Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 06-23-69CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES PUBLIC ~EARINGS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COM/4ISSION JUNE 23, 1969 The meetin6 was called to order at 7:35 P.M., by Chairman llalus. Led by Mr. Webster. Present: Absent: Commissioners: Commissioner: Mr. Sharp, Mr. Oster, Mr. Halus, Mr. Webster, Mr. Larnard, Mr. Mahoney Mrs. Ludwi6 Others present: Mr. Kenne~ Byrant - Assistant City Attorney Mr. IIarry E..GilI'- City Administrator Mr. James L. Supinger - Planning Director Jo Ann Turner - Planning Secretary It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by Mr. Oster, that the minutes of June 9, 1969, be approved as sUbmitted. Carried 6-0 (one member absent - Mrs. Ludwig) 1. V-69-249 - PAUL S. KNIGHT ON BEHALF OF RITA GRIES To pe~nit: a) Two (2) roof signs, each of which is 3' X 16' and has an area of 48 sq. ft. (Sign Ordinance per,its-roof signs'0nly in lieu of permitted free standing sfgns,) b) Total sign area of 96 sq. ft. for an individual business in the complex when 90 sq. ft. would be permitted by ordinance. Mr. Supinger presented the staff report stating that the building was previously occupied by Jim Dandy's Bar which had a roof sign facing east.. Proposal is for a real estate office to occupy the structure. Mr. S~p~nger recom- mended conditional approval to permit the following: One (1) roof sign, maximum area 90 sq. ft. facing to the east, not to extend above the parapet and with a setback of 4'6" from the northerly edge of the roof. 2. Maximum total sign area for subject business on th'e ~ite of 90 sq. ft. Suggested conditions of approval were: a) Installation of full sidewalk for the 155' frontage of. the subject property. Installation of two (2) street trees per the Master Street Tree Plan. Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 7~40 P.M. ' PC Minut~-~s - Juice 23, 1969 Mr. Paul $. Knight, 184].0 Fourth Street, '£~ustin, represent- ing %]~e app].ic~nt, stated that they are only asking to move the signs approximately 230 ft. west and t]~e reason for re- questing the additional 6 ft. is due to the amount of money that riley already have in the sign panels. He stated that ~he roof line is so low that if the sign is placed on the wall, it blocks the door and would be hidden by the exist- ing fence. He suggested by leaving it on the roof it hides the unsightly ventilation facilities and gives them better sign identification. Mr. Knight agreed to th~ 4% ft. set- back as suggested in the staff report and explained the changes in the structure to make it a more aesthetical asset to the city, complex and conununity. He did not fee]. it was fair to the tenant or the owner to place such stringent conditions as planing trees and instal- ling full sidewa].~ ~r ~'~ ].55' frontage of the proper~y. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Halus declared the public portion 6f the hearing closed at ~:50 P.M. . The Commissioners discussed the location of the signs, the contiguous properties, street tree planting, installation of sidewalk, expense that would be involved in such an addition and what portion of the property was actually in the City or County territory. Since the location for the installatio~ of trees and side- walk is under the County jurisdiction, the Commission did not feel it was within their purview to make such. conditions. It was also felt that the transition of the use and the alteration of the building was an improvement. It was moved by Mr. '~ster, seconded by Mr. Mahone_~v_, that Resolution No. 1090 be adopted, ~pprovin~ Application No. V-69-249 as follows: Two (2) roof signs, maximum area 96 sq. ft., one facing west and the one facing east is not to extend above the parapet and with a setback of 4'6" from the northerly edge of the roof. Maximum total sign area for subject business on the site of 96 sq. ft. Reasons for approval: That the adjustment hereby authorized will not constitute a grant of special privilege incon- sistent with the ].imitations upon other prop- erties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is situated. That because of special circumstances app].i- cable to the s~bject property, including size, shape, topography, location or ~urroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance will deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing are included by refer- Above motion carried 6-0. (one member absent - Mrs. Ludwig) PC Minutes - 0une 23, 19u'~ 2. ZC--69-].97 - NANCY ].,aSIIF.]',],E & ROB]':RT ASIiWOP. TII For rczoning of a 1~'2.5 .acre parcel from the R-1 (Single Family Residential) District to the PC (Planned Cool,unity) District to permit the es tablishmon~ o~ a pra-~ehool and private elemen- tary schbol. Location: Fronts approximately 320 ft. on the west side of Yorba Street at the intersection of Yorba Street and Jacaranda Avenue Mr. Supinge~ presented'the staff report s~ating that approval-will result in moving the facility from the present location a~ 14851 Yorba Street to the subject location, lie mentioned that the plan provides for an initial building fronting on Yorba just north of its intersection with Jacaranda and a second classroom building will be constructed to the north of the initial building as required by future demands, lie felt that this is a good use for the subject property and recom- mended conditional approval subject,to compliance with the recommendations of %he Fire and Engineering Depart- ments, .approval of plans by the Architectural Committee, the screening of outdoor play areas and provision of off- street parking. Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:20 P.M. Mr. Bud Ashworth, 221 Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar, applicant, gave a description of the existing and pro- 'posed facility, explained the'operation, hours in use, parking layout, off-street parking, future extensions, contiguous properties, screening of the property, number of enrollment and the overall plan. He stated that there are three major.~oncerns that are involved: 1. Aesthetics 2. Parking 3. Noise factors Nancy LaShelle, 18261 E. Oakridge, Santa Ana, was- also ~.n attendance There being no further.~o~ents from the audience, Chair- man Halus declared the public'portion of the hearing closed at 8:40 P.M . The Commissioners discussed the parking situation along Yorba and possible traffic hazards it may cause in the future. It was felt by Mr. Mahoney and Mr. Oster, that a red curb line could be stipulated alonq .certain portions of the property to eliminate on-street par~in9. Mr. Supinger stated that he has talked to the City Engineer Mr. Orville Myers, regarding the situation and he indicated that there was no reason at the present time.to incorporate this condition as long'as.~there is no traffic hazard~. Mr. Supinge~ stated that if it became necessary in the future to take such measures, it could be handled at that time. It was moved b~ Mr..Oster, seconded by Mr. Sharp, that ~l~:~iOn No. 1091 be adopted, re-6-~mending to the City ~ouncil, for adoption of an ordinance, Zone Ch.ange (ZC-69-19'7) from R-1 (Single Fam!l_~__~esidential) DistrJ. ct to the PC ~Planned CommunitY) D~strlct,. fgr.~h~..fo~low~n~ reasons: The proposed use is.a good use for.the subject parcel which i~ unusuaily ~haped an5 ~mB~wi~h~ between the Newport Freeway and a secondary highway. PC Minutes - June 23, 1969 2. Proposed plans provide for screening of outside ac~ivitJ, es from existing residences and provide adequate off-street parking facilities· 3. The success of the applicant's existing facility have proven the need for the requested facility in the conununity. Conditions of approval are: Compliance with the regulations of ~itle 19 of the California Administrative Code (Public Safety), the Uniform Fire Code and other re- lated City Ordinances which establish a minimum degree of fire and life safety· b. Gra~: :i,,! ~ 2~ feet of additional street right- of-way .in a~'..~.,~.~ce with the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. c. Installation of all missing street improvements including pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights and street trees.. d. Modification of any existing irrigation facilities' as necessary to permit construction of street im- provements. Submission and approval of a Parcel Map to create the parcel. Installation of any additional utilities or utility . service connection underground to conform with the surrounding developments. Approval o~ reviseQ plot plan, landscaping plan and elevations by the Architectural Committee. Provision of off-street parking at the rate of one (1) space for each staff member plus one'(l) addi- tional space for each eight (8) students based upon the maximum capacity at each stage of develop- ment. Outdoor play areas sha]~l be screened from surround- ing properties by a 6'8" high solid wall or fence as approved by the Architectural Committee. The above motion carried 6-0. (one member absent - Mrs. Ludwig) ~USINESS NONE ~USINESS 1. PARCEL MA'P .~ PM-6'9-23 - SANBERG AND LEBANOFF To separate R-1 district from R-3 distr~ct for purposes of sale and development of the parcels. Location: West side of Pasadena Avenue, north of Main Street. City Engineer, Mr. Myers, sx~mitted a report stating that this is an attempt to resolve the present problem of two zones within one parcel of land and in solving this prob- lem, ~.t divides the awkward, unusable, "sliver" parcel of land among the adjacent property owners to the north. A PC Minutes - June 23, 1969 ~_~r_.__S._~!~_%!(_?.'i~., ] 2].21 Bayport, Apartment 312, Garden Grove, al~plica~[:, was in attendance and gave a brief history of the property. It was mow:d b~ Mr. O::ter, seconded, by Mr. Sharp, that a minute or¢1(¥]? be adopted conditionally appr. oving' Parcel Map '(PM-69-23) as fei. lows: Written approval of the Parcel Map by the owners of Parcel 2 and 3 indicating a willing- ness to acquire the additional property as shown on the map. Installation of missing sidewalk, street trees and drive approach on Parcel 3. Upon development of the property, the instal- lation of street trees and sidewalk on Parcel 1. Submission to and approval b~ the Architectural Committee of development, plains for Parcel 1. 'Final approval by the City Engineer and record- ation of the map. The above motion carzied 6-0. (one member absent - Mrs. Ludwig) ENCE 1. NONE SCHOOLS NOT IN THE CITY Chairman Halus asked Mr. Gill about schools that are located on County property and not annexed to the City, feeling that problems arising in the schools such as narcotics ~outd be appropriately handled through the Tustin Police Department, .if such action took place. Mr. Gill commented that such problems are handled by the Orange County Sheriff's Office, although the Tustin Police do work in conjunction with them if the need arises. He stated that he would be willing to talk with the citizens of the community regarding the schools not being on City prQperty if they so desired. RED LINE CU]~S AT DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES Chairman Halus commented on on-street parking in the Multiple Family Residential areas, stating that he has noticed cars parking contiguous to driveways of apartments, especially along the Castillian apartments located on Newport, feeling that this could be hazardous to the tenants or people backing from the driveways onto the street. He ~equested that the City Engineer be con- tacted and ~sked his consideration of working out an appropriate action to alleviate this problem. His sug- gestion was to paint red lines in appropriate areas. 3. SUMMARY R~.PORT - PART I - ORANGE COUNTY GENERAL PLANNING. Chairman Iln].us stated that a copy of the subject report ~--~ been made available to the Coimnissioners and that Part II was being routed due to a limited supply. He stated that he would ].i. ke very much for the Commission' to consider going on.record to th~ Tustin. City Council encouraging them to recommend to the Boa~ of ~u}~- ¥isors their support of the intent and the benefit to- be' gained from the General Planning Program. PC Minutes - June 23, 1969 ADJOURNMENT Mr. Os£'er asked for a c~ntinuance of th.~s matt¢::r to the ['I"~]'.~-"i4, ].~69 m(:ctJ, ng to allow more time for rcv:;.¢:w. Mr. Sharp felt that if t}]e County wanted the cooperation of the other cities contiguous to the County, a copy of the roport should be for%carded to Planning Departments to be filed in their libraries. He felt that it might be more beneficial if Mr. Supinqer prepared a synopsis or summary from these reports and presented it to the Com- mission. Chairman IIalus requested Mr. Supinger coordinate a joint mee'c~ng with I,~r. Dick Ramella or Mr. Bell of the Orange County Ploun.~, Don,nrtment, for a presentation of the plan, inviting the C.[I.y C~..t~:~::J.]., City Administrator, Planning Commission, Planning Staff, Department Heads and other interested parties. It was moved by Mr. Larnard, seconded by Mr. Mahoney, that t~'.~? meetin.q be adjourne, d. Carried unanimously. There being no further business before the Commission, Chairman Halus declared the meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION