division, however, if is fha stated intent of the applicant fo have two homes on a single lot. Mr. Brotemarkle said the staff was in receipt of a petition signed by approxi- mately 24 owners in the area, opposing this request and quoted their objections. Mrs. Kennedy asked on what basis did staff recorrrnend approval of this request. Mr. Brotemarkle said based on the fact that the property suffers from a hard-- ship due fo fha original subdivision of the property in 1922, leaving these properties about 300 square feet short of a later ordinance establishing 12,000 square feet as a minimum. Due to this, the property could not enjoy privileges granted similar properties under the same zoning in the immediate area. Mrs. Kennedy asked if the property had changed hands since the adoption of the tigh[er control. Mr. Brofemarkle said tho applicant would have to answer that question; he did not know, Mr. Salfarelli asked what percentage of the homes on Myrtle were now rental units. Mr. Brofemarkle said he was not sure since a number are single-family homes and he did not know how many of them were rented or owner occupied. He said there is a mix of densities and unit types with a small aparfmenl' complex north of the subject property and other uses as indicated in the opponents? petition, in addition to single family. He said there are eight lots on Myrtle having substandard area. Chairman Schuster declared the public hearing open and asked if there was any- one who wished fo speak in favor or opposition fo Variance No. 80-Z. Linda Sfrahen, resident at 205 Myrtle, said she was representing the neighbor- hood and lived next fo the subject property. She said the property has changed owners twice during the past few years, most recently in the last eight months. She said the people who live in this neighborhood like if the way if is; bought their properties because of the large lots and she does not want a two-story house five feet from her property line. It would seriously restrict her privacy. She said there was only one two-house lot in the block on Pacific Street and that owner intends fo keep it as a single lot and we all agreed with that. The street is substandard, there is a problem with water for fire fighting; our neighborhood has started fo change during the last few years and if is hoped that the condominium conversion of Tustin Acres will change if so if gets back fo a neighborhood type area. Some houses have turned into rentals, but not very many. Of the people we surveyed, no one was in favor of this request. Mr.Salfarelli asked if it would make a difference if fha two-story house was only a one-story house. Ms. Sfrahen said almost unanimously they were opposed fo having two houses on the lot, but everyone was for the owner putting one nice house on fha lot; but fo put a two-story house on the back of the lot it would invade all their Planning Agency Minutes January 7, 1980 page 5. privacy. Mr.Ben Torres, 695 West Third Street; Mrs. Marjorie Kaufman, 180 Myrtle; Leon Strahen, 670 West Third; and Carol Hunter, 180 Pacific were opposed fo this request. They cited concerns over traffic safety, increased density, loss of neighborhood feeling, overcrowding, police problems, property speculation, and other factors contributing fo their opposition to the proposal. Mr. James Nowell, contractor, representing the owner of the subject property, said they agreed fo all the recommendations of the Planning staff. He thought the people in the neighborhood were under the impression that the density would go up a great deal in this area and that is not the intention. He said the intention is fo get a minor variance from the ordinance so they could add an additional home to the lot. When you consider that there are lots in the area smaller than this, many lots in the area are around 7,000 square feet, we are not significantly changing the density of the area. Miss Pacoffi would live in the front house and her daughter would live in the rear. We are not trying fo change the neighborhood or rent these houses out. He said just four lots north there are four rental units on one lot. Sid Gregory, 235 Myrtle, said they were only talking about six lots not the entire town and if would not create the problems indicated by the neighbors. The influence of this one request could possibly result in one or maybe two additional houses in the whole neighborhood. He failed fo see how that would disrupt their lives. The people who own the lot should have the privilege of developing their lot the way they want fo if if doesn't degrade the area. He felt the request should be approved. MOTION by Saltarelli, SECONDED by Kennedy, fo close the public hearing. AYES: NOES: Sharp, Saltarelli, Kennedy, Welsh, and Schuster None MOTION by Kennedy, SECONDED by Welsh, to deny Variance No. 80-1. Under discussion Mr. Salfarelli asked if it was true that if the applicant of this request were fo purchase an additional five feet fo the rear of their property fhaf they would be able fo have these two homes without a variance? Mr. Brotemarkle said they would merely be required to file a use permit, Mr. Saltarelli said he didn't see how the Agency could make a decision until they found out more facts. We hear that one lot has four units on it. He wanted fo know how fhaf occurred. He thought these things should be looked info. If permission has been granted to other properties, what were the reasons behind the approval. There are bound fo be changes within the next five or fen years and he thought the Agency should determine what the character of the neighborhood is going to be as a group, rather than decide on a lot by lot basis. He felt af this time the Agency needed some answers fo these questions before if could act fairly. Mr. Welsh said the initial approval for those four units was given by a prior body fo the current members and that could be one of the reasons they are not here now. He also felt that if this request were fo be approved, if would be an action fhaf could encourage a drastic change. He would not appreciate in- creasing the density which would in effect decrease the value of the property. Mrs. Kennedy said since the request was for a variance all the Agency could do was fo approve or deny a variance subject fo showing of hardship. The hardship was possibly fo the owner in 1922, but when a new party buys if then it's up fo them to find out what the restrictions are. If the property has changed hands twice since our ordinance was upsraded, then we have nothing fo give a variance on. She recommended the matter be voted on now. Mr. Saltarelli said he would like to request, once more, that they continue this hearing. Planning Agency Minutes January 7, 1980 page 4. Chairman Schuster called for the motion. AYES: NOES: Sharp, Salfarelli, Kennedy, Welsh, and Schuster None Mr. Salfarelli requested that a coherent plan for fha emfire area be developed for Agency perusal. The Agency concurred. Mr. Sharp said he thought 1here was such a study made, a number of years ago, and if should bo taken out of fha drawer and studied. L!~¢ Permi t. 80-;~ Applicant: Richard Fairchild Location: 1702 Moulfon Parkway Mr. Brotemarkle said this was a request fo establish a recreational vehicle storage facility with an on-site caretaker. He said this particular piece o¢ "M" zoned property is tho rear portion of the Celanese Company property and also behind fha Koll Business Center. It would take access off a dead-end street from Parkway Loop. If is extremely isolated and abuts fha Marine Corps base on the south and the east. Such a use as this would be excellent for the property. He said he would like fo point out that although the staff recom- mends approval, if should be subject to the approval of a parcel map separating the site utilized for the recreational vehicle storage, and the area utilized by Celanese for their pipe storage. Chairman Schuster declared the public hearing opened and asked if there was anyone fo speak in favor or opposition I'o Use Permit 80-2. Mr. Richard Fairchild said the only comment he had was concern as to how fha Celanese and Koll Companies are going fo feel about filing a parcel map. His only question was do they really need to provide a parcel map. They are ex- pensive and it's probably not in my best interest and maybe not in the best interest of the community or the other parties. Mr. Brotemarkle said the staff's interpretation of 1he subdivision map ordinance was fhafwhenever a property is divided for purpose of sale, lease, or financin9 that a formal division of that property is required. Dr. Kenneth Fleagle, Planning Consultant, stated fhaf Mr. Brotemarkle was cor- rect; our ordinance does require an approval of fha division of any property that extends more than a thirty day lease. However, there is also an exception built into the ordinance that provides for a certificate of compliance action by the Council, allowing waiver of the procedure of fha parcel map. If can then be accommodated by the staff but must still have approval of af least a tentative map. Mrs. Kathy Wail said she lived in Tusfin Meadows and was very much in favor of this request. Chairman Schuster asked if there was anyone else who wished fo speak in favor or opposition and hearin9 no response he closed the hearin9 and asked fha pleasure of fha Agency. MOTION by Kennedy, SECONDED by Saltarelli, fo approve Use Permit 80-2 by the adoption of Resolution No. 1866 and fo waive the requirement for a parcel map. AYES: Sharp, Saltarelli, Kennedy, Welsh, and Schuster NOES: None Planning Agency Minutes January 7, i980 page 5. ~UBLIC CONCERNS Tu~tin Acr~?. Mr. Mike Seamore said he was a resident of Tustin Acres and wanted fo discuss the condominium conversion with the Agency. He said the manager gave to the tenants a letter saying there would be minimal incon- veniences with few problems, but he felt they were enduring many inconveniences. He mentioned the lack of trash bin locations, piles of dirt and debris, early morning construction, water being shut off several times during the week on very short notice, the tearing out of laundry rooms, and very limited parking. He said his wife is pregnant and in order to take advantage of the relocation fees~ they would have fo move out just about the time the baby is due and he felt this was an inconvenience. He could not see how the $320 rent reimburse- ment was supposed to cover moving out, turning on utilities, telephone in- stallation, and all the things fhaf have fo be taken info consideration when there is a move. He said he had talked with a number of people associated with the conversion and as of yet nothing had been done about the problems. He said he called the Housing Authority and they referred him to the Planning Agency. He was now wondering if actions could be taken to help alleviate some of these problems. Mr. Saltarelli said he would suggest that Mr. Seamore talk with Mr. Brofemarkle fo see if he could perhaps help. Mr. Schuster said it sounded fo him like Mr. Seamore had some legitimate com- plaints, but others sounded unavoidable. He said there are certain things during construction that con'f be helped, but perhaps Mr. Brotemarkle should look info the matter. Mr. Seamore said that under Section 3479 of the California Civil Code, in part it says "...anything injurious 1o health which is indecent or offensive fo the senses or an obstruction fo the use of property so as fo interfere with the comfortable enjoyments of life or property is considered a nuisance" and that is the premise ho would like fo take. It is a nuisance and we don't feel fhaf as paying tenants we should have fo contend with this kind of run around. OLD BUSINESS Wu~'s Site Plan Mr. Brotemarkle said this concerned the proposed restaurant at 17th Street and Enderle Way. He said the applicant had submitted a revised plan of the parking area, as requested by the Agency, and was an information only item, requiring no Agency action unless the Agency desired further revisions. There followed a discussion regarding the revised parking plan. Mr. Schuster and Mr. Saltarelli weren't satisfied with the revision, but in light cf the circumstances said they would go along with if. I~W BUSINg66 ~Xf¢fl~ion of Tim~ for Far Western Bank Mr. Brofemarkle said the applicant for this temporary facility was requesting an additional six months period of time and construction was proceeding'actively on the permanent facility. MOTION by Salfarelli, SECONDED by Sharp, to approve the request for a six months extension of time for Far Western Bank. AYES: NO~S: Sharp, Saltarelli, Kennedy, Welsh, and Schuster None Planning Agency Minutes January 7, 1980 page 6. Fiqol Parcel Map 79-1032 i;~r. Brofemarkle stated this concerned property for South Orange Development af the northwesterly corner of !7th Street and Prospect. MOTION by Salfarelli, SECONDED by Sharp, to recommend approval to the City Council by the adoption of Resolution No. 1865. AYES: Sharp, Salfarelli, Kennedy, Welsh, and Schuster NOES: None CORRESPONDENCE Letter to TusfiD Businessqs and Sign Companies Mr. Brotemarkle said this was simply an information item, in the event Agency members received any inquiries they would know that the new section concerning non-conforming signs went into effect as of January l, 1980. If will require non-conforming signs which exceed the height or lighting criteria by 25%, animation or other terms of this code; fhaf when there is a change in ownership or name, they have to come as close as possible fo conforming with tho Code. Mr. Sharp said this seemed like a good public service fo inform the businesses and sign companies of this. Mr. Schuster asked if there was any action required on this matter, Mr. Brotomarkle answered negatively. STAFF CONCERNS None AGENCy CONCERNS None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Agency Chairman Schuster declared the meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m., to meet again for a regular meeting to be hold January 21, 1980 af 3 p.m. in tho Council Chambers oF the Tusfin City Hall. ~teph~n L. Schusler Ch a i rman M.I. Mehl Recording Secretary