Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 10-27-69MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 27, 1969 CALL TO ORDER LEDGE OF LLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ve PUBLIC HEARINGS The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Halus. Led by Commissioner Webster. Present: Commissioners: Mr. Webster, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Larnard, Mr. I{alus Absent: Commissioners: Mr. Oster, Mrs. Ludwig, Mr. Mahoney Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney J~es L. Supinger, Planning Director Jo Ann Turner, Planning Secretary It was moved by Mr. Larnard, seconded by Mr. Webster, that the minutes of October 13, 1969, be approved as corrected. Motion carried 4-0. ZC-69-190 - RICIIARD & BILLIE KRUPPE (Continued from August 11, 1969) For rezoning of an approximate 0.83 acre parcel from R-1 (Single Family Residential) District to the PC (Planned Community Residential) District. Location: 'Site fronts 109.16 ft. on the south side of Main Street, approximately 227 ft. east of the center- line of Pacific Avenue. Mr. Supinser stated that the application was originally con- sidered February 10, continued to April 14, August 11 and October 27, 1969 in anticipation of receipt of information from the Economic Study. He suggested that this application be deleted from the agenda with the applicant's approval and re-advertised at the earliest possible date when a specific plan has been adopted for the Tustin City Area. Mr. Supinger recommended denial if the applicant does not agree to having this request deleted from the agenda. Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:35 P.M. : ~. Richard Kruppe, 123~2 Newport Avenue, stated that he and his wife want to develop the land in a pleasing type of manner that would be beneficial to the community and would comply with the Building Codes, Architectural conditions and Planning standards set forth. He stated that it was his understanding that the Study being conducted of this particular area, was to be completed at this time. He suggested that since all the pertinent information was not available that maybe the City Council and the TNT Committee could get together and using what information that they do have avaiTable in resolving the area's need for this particular location. Mr. Kruppe stated that he would build a reasonable project that could be worked out with the City. He stated that he wanted a decision at this time and did not want the item deleted from the agenda. Those in oppo::ition were: Mrs. Barbara Torres, 225 South Myrtle blr. Jack l~.[oom, 330 California Street Mrs. Lee Wagner, owner of Lamp Shop on corner of Ma'in and E1 Camino Real. The above opposition requested denial due to traffic noise, traffic hazards, non-conforming use and destroying the character of the neighborhood and area. They strongly opposed the above requ'.est. ' There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Halus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:55 P.M. ' Mr. Webster stated that information that has been gathered by the Economic Research Committee would be prnne;-.~ ti to the '- ' c,-m;~;'!ttee for the first kJ~.~e on the 7th of Luvcmmer. lie did no~' feel that this first presentation would solve any of the overall problems at this time. He did not feel that a piece-meal type of zoning was in the best interest of the City and was not prepared to discuss an alternative density' matter, with no available plans as a guideline. It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by Mr. Larnard, that Resolution No. 1112, be adopted, re. comme.ndi.ng denial of Application No. ZC-69-190., to the Cit~ Council for the followi.n~ reasons: 1. The proposed density of 34 d.u./acre is more than eight times the 4 d.u./acre (Medium Density Resi- dentiaD District suggested by the Tustin Area General Plan. An Economic Study, currently under way, is studying land use potentials for the subject area. The sub- stantial investment in the Economic Study would be jeopardized by the approval of zone changes increas- ing residential densities prior to receipt of the results of the Economic Study, As additional ground~, the minutes and evidence in- troduced at the hearing are included by reference and made a part of the motion. Chairman Halus concurred with Mr. Webster, stating that he felt it would be in the best interest of the applicant and the citizens in the community to ~eny this particular hear- ing at this point and time. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. (3 members absent) 6. ZC-69-198 - SCltOLZ H~MES INC. ON BEHALF OF FIRST WESTERN BANK DaND TRUST COMPANY For rezoning of a parcel with a gross area ~f 11.1 acres as follows: (a) PC-Pr (Planned Community - Professional Offices) District for a depth of 200 ft. from the centerline of Irvine Boulevard (Fourth Street.) Proposed structures would be a maximum of four (4) stories in height and have both surface and underground parking. (b) PC-R-3(2100) (Planned Community - Multiple' Family Residential - 2100 sq. ft. of lot area per dwelling unit) District for a depth of approximately 340 ft. southerly from the northerly boundary line of sub- 'iec~ pardol, Pr~osp. d d~m;,l~.~ incl,:des three 3-story PC Min~t;e~ - Ocgobur 2'1~ £'Jb'J ~m~ocation: Site fronts approximately 1000 ft. on the ~"~6rth ~fde of Irvine Boulevard (Fourth Street). and approximately 500 ft. on the east side of North "B" Street and thc~ west side of Prospect Avenue. It was moved by Mr. Websge'~v~seconded by Mr. Larnard that the rules be suspended to consi.der Item No. 6, & 7 under Public Ilearin~s, out of order. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Supiqger stated that the applicants of s~bject application have requested a continuance to November 10, 1969, to make some changes on their plot plan and changes that will improve thei= project. Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:07 P.M. Those in opposition were: ~:r. Ray Mathewson, 17712 Westbury Lane Mr. Norman E. Templ. e, 17572 Westbury Lane Mr. Donald Rhoades, 14701 Evanston Circle The above opposition wanted to go on record as strenuously opposing the request due to apartment projects not being in keeping with the Tustin Area General Plan. They wanted the area to remain exclusive of apartment dwellings to eliminate all the problems that would possibly derive from this type of request. They felt that this would create an undesirable effect'of the existing neighborhood. Mr. Temple stated that he was opposed to the entire plan as presented. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Halus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:17 P.M. It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by Mr. Curtis, that Applicatipn No. ZC-69-198, Scholz Homes, Inc. be-continued to November 10, 196~. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. (3 members absent) 7. V-69-260 - ROBERT' J. PINKERTON, D.D.S. ON BEHALF OF TOM PELFREY To permit the use of an existing nonconforming structure as dental offices and general offices without providing required off-street parking.' Location: Site is at the northwest corner of the inter- section of E1 Camino Real ("D" Street) and Second Street. The applicant requested that this item be deleted from the agenda permanently. ~ It was moved by Mr. Larnard, seconded by Mr. Curtis that Application No. V-69-260 be deleted from the a~enda ~rmanently. MOTION CARRIED 4-0 (3 members absent) 2. UP-69-310 - SEABOARD ENGINEERING COMPANY ON BEHALF OF GULF OIL , To permit the reconstruction and modernization of an existing service station. Location: At the northeast corner of the intersection of First Street and Tustin Avenue. PC >iinutes - 0trebor 27, 1969 Mr. Su[>inqer presented the staff report stating that the ~u-~O~-~' '~-~poration should be commended for this proposal to replace an existing non-conforming structure and use with a contemporary service station structure which will conform to City standards, lie stated that the proposed plans conform to the Service Station Site Development Guide exoept in the following respects: 1. The required six (6) parking spaces are not shown. 2. Planter areas, are not shown around the entire boundaries of the parcel. Landscaped area does not total 5% of the site area. 4. Restroom doors are not screened. Mr. Supinge~ suggested that subject request be conditionally approved subject to compliance with the Service Station Site Development Guide, approval of plans by the Development Pre- view Committee and the 11 conditions as set forth in the staff report. Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:22 P.M. Mr. George Bernharth, Seaboard Engineering Company, repre- senting Gulf Oil Corporation, stated that they have no ob- jections to the staff's conditions and there would be no problem with the parking or landscaping, although he felt that additional landscaping would be redundant. He stated that they would abide by Condition No. 7 relative to the prohibiting of rental of trailers or other equipment and the storage of the same on the site, if an agreement could not be reached. Mr. Richard Ball, 666 East Seventeenth, Santa Ana, stated that in thc leases that their Oil Company makes with the individual dealer specifically states that there is a provision that con- trols this use of trailer rentals. He stated that it is sort of general procedures to provide trailers for rental at these service stations but it is controlled. He stated that they would certainly make a sincere and strong effort in keeping the property acceptable from an aesthetic standpoint and would control the use of the trailers to the best of their ability. F~. Webster suggested that the City prohibit such a use which would take the burden away from Gulf Oil. He felt that once this type of operation is in, there wouldn't be much that the City could do, if problems did arise. ~ Mr. Ball stated that he felt the Oil Company would not be adverse to this type of condition. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Halus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:30 P.M. Mr. Webster commended the Gulf Oil Company for their efforts upgrading the existing business. It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by, Mr. Curtis that Resolutior No. 1113 be adopted, conditioh~lly approving Application No. UP-69-310 for the followiq9 reasons: · The Commission finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use applied particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in.the neigh- bor)~ood of tho propo::~,d use and it will not be i~njurious or .]ctr].:~,ental to tl~,: ..ro[,~','ty and improvements in the neighborhood of the general -~,:~.?~wolfare of the City. .... As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing are included by reference and made a part 0f~.t~motion. Conditions of approval are: Compliance with th9 Service Station Site Development Guide. Approval of Plot Plan, Elevations and Landscaping' Plans by the Development Preview Committee. Banners, bunting and flags (except City, State and Federal) shall be prohibited except for an initial grand opening period which is defined as one (1) month after issuance of final use and occupancy permit by the Building Department. Temporary promotional displays shall be limited to thirty (30) days per quarter. Operations not conducted wholly within the main service station building shall be limited to dis- pensing and/or installation of gasoline, oil, water, minor parts and items and tire changing. No merchandise, other than oil or gasoline products, shall be stored or displayed outside of the main service station building. (Oil products do not in- clude oil or gasoline additives.) Rental of trailers or other equipment and the storage of same on the site shall be prohibited. 8. The parking of trucks, other than those necessarily, immediately and directly involved in the station's operations on the site, other than for minor servicing shall be prohibited. 9. No vending or dispensing machines shall be stored or maintained other than wholly enclosed within the main service station building. 10. Major overhaul of engines shall be prohibited. 11. Installation of Street Trees'per the Master Street Tree Plan. Mr. Webster sta~ed that he felt the landscaping problem co'uld be worked out during the time the' plans are submitted to the Development Preview ~om~.ttee, rather than trying to resolve the~ matter this evenzng. The above motion carried 4-0 (3 members absent) 3. UP-69-314 - SEABOARD ENGINEERING COMPANY ON BEHALF OF GULF OIL CORPORATION To permit the replacement of existin~ signs as follows: (a) Free-standing sign at the intersection of First Street and Tustin Avenue; height 30 ft. total area 238 sq. ft. (b) Wall sign on service station structure, 4 sq. ft. (c) Wall sign on edge of canopy, 3 sq. ft. (d) Total area on the site, 925 sq. ft. Location: Site is at the northeast corner of the intersection of First Street and Tustin Avenue. Mr. Supinge_r stated that this proposal is made to 'replace certain existing signs with new signs in conjunction with the previously considered service station modernization. lie stated that because the local identification sign was only recently approved by the City Council, it is suggested that it be retained. Mr. Supinger recommended approval as follows: I a. Freeway I.D. Sign (existing) total area 682 sq. ft. b. Local I.D. Sign (existing)height 18 ft., t6tal area 56 sq. ft. c. Service Station Wall Sign (new) 4 sq. ft. d. Canopy Wall Sign (new) 3 sq. ft. e. Total Area 645 sq. ft. Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:36 P.M. Mr. George Bernharth, Gulf Oil Representative spoke, describ- ing the signs and their need for the trademark signs. Mr. Ball, Gulf Oil Representative stated that due to the con- figuration of the service station site and the freeway, a larger sign for this area would not be offensive to the community and could better identify their station. He felt that the requested free-standing sign of a height of 30 ft. would be in keeping with the surrounding businesses in the commercial area and gave this as their justification for such a request. Mr. Halus stated that in his experiences of readily noticing sign advertising, he felt that a sign between 16 to 18 ft. in height, seems to be more noticable when driving. / There being no further discussion from the audience, Chairman Halus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:45 P.M. Mr. Curtis stated that by remodelling the station and trying to update these requested projects, he feels that the signs should also be carefully considered as part of the overall project and not to think, only, of the appearance at the present, but the future plans in the area. He stated that from his observation of the existing sign, he felt it adequately projected what they need for local trafic. 'He did not feel that a sign with a greater height would be that beneficial for identification. Mr. Bernharth stated that the existing sign would be relocated on the property. He stated that the contiguous service stations have a height at approximately the requested height of their sign, which would deprive them of having comparable exposure. It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by Mr. Larnard, that Resolution No. 1114 be adopted, conditionally approving Appli- cation No. UP-69-314 for the following reasons: The Commission finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neigh- .borhood of the proposed use and it will not be improvements in the neighborhood or the general w~lfare of the City. As additional grounds, tho minutes and evidence iutrod',. 'e.~ at th,'; hearing are included by refer- cncu and made ,~ part of ~he motion. ~',~',' A~proved signs permitued ~re: L~cal I. D.' Frd~'~,~tandino SLgn ,ex~.s-~'-ng;heigk~ 18 ft., total area 56 sq. ft. Ce Service Station Wall Sign (now) 4 sq. ft.(as indicated in attached sketch.) Canopy Wail'Sign (new) 3 sq. ft. (as indicated in attached sketch.) e. Total'Area, approximately 745 sq. ft. }:r. C'~rtis stated that he did not notice "Price Signs" indicated 'in the staff report, but on the site, he did observe several of ~2%es e signs. ?~r. Supinger s~ated that price signs are pe~.~ittua bg mhe Ordi- nance and are ~lso restricted, although the application did not indicate that they wished to deviate from the Ordinance standards. · ~:OTION CARRIED 4-0 (3 members absent). V-69-256 - TACO BELL & ALFIE'S FISH & CHIPS (Continued from October 13, 1969) To permit: A Taco-Bell take-out food operation wi~'. i.~ ,,ff- street parking spaces (Ordinance require~ a i~se Permit and 22 parking spaces for subject bus,ness.) be An Alfie's Fish & Chips take-out food opur~ or. with 22 off-street parkin spaces (Ordinance requ~ '.:s a Use Permit and 26 off-street parking spaces ject business.) Location: Site fronts approximately 205 feeI: on ,ah, :~outh- ~ast sid'e of Newport and approximately 135 feet on t2,e north- east side of Mitchell. l.:r. Su. pinger stated that this matter was continu..d f~'om t2%e last ?~anning Commission meeting t~ allow the staff %'.~ ~,b:.erve t~e o]~erations at !_he existing Al:~ie's facility 3. n ,.. ,~.," m. '~e seated that du .-ing the noon-time hours, there: we c',~.3tomers and 5 "take-out" cu:;tom~rs - Betwe(:n 6.,~u ;~.'-..~. an~. 6:30p.m., they had 7 "eat-in" and 4 "take-out" c~.u~.o~.ers. stated that t~his use be consi~lered a "take-out" Saciiity tk..~t the appropriate standards apply. Mr. Supinger Stated tha= tko staff does not oppose this type of operation if they comply with the standards of ~the ordinance. Ck,'.irman IIalus opened th~ public portion of the hearSng 8:55 P.M. Those verbally speaking were: Mr. William Stits, 224 Fourth Street, Manhatten. Deach, area owner of Alfie's Fish & Chips. [.~. Gary Cooper, Alfie's representative. Mr. George C. Austin, with Arthur Turner, 520 Ea~C First ~'Ureet, representing the owner of the property. a:;ked for a definition of the "take-out" food establish- feeling ~chat their business could not be defined as one. -7- Alfie's representatives stated that they would like some sort of criteria'to go by and would willingly work with the City. Mrs. Barnett, 14201 Raleigh Place, Tustin, voiced concern over ~dd~al traffic that this operation would 'create. She stated that there are approximately five (5) existing or proposed "take-out" food establishments within a five (5) block radius, plus service stations and a drive-in dairy. She stated that she is not opposed to the type of establishment, but cons'iderable thought should be given to the school children that have to use that route for tending school relative to the overflow of traffic. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Halus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 9:10 P.M. After discussion among the Commissioners relative to the seating, parking requirements, traffic problems and reviewing the results of their field trip, it was felt that it would be detrimental to the community in regards to the traffic pattern to permit this request. It was moved by Mr. Larnard, seconded by Mr. Webster, that Application No. V-69-256 be denied for the following reasons: 1. That the adjustment applied for will constitute. a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and.district in which the property is situated. That special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography location or surroundings, do not because of the strict application of the zoning ordinance, deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. e As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing are included by refer- ence and made a part of the motion. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. (3 members absent) 5. UP-69-313 - TRANS-AUTO RENTAL & LEASING COMPANY ON BEHALF OF JOHN ROACH AND JEROF~E STEWART To permit the leasing of automobiles and trucks in the C-2 (Commercial) District. Location: At the southwest corner of the intersection of Main Street and E1 Camino Real (D Street.) ~. Supinger stated that the applicant has requested this site to be used for the operation of an office for auto leasing and that the autos would be picked up at individual dealers from which they are ordered. Mr. Supinger stated that the staff has no objections, although there are some problems that will have to be resolved relative to the site. He recommended conditional approval. Chairman IIalus opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:15 P.M. Mm~--~/~hard IIirst, par. tnQ~..~.,i,t~h Trans-Auto Leasi_~/~ CQmpanv · .~ aware'"~'~::'~'6~ of tge. work t'~~~Tto b~ · ~,~.~ ~cation. 'lie stated tha~ %he conditions that ~?~ave b~ .stipulated would be taken care of and their in~ent ~s to ma~9,~e .operation as pleasing as possible for the benefit 6f'.Tus ~in. Mr. John Jamieson, Western Building Design, across the street from subject property, stated that he has looked into this business and .their plans and feels that it would be to the benefit of the city, to have this application approved which would result in cleaning up the property and aesthetically improving this location. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Ilalus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 9:30 P.M. After a brief discussion among the Commissioners, It was moved ~y Mr. Larnard, seconded by Mr. Webster, that Resolution No. 1115 be adopted, approvin9 Application No. UP-69-313 for the followin9 reasons: The Commission finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare : of the persons residing or working in the . neighborhood of the proposed use and it will not be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing are included by refer- ence and made a part of the motion. Conditions of approval are: That the property not be utilized to store leased autos. 2 Reconstruction of missing or broken sidewalk on the Main Street frontage (approximately 12' X 40'.) Submission of a.plot plan. of the new building and location of underground storage tanks. Removal of underground tanks and proper filling of holes. A permit for remgving the tanks shall be secured from the Fire Chief. Approval of plot plan, elevations and landscaping plans by the Development Preview Committee. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. (3 members absent) 8. UP-69-312 - FEDERAL SIGN & SIGNAL CORPORATION ON BEIIALF OF ZACHARY T. PEDICINI To permit a free-standing sign to identify tenants of a commercial complex. Proposed sign would have a'height of 53 feet, identify 11 tenants, an area of 567 sq.ft. per side and total area 1134 sq. ft. -9- Mr. SupincTer stated that this proposal is for a complex ldentlI~catlon sign to identify tenants of a new shopping center currently under construction. The proposed sign identifies the major tenant with a large sign on the top with 10 additional modules to identify other tenants in the complex. He explained that the application is permitted to request height, size and number of signs in excess of that normally permitted by the ordinance because the property is within 200 feet of a freeway. He stated that because this complex is a small, neighborhood oriented shopping center, it is felt that freeway identification and the proposed in- creased height and area are not required. The Planning De- partment recommended denial of subject request because of lack of justification. I Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:35 P.M. Mr. John McDonald, representing Federal Sign & Signal C0rr poration, stated that he would like to make a correction on the proposed free-standing sign. He stated that the staff report stated that they were requesting an area per side of 567 sq. ft. and their request is for 508 sq.ft, per side. He also stated that he did not see where this could be detri- mental to the welfare or health of the community. He ex- plained that the buildings and signs are done in good taste and that the signs do not flash or revolve in any manner. He submitted some pictures of an alternate plan for the Com- missioners to view. Mr. Zachary T. Pedicini, 712 North Palm Drive, Beverly Hills, stated that he felt a solution could be worked out and still not disturb the Tustin ordinances. He explained that the buildings are being constructed under the Orange County rules and regulations due to the construction starting before this property was annexed to the City. He stated that due to many strikes hindering the building process of the project has resulted in a difficult situation where it was not completed before they had to change from the Orange County ordinances and codes to the Tustin Planning Department's recommendations, which are different ordinances than they originally set out to comply with. I{e stated that after talking with Mr. Gill and Mr. Supinger, that they volunteered to annex to the City. Prior to the annexation, he said that he had talked with Mr. Gill, regarding the partial completion of the shopping center and the regulations under the Orange County's jurisdi6tion, and asked that they might complete this project with no change in regulations. He stated that the sign has already been approved by the County and asked the Commission to allow the sign to be constructed and erected under the Orange County Planning Department's jurisdiction. I{e explained that there ks a 750 ft. frontage and 1000 ft. at the back of the property and he did not feel that the proposed sign was asking too much for this area. He stated that they had scheduled a flagging of the si~e and none of the Commis- sioners were present. Mr. Supin~er.clarified the sign situation, stating that this application was advertised incorrectly. He stated that the sign that is being requested is 913 sq. ft. per side with a total area of 1826 sq. ft. He explained that this figure is determined by drawing the smallest possible rectangle around the total sign area and figuring the area per side from that. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Ilalus declared the public portion of the hearing closed a~ 9:55 P.M. -10- PC Minutou - Octobur 27, 1969 .M~ G~.tl. explained that this property was anncxed~..[Q~the City of Tustin, effective date September 26, 1969. lie s'tated that all plans issued to that date would be considered under the County's jurisdiction. He stated that the Signs were not considered by the County and subsequently would have to be regulated by the City of Tustin's ordinance. Mr. Supinger reminded the Commission that nothing could be ~pproved over and beyond what was advertised. Mr. McDonald asked if ~ey could re-design the sign and bring ~t back for the.Commission's review. After much discussion regarding the sign computation, the existing problems and hardship resulting from the transition from the County regulations and the City of Tustin, along w~.th the error in advertising, it was agreed upon that this hearing be rescheduled and re-heard at the next regularly scheduled meeting of November 10, 1969. It was moved by Mr. Curtis, seconded by Mr. Larnard, that APplication No. UP-69-312 be re-advertised and scheduled for the November 10, 1969, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. (3 member absent) VIII. COu~ES- PO~ ENCE It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by Mr. Larnard that ~e.rul.es be suspended to consider the Correspondence Item ~rior to the New Business Item out of order. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. 1. COUNTY CASE UV-6334 - Paul Williams & Robert Cle99 To permit the establishment of a 58 unit apartment com- plex in the 100-C1-10,000 "Local Business" District and certain variances. Location: Fronts 284 feet on the northwest side of Browning' Avenue between Mitchell Avenue and Nisson Road (adjacent to existing duplex residences.) Mr. Supinger presented the staff report stating that because of this specific prohibition of residential uses in the C1 District, it is suggested that this'application should not be granted. A more appropriate vehicle for such approval, which would not circumvent the legislative process required to change zoning would be to witharaw this application and to apply for rezoning, he felt. He stated that the staff is also concerned because of the pro- posed density of 30.7 d.u./acre and explained that the Tustin Area General Plan suggests High Density Residential (12 d.u./ acre) for this area. He'recommended strong opposition to this proposal. It was moved by Mr. Curtis, seconded by Mr. Larnard, that a letter be directed to the County strongly.opposing subject application because the proposed density zs two and one-half (2½) times the density suggested by the Tustin Area General Plan for the subject area and feels that residential use is more appropriate for the area than would be c~mmercial use. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY LD BUSINESS 'II o MW BUSINESS NONE l. PARCEL ~iAP - (PM-69-28) - DIXON W. TUBBS TO divide parcel for purposes of sale and · future development. Location: East side of Tustin Avenue, 200 ft. north of First Street. Mr. Myers, City Engineer, submitted a report, stating that this map is a resubmission of PM-69-21 conditional- ly approved on June 9, 1969, but never recorded. Parcel frontages are being revised as follows: Parcel 1 from 65 feet to 55 feet. Parcel 2 from 65 feet to 98.50 feet. Parcel 3 from 210 feet to 186.50 feet. Ail parcels are currently zoned C-2 and Parcel 1 has been developed as Carter Lighting Company. He stated that curb and full paving have been constructed east of the centerline of Tustin Avenue and, sidewalk has been constructed on Parcel 1. Mr. Myers. recommended that a minute order be adopted approving the parcel map. After a brief discussion with the Commission, It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by Mr. Larnard that a Ptinute Order be adopted, approving Parcel Ma~ PM-69-28 subject to the following conditions: Construction of full 8 foot sidewalk on both Parcels 2 and 3. Construction of drive approaches or close · existing curb openings. 3. Planting of one street tr~e on Parcel 1. o Planting of street trees on Parcels 2 and 3 upon development of the property. o Installation of underground utility services upon development of the property, applicable to Parcel No. 3 only. Final approval by the City Engineer and re- cordation of.~he map. .X. ,TilER BUSINESS NONE ,DJOU~N~.~NT It was moved by Mr. Larnard, seconded by. Mr. Curtis, that the meeting be a ourned MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Ilalus declared the meeting adjourned at 10:50 P.M. iNG COMMISSION