Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 11-25-74 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION November 25, 1974 The regular meeting of the City of Tustin Planning Commission was held on the 25th day of November, 1974, at the hour of 7:30 p.m., of said day, in the CQuncil Chambers, 275 South "C" Street, Tustin, California. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: McIIarris, Dukleth, Hill, Schier, Sutcliff Absent: Commissioners: None Others Present: R. Kenneth Fleagle, Assistant City Administrator- Community Development Director Bruce Lenorovitz, Assistant Planning Director Marge Will, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner McHarris. INVOCATION was led by Commissioner Schier. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Schier, seconded by Sutcliff that the Minutes of November 12, 1974 meeting be approved. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None PUBLIC CONCERNS - None OLD BUSINESS 1. Parcel Map 74-70 - Sunset Builders of Anaheim (Madison Gray) Location: Easterly side of Newport Avenue + 268' southerly of First Street Mr. Flea~le reported that consideration of this matter was continued from the last Commission meeting for the purpose of determining the impact of the proposed division of land upon the existing medical building complex. As requested by the Commission, staff surveyed the parking accommodations and determined there were a total of 131 parking spaces on the total parcel, 15 of which are located on parcel 2, the proposed site of the pharmacy. The two medical buildings on the site require 69 parking spaces. Upon separation of parcel 2 from the total parcel, 116 net spaces would remain. The interest of the Planning Commission is to evaluate the parking impact created by this division. These spaces met code requirements at time of construction and present requirements of the code as related to the parcels the subject of this application. Staff is unable to find a reason for denial. Mr. Fleagle read the letter from the adjoining property owners which stated their awareness of the impact of the development of parcel 2 upon their property. PC Minutes 11/25/74 Page two Commissioner Schier questioned whether we are looking at the whole picture -- mainly the impact on the adjoining parcels. Mr. Flea~le answered that it was the Planning Commission's responsibility to look at the total area. Mr. Flea~le stated that at one time parcel maps were not required and owners could sell property by meets and bounds without approval of the city. The northerly and southerly parcels are owned by different corporations or partnerships. The letter of November 19 included the principal owners of the southerly property. Commissioner Hill inquired if there is any responsibility that we might be concerned with on their part and the response was the mitigating factor of the letter of consent from the adjoining property owners. Commissioner McHarris questioned if the number of parking spaces meet today's standards on these parcels, and the response was that the northerly parcel meets parking standards of the city and the southerly parcel, not a part of this application, will be nonconforming for lack of adequate parking accommodations. Robert Gilman of Sunset Builders of Anaheim, stated that this application has been a matter of long standing concern. The complex was developed in stages under different ownership agree- ments. The parcel proposed for the pharmacy was purchased by the present owner from Cal Davies. In response to a question from Commissioner Schier, Mr. Gilman responded that an attempt was made by the owners of the medical complex to purchase other properties within the area for parking, but without success. Commission discussion related to the impact of the proposed development upon the parking accommodations, traffic impact, and potential for acquiring additional parking accommodations. It was further discussed that access easements would be required to serve parcel 2. Mr. Gilman also stated that the street right- of-way for the southerly parcel would be dedicated to the City of Tustin. Moved by McHarris, seconded by Schier for staff to prepare a resolution of approval for adoption at the next meeting of the Planning Commission with all requirements and conditions as discussed. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 NEW BUSINESS 1. Disposition of Old City Hall. Mr. Flea$1e explained that this matter was placed on the agenda for discussion and would like to know what the Planning Commission's recommendations are. Moved by McHarris, seconded by Schier to continue the matter to a workshop session following the regular meeting. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 PC Minutes 11/25/74 Page three 2. Bike Plan for Newport Avenue. Mr. Flea~le reported that the City of Tustin has made application for a joint City-County project to improve Newport Avenue from Irvine Blvd. to McFadden. It is necessary to determine if it is the City Council's desire to accommodate a bicycle trail on New- port Avenue from Irvine to Laguna in conjunction with the right of way acquisition and improvement of Newport Avenue. Commissioner Sutcliff asked if the storm drain was scheduled for the east side of Newport. Mr. Fl~agle replied that the sanitation sewer was going on the west Side of Newport and that an EIR report had been received. He also stated that the sewer line would be in the ground before the street improvement project is started. Lois Carr and Mary Hernandez, Parks and Recreation Commissioners, ~6th unani~ousIy--ag~eed that we should favor the bike trail on Newport. They stated they would like to see it go to Sycamore but are willing to start with Newport. They voiced a desire that both plans be worked out. Mr. Fleagle advised it was before the Commission at this time to determine whether it would be desirable to incorporate within Newport Avenue improvement plan the extension of the city's bike plan. The City should request that the County Arterial Bike Plan be amended to include the Newport Avenue plan. ~oved_by sutcliff, seconded by Dukleth for staff to (1) request City Council f~r authority to hold a public hearing to amend specific plan of bikeways to include Newport Avenue from Irvine Blvd. to its southerly terminus; (2) incorporate bike path design plans in the street improvement plans for Newport Avenue within the project limits; and (3) apply to Harbor, Beaches and Parks Department of Orange County for total or matching funds. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 3. Irvine Industrial Complex Development Plan. Mr. Fleagle stated that the Irvine Industrial Complex Development Plan was received at 4 p.m. on Friday and is furnished for the Commission's information. Moved by Hill, seconded by McHarris to continue this item to the next regular meeting with a detailed staff report. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - None CORRESPONDENCE 1. Planning Commission Conference - UCI - Jan. 31 & Feb. 1, 1975. 2. ~ublic Hearing Notice for Tract 8490 (Orange County). Mr. Fleagle stated that the Orange County Planning Commission has scheduled a hearing for December 3, 1974 to consider an access road from Ethelbee Way to Tentative Tract No. 8490. Moved by Sutcliff, seconded by Schier to have staff respond ~ndicating no objection to the proposed access road but to request that precise street improvement plans be forwarded to the City Engineer for his review and approval. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 PC Minutes 11/25/74 Page four Orange County UP 3571 - Authorization for Red Hill Lutheran Church to operate and maintain a day nursery and youth center in a R-1 district in the Tustin area. Commissioners Hill and Sutcliff abstained from the discussion and vot'i~"for this Use Permit. Mr. Fleagle explained that the Red Hill Lutheran Church had made a Use Permit request to the Orange County Planning Department for the property at 13200 Red IIill Avenue, since it is in county un- incorporated territory. They wish to establish a day nursery and youth center in a R-1 single family dwelling area on Melvin Way, which is inconsistent with city planning and zoning. Access to both developments would be through the rear yards of the single family dwellings which abut the church parking lot. Moved_by McHarris, seconded by Dukleth to have staff write a letter to the Orange County Planning Commission stating that the Use and Zoning were not consistent with the City of Tustin standards. Also to advise the Orange County Planning Commission that the City of Tustin would prefer to have a zoning consolidation and use of all the church property. MOTION CARRIED: Ayes: Dukleth, McHarris, Schier. Noes: None Abstained: Hill, Sutcliff. STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Flea~le reported that the Noise and Seismic elements would be ready in about two weeks. Also he reported that the Growth Policy is on the City Council agenda for December 2 for their consideration. COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Hill stated that the height limitation of buildings has been sent to the TNT Committee for them to take another look at the Commercial Planned Development District. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Sutcliff, seconded by Schier to adjourn to a workshop session, and then to the next regular meeting scheduled on December 9, 1974. /'coMM',-SSION C AI ~LANNI~ COMMISSION RECORDING SECRETARY