HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 09-11-72MINU]~ J.~ OF A REG~I!.,AR MI':ETI.~.[G
OF TIIE TUSTiN PJ.ANNING COMMISSION
DATE: September 11, 1972
TIME: 7:30 p.m.
PLACE: Council Chambers, 275 South "C" Street
PRESENT: Curtis, Sharp, Larnard, Dukleth and Edelstein
ABSENT: None
ROLL CALL
INDEX PAGE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 1972
PUBLIC IIEARINGS
OLD
NEW
Continued
UP-71-364
New Items
UP-72-391
UP-72-392
PZ-72-135
PZ-72-136
ZC-72-233
1
1
Item
(re-advertisement) - Eugene F. Tutt ........ 1-2
- Tic Toc Markets, Inc ..................... 2
- Frank H. Greinke ......................... 2-3
- Planning Commission Initiated ............ 3,4,5
& ZC-72-232 - Planning Commission Initiated. 5-6
- Southern California Projects, Inc ........ 6-7
BUSINESS - none
BUSINESS
Final Map of Tract No.
Tentative Tract Map Nc.
Procedural Rules for
7970 .. ......................... 7
7924 ......................... 7
Public Hearing .................. 7-8
CORRESPONDENCE
County Case ZC-72-56 ................................. 8
So. Calif. Planning Congress announcements ........... 8
Malena Storm Drain ................................... 8-9
Letter from Automatic Car Wash Assoc. of So. Calif. .. 9
STAFF CONCERNS ............................................ 9
COMMISSION CONCERNS - none
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - none
ADJOURNMENT ............................................... 9
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COM~ISSION
SEPTEMBER 11, 1972
%'he regular meeting of the City of Tustin Planning Commission was
held on the llth day of September, 1972, at the hour of 7:30 p.m.,
of said day in the Council Chambers, 275 South "C" Street, Tustin,
California.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Sharp.
The Invocation was given by Commissioner Dukleth.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Absent:
Others
Present:
Curtis, Sharp, Larnard, Edelstein, Dukleth
None
James G. Rourke, City Attorney
R. Kenneth Fleagle, Ass't. CA-Comm. Dev. Dir.
Pat Brown, Assistant Planning Director
Nancy Lawton, Planning Commission Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
OF REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 28, 1972
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Continued Item
1. UP-71-364
(re-advertisement) - Eugene F. Tutt - to permit continued
use of subject property as a landscape nursery with sales
of plant materials, for a one year period, subject to
further six-month extensions of time.
Location:
Site fronts approximately 110' on the northeast side
Nisson Road, and is located approximately 435' south-
easterly of the centerline of Red Hill Avenue.
Mr. Brown advised the Commission that at their August 28, 1972 meeting
this item was continued to present meeting in order to permit the Staff
time to ascertain the cost in improving the Nisson Road frontage and to
give the owner of the property, Mr. Tutt, time to respond to these recom-
mended street improvements and the possible removal of the billboard now
located on this same property.
The City Engineer estimates the cost of improving the street frontage
would be approximately $1300. After contacting Mr. Tutt, Staff was in-
formed by him that since this temporary nursery use is strictly on a
month-to-month interim use basis, pending total oermanent development
of the property at some future date, he would feel the cost of street
improvements and the loss of revenue from the removal of the billboard
would be entirely unwarranted at this time. Mr. Tutt indicated that if
either or both conditions were imposed as a part of approval, he would be
forced to discontinue the nursery use of the property. A letter from
Mr. Tutt to the Commission was introduced into the record.
Chairman Curtis opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:37 p.m.
Dennis Wall, 15500 Tustin Village Way, operator of the nursery, advised
that he was available if anyone had any questions.
The public portion of the hearing was closed at 7:39 p.m. for discusszun
among the Commissioners.
Co~missioner Sharp questioned paragraphs E & F of Resolution No. 1282
relative to street improvements and final development plans being sub-
mitted to the Develooment Preview Commission, stating that he thought
these should be deleted from the resolution. He felt that this temporary
use is much more desirable than what existed in the past.
PC Minutes 9/11/72
Page two
Commissioner Sharp moved for adoption of Resolution No. 1282, with the
deletion of paragraphs E & F; seconded by Commissioner Larnard.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
Commissioher Larnard complimented Staff on getting the information neces-
sary in helping the Commission make their final decision.
New Items
UP-72-391 - Tic Toc Markets, Inc. - to permit a take-out delicatessen
operation in conjunction with an existing market.
Location:
Site has a frontage of approximately 52' on the southeast
side of Newport Avenue, and is located approximately 150'
southwesterly of the centerline of Wass Street.
Mr. Brown advised that the applicants are proposing to slightly modify
the interior of the existing store so as to provide facilities for the
preparation and sale of take-out delicatessen items such as hot and cold
sandwiches, salads, etc. A similar activity was approved by Use Permit
about a year ago for one of their facilities located on Pasadena Avenue.
Based on the model way in which this Pasadena facility has been operated,
Staff would have no objections to this present request.
The Development Preview Commission, at their August 30, 1972 meeting,
gave preliminary review to this request and advised that if it was
approved, they would be concerned about providing some type of landscap-
ing treatment, since none exists at the present time. The applicants
have indicated that they would be willing to work with that body in de-
veloping a mutually agreeable design.
Chairman Curtis opened the oublic portion of the hearing at 7:46 p.m.
Don H. White, 2559 Harriet Lane, Anaheim, stated that he was available
should anyone have any questions. He said that as far as the landscap-
ing was concerned, they have re-planted the 5' planter boxes four times,
two this year and two last year, and people keep taking the flowers from
them.
Public portion of the hearing was closed at 7:50 p.m. for discussion
among the Commissioners.
Commissioner Edelstein moved for approval by adoption of Resolution No.
1283; secoHded by Commissioner Larnard.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
UP-72-392 - Frank H. Greinke - to permit the establishment of a tire
sales facility (no recapping or manufacturing) at an
abandoned service station site.
Location:
Site is located at the easterly corner of the intersection
of Newport Avenue and Laguna Road.
Mr. Fleagle advised that this property is presently zoned C-1 and at one
time was used as a service station site, but has been abandoned for sev-
eral years. Staff would have no objections to the use as proposed, since
it would be far more beneficial to the city to have this abandoned facil-
ity in an active status, and the surrounding land uses would certainly
warrant this type of use.
The Development Preview Commission has given preliminary review to this
request at their August 30, 1972 meeting. They were concerned with up-
gra~lng or. the site, Du~ were ac~vi~ed by ti~c ~[~,~,ii~a~L L]~ ~i,~ iniL.[~l
lease on this proposal was for only a t:~o year period. Also, the owner
of the property had long-range plans for a total redew.].opment of not
only this property, but adjacent pro~.~erties which he owns. Under these
circumstances, the Development Preview Commission felt that a temporary
delay would be warranted in the insta].l~tion of additional landscaping,
-2-
PC Minutes 9/11/72
Page three
etc. and suggested that perhaps a bond be posted so that these items
could be reviewed and installed in the event the lease was extended be-
yong this initial two year period.
Mr. Fleag. le stated that the Commission might want to make this bonding a
part of the approval, if this request is approved.
Commissioner Sharp asked if there were any plans for signing on this
property, with Mr. Fleagle stating that no application has been submit d
for signing, and this would go before the Development Preview Commission.
Chairman Curtis opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:58 p.m.
Frank Brien, 1892 Parkview Circle, Costa Mesa, one of the operators of
the proposed facility, advised that the reason for the short-term lease
is that they don't know if this facility will be successful. He stated
that the planter area will be upgraded, and the signing has not been
finalized yet.
Frank Greinke, owner of the property, wants to upgrade the property and
beautify the City. He only wished the short-term lease due to future
development. They are in a position to put up the bond~ doesn't feel
it is necessary due to his relationship and longevity in the city.
Public portion of the hearing was closed at 8:02 p.m. for discussion
among the Commissioners.
Commissioner Larnard does not feel that there is a need for a bond in
this temporary case.
Commissioner Larnard moved for approval, by adoption of Resolution No.
1284, subject to a temporary two-year period and re-advertisement upon
expiration ~ the term of the Use Permit; seconded by CoJ~u~issioner Ede
stein.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
e
PZ-72-135 - Planning Commission Initiated - a prezone change from
the Orange County C-2 District to the City of Tustin
Planned Community (PC District, to authorize an inte-
grated development consisting of a village shopping com-
plex, private club, restaurant, and multi-family resi-
dential units.
Location:
Site is located on the northerly side of Irvine Boulevard
at 13061, with 315' between the Southern Pacific Railroad
right-of-way and the Orange County Flood Control Channel.
Mr. Fleagle summarized staff report advising that the present use of the
property consists of a truck and materials storage yard. The concept
plans as submitted with the application are endorsed, subject to some
modifications and annexation to the city. The proposed development would
be essentially in the following manner: the southern one-third, more or
less, on the Irvine Boulevard frontage to be utilized as a parking area;
the central one-third, as a village shopping mall, private club and po. ,
and restaurant; and, the northern one-third for a 153 unit two and thr.
story apartment and townhouse complex. Approximately one-third of the
total parking proposed would be subterranean. They further intend to
reconstruct and completely cover the flood channel in the western portion
of the property, with this area to be utilized for parkin~ and a private
driveway.
On August 30, 1972, the Development Preview Commission gave preliminary
review to this concept and their concerns are as follows:
-3-
PC Minutes 9/11/72
Page four
The main entranceway to this project and the area immediately
adjacent to it on the Irvine Boulevard frontage should present
an aesthetic aspect commensurate with the scope of the total
project. The initial concept plans as presented, in their opin-
ion, lacked this emphasis.
Although the design needs were recognized, they felt that per-
haps some of the large parking area at the front of the develop-
ment could be redistributed to other areas, so as not to present
such a vast expanse of parking.
e
In line with this last thought, there was a feeling expressed
that perhaps the development was too cgmpartmentalized or sec-
tionalized, and that perhaps a more subtle integration of the
landscaping, parking, and uses could be accomplished.
4e
Concern was also expressed relative to the three-story structures
along the north portion of the property as a result of their close
proximity to existing single-family developments to the north.
Perhaps this could be relieved somewhat by the use of perimeter
parking, landscaping, etc. for additional distance and sight
buffering purposes.
Se
On the plans, the proposed County portion of the master bike trail
plan was immediately easterly of this site. This is proposed to
be developed on the abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad right-
of-way in that area. They felt that consideration should be
given to providing access from this project for cyclists to that
system, once it is developed.
e
They also wished to express their mutual concern relative to
comments made by several of the City departments, particularly
that of the. Fire Department as re].ated-to~ acc~.s~ to. som~_o£_ tha
residential structures.
Mr. Flea~le expressed the concerns of Staff which are:
Apartment complexes without exposure to a traffic artery become
difficult to rent and require extensive promotion.
The density of development requires design amenities to assure
long term desirability. Open space and recreation areas are
the best assurance of long term assets.
Traffic circulation patterns for residential occupancy should be
separated from the commercial, as well as the necessity to buffer
from sound.
e
The peaceful enjoyment of existing adjacent residential proper-
ties should be protected by height limitations and setback re-
quirements.
Mr. Flea~l~ advised that the Development Preview Commission is to review
the precise development plans prior to construction, and that the Planning
Commission should establish development criteria for the project and
approve the concept, subject to review of precise development plans.
Development standards which would be applicable to this project include
the following:
ae
}{eight limitation of not to exceed two stories or 25' above
existing grade within 25' of the property line of any adjoin-
ing residential properties.
Residential parking accommodations equivalent to two spaces
per dwelling unit.
Ce
Density of development not to exceed the equivalent of one
dwelling unit for each 1,000 square feet of land area related
to residential development with not less than 30% of ground
surface area in unobstructed open area for landscaping and
recreational
PC M. inutes 9/11/72
Page five
' "'' ..... tion "= ~ ~~g ~e R.-lq p.m.
Chairman ~urtis ope~d L]~e ~u~ ~
Nick Barletta, 105 S. Prospect, developer of the project, gave a review
of this development outlining that this will be for the mature adult,
have a security guard, maid service, elevators, etc. It will have the
theme of old New England, something along the lines of a fishing village,
with the center of the mall having an old New England schooner. Other
features of the project will be a private club and pool.
He stated that he would like to have a clearcut decision especially re-
garding parking requirements and density.
Mark Corcoran, Calstate, feels that this particular property is a prob-
lem piece of property due to it's physical configuration; however, does
feel that this proposed use would be the most logical and best use.
Bob Kramer, Vice-President of Best Years, Inc., related to the Commission
the specifics as far as square footage, etc. of the different buildings
and areas were concerned.
Mrs. Edwin Watne, 14622 Clarissa Lane, property owner to the north of
the project, although not opposed to the project, stated that if the
three story apartment were to be built, it would be an invasion of pri-
vacy as the balconies of the apartments would be looking right down on
her property.
Mrs. Meredith qree.~ey, 14621 Clarissa, reiterated Mrs. Watne's feelings
as respects the height of the apartment complex, but otherwise felt that
this was a good development.
Commissioner Sharp commented at this point, that the action tonight cen-
ters around the prezoning matter, and that the precise plans will be
taken care of at a later date.
The public portion of the hearing was closed at 8:57 p.m. for discussion
among the Commissioners.
Commissioner Edelstein commented that a serious point would be the apart-
ment complex as the developments of the past few years do not have any
buildings with three stories.
Commissioner Dukleth was concerned as respects the traffic pattern off
Irvine Boulevard, with the two entrances and exits. He felt that if one
entrance and exit were closed, it would create enough space to move the
project more to the south, to gain more space in the project area.
Mr. Fleagle advised that if the townhouses were put on the northern perim-
eter, it would resolve the problem cf'height and privacy for adjoining
residents. It would not reduce the density, but would change the config-
uration.
Commissioner Sharp moved for approval by adoption of Resolution No. 1288;
seconded by Commissioner Larnard.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
4. PZ-72-136 - Planning Commission Initiated - prezoning and zone ch ge
ZC-72-232 from the Orange County R-1 District (2 parcels) and t
City of Tustin C-1 (1 parcel) to the City of Tustin
Planned Community (PC-Commercial) District.
Location:
Site is located at the northeasterly intersection of
Irvine Boulevard and Elizabeth Way with frontages of 165'
on Irvine Boulevard and 270' on Elizabeth Way.
-5-
~?C Minutes 9/11/72
Page six
Mr. Flea¢~le advised the Commission that the parcel at the easterly cor-
ner of Irvine Boulevard and Elizabeth Way is presently developed with
a small commercial-professional complex. The two parcels lying north-
easterly of this parcel are presently located in the County, are zoned
R-1 and have two existing single-family residences located on the prop-
erties. · The owners of the existing complex have indicated they are
purchasing the two residential parcels located in the County, and it is
their desire to remove the existing residential structures and expand
their existing commercial-professional structure northeastward onto
these two parcels. It was suggested that the owners file for annexa-
tion to the City of Tustin for the two County parcels, conjunctive with
the prezoning. Furthermore, it was suggested that all three properties
would be best zoned in a Planned Community-Commercial status, to allow
for a flexible, consolidated development plan of the total facility. The
owners have agreed to this procedure.
Staff also advised the developers that the commercial and professional
structures front on Irvine Boulevard, with Elizabeth Way providing ser-
vice entrances. With the design control exercised by the Development
Preview Commission, Staff feels that this should produce a development
compatible with the surrounding area.
Chairman Curtis opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:50 p.m.
Rex Rehnauist, 1163 Irvine Boulevard, architect and contractor for Mrs.
Osteen, the property owner, advised that he was available if there should
be any questions.
Public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:52 p.m. for discussion among
the Commissioners.
Commissioner Sharp moved for approval by adoption of Resolution No. 1286
and 1287; seconded by Commissioner Larnard.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
ZC-72-233 - Southern California Projects, Inc. - to permit a zone
change from C-1 to the Planned Community (PC-Commercial)
District, to authorize a consolidated commercial and pro-
fessional complex.
Location:
Subject property is located on the southeasterly side of
Newport Avenue, and is bounded by Main and Bryan.
Mr. Fleagl~ advised that the subject property is in a stage of develop-
ment, after having been vacant for many years. A newly opened veterinary
hospital is located on the northeasterly side of Bryan Avenue, and a
large restaurant (Seta Bella) is located on the Newport Avenue frontage
which is nearing completion. The southwesterly corner and the balance
of the property fronting along Main Street are presently undeveloped,
but concept plans have been submitted which indicate these areas are
proposed to be developed with combination professional-commercial uses.
The requested rezoning is highly desirable, since the Planned Community-
Commercial District for the total triangular shaped parcel would permit
both greater flexibility of design and a functional consolidation of
existing and proposed uses on this total site. Also, City control of the
final development would be strengthened through the vehicle of a precise
plan for any such development. The existing C-1 zoning, could prove to
be too inhibitive from a design and functional standpoint for a project
of this magnitude and for this site's community exposure. The concept
plan as presented appears feasible with the exception of the small struc-
ture on the most easterly end of the triangle.
Although the portions of the property of the veterinary hospital, and the
vaca~t ~v~i~ ow~d b~ G~i£ Oil ~ ~o~ p~ of ~he ~p~ica~io~ submi~ti
by applicant, the entire parcel bounded by Newport, Main & Bryan were ad-
vertised for zone change hearing.
Chairman Curtis opened the public portion of the hearing at 10:02 p.m.
-6-
PC Minutes 9/11/72
Page seven
Harry Cain, ~{icnard P~ior & A=o,,ciatcs, stated that the pnrkina situa-
tion will be helped on a joint basis with this Planned Community-Commercial
zoning.
Frank Dowler, 1132 Letty Lane, questioned the height of the building and
was advised that the two retail stores would be two stories high.
Public portion of the hearing was closed at 10:12 p.m. for discussion
among the Commissioners.
Commissioner Edelstein moved for approval, by adoption of Resolution No.
1285; seconded by Commissioner Dukleth.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
OLD BUSINESS - none
NEW BUSINESS
1. Final Map of Tract No. 7970 - Sierra Pacific Properties
Location: Northeast corner of Pasadena & McFadden Avenue
Mr. Brown stated that the subject property is currently developed as a
32 unit apartment complex and is proposed for conversion to condominium
units. This Final Map conforms to tentative Map No. 7970 approved on
July 24, 1972.
Commissioner Larnard moved for approval, subject to final approval by the
City Council, the City Engineer, submission of Labor and Material Bond,
Faithful Performance Bond and Monumentation Bond and conformance to tX
conditions of approval outlined for Tentative Map, including approval
the CC&R's by the City Attorney; seconded by Commissioner Edelstein.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
2. Tentative Tract Map No. 7924 - Jack D. McClean
Location:
West side of Prospect Avenue, south of Carlsbad Drive
and south of Tentative Tract 7846.
Mr. Brown advised that this tentative tract is the southerly portion of
the 7.8 acre Prospect-Carlsbad Annexation No. 75 annexed to the City on
May 10, 1972. This area was prezoned as an R-1 (Single-Family residential
area under PZ-72-132. Tentative Tract 7846 was filed on the northerly
portion in May, 1972.
Tentative Tract 7924 is in reality a continuation of Tentative Tract 7846.
but not as yet submitted for approval of the final map. Since this tract
has no access to public streets except through Tract 7846, it is readily
apparent that either Tract 7846 must receive final approval and be re-
corded, or an improved access route must be provided from Prospect Avenue
to the 10 lots with Tract 7924.
The City Engineer has recommended 13 conditions as subject of approva
approval is granted.
Commissioner Larnard moved for approval, subject to the City Enginaer's
13 conditions; seconded by Co~nissioner Edelstein.
i
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
3. Procedural Rules for Public Hearing
Mr. Flea~.le presented 8 procedures for the Commission's review, along wit
a report on Due Proclass recuJ.rements for Zoning Decisions. Commi.~sioner~
discussed [.i'~e pro~o~'~<l format for conducting r~ublic hea~'~n~s and suggest.~
--7--
PC Minutes 9/11/72
Page eight
that the hearing process be made as informal as possible. The matter
was continued to the next regular meeting ~o provide Staff an opportunity
to incorporate comments of the Commissioners into the proposed rules.
CORRESPONDENCE
1. County Case ZC-72-56
Location:
Southeasterly side of Newport Avenue, approximately 645'
northeasterly of Wass Street.
Mr. Brown stated that this request is to rezone subject property from the
Orange County R4-7,000(PD)-3,000 "Suburban Residential-Planned Development"
District to the PA "Professional and Administrative Office" District.
In Staff's opinion, this requested rezoning of the property from the
multiple-family status to a professional office category is highly un-
desirable for the following reasons:
The Tustin Area General Plan indicates the feasibility of high den-
sity (12 units per acre) residential development along the south-
eastern side of Newport Avenue from Irvine Boulevard to LaColina Drive.
Northeastward of LaColina, medium low density (2.5 units per acre) is
the indication along Newport Avenue. No professional or commercial
land uses are indicated northeastward of Wass Street.
e
Approval of this requested zone change to professional and adminis-
trative office uses would be a violation of the indications of the
General Plan, and would establish a precedent which could initiate a
proliferation of professional and even commercial uses northeastward
along this entire street frontage.
e
The City of Tustin has attempted to focus, the deve~.op~t of profes-
sional facilities along Irvine Boulevard and in its downtown area.
Approval of this request would dilute these goals and would encourage
undesirable strip highway development of such uses.
There are existing vacant parcels authorized by zoning for PA develop-
ment within the Tustin area. There is no known reason justifying the
requested zone change, nor is there any reason precluding the develop-
ment of subject parcel in accordance with the existing zoning classi-
fication.
The existing R4 zoning is compatible to the indications of the General
Plan and surrounding land uses.
Commissioner Larnard moved for recommendation for denial of this request;
seconded by Commissioner Edelstein.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
2. Southern California Planning Congress announcement
Mr. Brown read the announcements of two meetings; one on September 14,
1972 and the other on October 7th.
3. Malena Storm Drain
Mr. Brown informed the Commission that the request of the City, the con-
struction of the Malena Storm Drain was included in the Orange County
Flood Control District's 1972-73 budget. The Government Code of Califor-
nia Section 65402, provides that a local agency such as the flood control
district shall net construct public works in any city until the location,
purpose and extent of such works have been submitted to and reported upon
as to conformity to the city's adopted general plan. If the project is
considered in conformance, a resolution is requested stating that this is
in conformance with our General Plan.
-8-
PC Minutes 9/11/72
Page nine
lution No. 1289 be adopted.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
4. Letter from the Automatic Car Wash Association of Southern California
Mr. Brown summarized this letter, advising of the subject Association'
concern relative to excess service stations throughout this area, and
their blight to the community.
He advised Commission that Staff will send a letter to this Association
advising them that our Zoning Ordinance requires that a Use Permit be
approved prior to issuance of any Building Permit and also that any
action by the Planning Commission on such a request must be based on the
appropriateness of the facility to the surrounding area, traffic circula-
tion, etc.
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Fleagle advised the Commission of the content of new bills passed by
the State Legislature.
The Commission was requested to review a film, following adjournment. The
film that was made by Eastman Kodak, All the Difference, presented alterna
tives to land, air, water and visual pollution.
CO~%IISSION CONCERNS - none
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - none
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Edelstein moved for adjournment at 10:57 p.m.; seconded by
Commissioner Larnard. Unanimously carried.
CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING CO~L~ISSION
PLANNING~OMMISSION RECORDING SECRETARY
-9-