HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 11-12-68CALl, TO
ORDER
II.
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
III.
ROLL
CALl,
IV.
APPROVAL
OF
MINUTES
PUBLIC
HEAR I NG S
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 12, 1968
l~ovcmbcr 12, 1968
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman tie!us.
Led by Co~nissioner Oster
Present: Com~n, issioners: Sharp, Oster, Ludwig, Halus, Webster, Mahoney.
Absent: Commissioner: Larnard
Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney, James L. Supinger, Planning
Director, Jo Ann Turner, Planning Secretary
It was mowed by Mr. Sharo, seconded _by l. lr. Oster that the minutes of
the October 28~ 1968 nh~cting be approved as sub,uitted. Carried 6-0.
1. V-68-22~2 - GULF OIL CORPOR-\TION
For a variance to permit the replacement of an existing nonconforming
pole sign (10' x 15' each side, total area 300 sq. ft.) with a pole
sign in the same location which is proposed to be circular, 81 sq.ft.
per side and 162 sq. ft. total area.
Location: Site fronts 180' on the northwest, side of Neg.{port Ave. and
approximately 180' on the south side of McFadden St. at the intersection
of McFadden St. and i~ewport Ave.
.Mr. Supinger presented the staff report recon~nending denial due to the
hardship involved being self-created in that the applicant, Gulf Oil, has
chosen to change its corporate sign identification.
Mr. Sharp pointed out that this was a modification and according to Section
29.00 (Page 17) in the Sign Ordinance, would baa nonconforming sign unless
made to comply with thc provisions of the Sign Ordinance.
Mr. Rourke stated that 14r. Sharp was correct but did not feel that by elim-
inating thc "price panels" that they would have to eli~.~inate the complete
sign.
Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:45 P.M.
Mr. Randall gall_, representing General Maintenance Co, 4800 E. LaPalma,
LaPalma, California, submitted two photographs of the present and proposed
sign to the Planning Commission for their viewing. In response to the four
reasons for denial by the staff, he stated that Gulf Oil Company is being
denied property rights that are being enjoyed by others inas:.~.uch as brand
identification is a key to successful marketing for an operation and is
essential to this particular servic, e station. He did not feel tha~ it would
be a grant of special privileges, inasuuch as it is a unique case.
tie felt that there is a specific problem in the hardship area and explained
that the current s~gn is a Wilshire Oil sign and that on the We,~t Coast,
Gulf Oil took over the Wilshire Oil Company and due to the cost and time
elements involved could not- completely convert a Wilshire Oil station to a
Gulf Oil station, lie stated ~hat to facilitate a partial rehabilitation
and change over, Gulf Oil. changed a nut:her of things, one of the most int-
portant being, replacing the 5' x 1.5' panels in the existing Wilshire Oil
Company s~gns with their own design and that the price panels were a part
of the existing Wilshirc sign. lie respectfully asked the Co~.'.'uissions' care-
ful consideration in this m?,tter.
-1-
}Ir. C_,c~rge Ar~j.xi~.'o,%, 415 West t'ourth Street, Tustin, spoke in favor of
subject request, statit:i~ that this particu!az' sign was construct'cd
fore thc Sign O~.'dinancc was adopted and felt that the proposed sign
an aesthetically much i~nproved sign from what they no',.~ have.
There being no other co::~r.'.~.mts from the audience, Chair,'~zm }!al.ns declared
the public portion of the heariug closed at 7:55 P.M.
After discussion relative to sign sizes, reasons for the request and the
hardship shoxm, It' x,:as moved by ~X~r. Os','er: seconded by Mrs. Lud:..~ig that
V-68-222 be__~ranted for the following_reason_p_:
That the adjustment hereby attthorized will not constitute
a grant of special privilege inconsistent x.;it'h the limita-
tions upon other properties in the vicinity and district
in which the subject property is situated.
That because of special circunstances applicable to the
subject property, including size, shape, topography, lo-
cation or surroundings, the strict application of the
Zoning O:-dinance will deprive subject property of privileges
enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under ident-
ical zone classification.
As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced
at the hearing are included by reference and made a part of
the motion.
Mr. Webster felt that there was no justification submitted to legally
grant a variance and was opposed to it.
Mr. Oster exp!ai~,ed that he is opposed to getting involved in removal
of nonconforming signs but in effect this is st,bstituting a sign for
another sign that he feels they cannot ask Gulf Oil to remove, consider-
ing this piece of property and the fact that they will be cutting the
present sign almost half in size.
The above motion was voted by roll call.
Noes: Halus, Webster, Sharp. Absent:
a tie 3-3.
Ayes: Mahoney, Oster, Ludx.zig,
Mr. Larnard. Vote resulted in
Discussion continued with Mr. Webster asking what type of vehicle could
be used to resolve a situation of this kind.
Mr. Rourl~e explained that the Co:u.n. ission only has the po~-:er to carry out
the ordinance as it has been enacted and insofar as this application, the
Corr.,nission can only grant ,it if the conditibns are found to be essential
to grant this variance. Because there is a different opinion of x.:hat is
desirable, th.e Planning Con~nission hfs not been given the discretion to
determine that.
Mr. Webster felt that a little more time and consideration should be given
to this request and since the Sign Ordinance is undergoing a revision study,
it would be appropriate to postpone any further action until the Sign Ord-
inance Revision Study has undergone some changes.
It was moved by_~r. Sharp: .seconded by_Xr. Webster that V-68-222 be con-
tinued until such time as the Siqn Ordinance th~. is no~.,., bein.~, rev_s~.d is
_cO{n~.le Led.
~"ne ebove r.:otion ~.~as amended by :V.r. Sharp~ secon(':ed bv !.:r. ~..,'obster to con-
tinua_ A?~o_l. ic_a.~j o_j?_~':o__:._V__-_6_8-22_?zto the .'.:ovem. b,~r 25~h
meeti_n~%. The a:'..?.nded motion ~.'as carried 6-0. Co::::'~.ission2r L~:rnard absent.
-2-
'PC Minutes - l;ovcmbcr 12, 1968
VII.
OLD
BUSINESS
2 V-68-223 - GUIY OIL CO~',tO~L'J].Oc,
For a variance to parn:it thc replacement of an existing~ nonconforming
pole sign (10' x 15' each side, total area 300 sq. ft.) by a circular
pole sign 81 sq.ft, each side a~d 162 sq. ft. total area.
I,ocation: Site fronts 120' on the north side of First St'. and approx-
imately 150' on the east side of Tustin Aveuue at the intersection of
First Street and Tustin Avenue.
Mr. Supi~cr presented the staff report, reco:maending denial due to a
self-created hardship, stating that this property is not a part of a com-
plex. There is one large freeway oriented pole sign and a small sign
that is located at the northeast corner of First and Tustin Avenue. The
sign at the southwest corner is the one requested to be replaced.
Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:27 P.M.
Mr. Randall Kall, representative, stated that their position on this
application was much the s~,ne as the previous one and felt that it would
be best to accept a postponement on this matter also, until the Sign
Ordinance has been considered and further reviewed.
A brief duscussion took place among the Co,~nissioners relative to the
freeway oriented sign, height and dimensions, legal aspects and non-
conforming conditions.
Chairman Ualus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:30 P.M.
Mr. Sharp felt that this variance was equally as complicated as the previous
one and due to a Sign Ordinance Workshop being scheduled for November 15,
it would be best to continue this matter after a more thorough study and re-
view has been made.
It was moved by Mr. Shar~.__s_e_c_oj~ded._b¥ Mr. ~,___~ebst__c.r_ that Ap.:~lication },'o.
V-68-223 be continued to the next regularly scheduled Pla~]nin~ .... ~ '
meeting, Nove!n~e~ 25_~ 196.8. Carrie,d 6-0.
1 PARCEL MAP 1~I-68-15 UNITED CA!.I~O..,:,IA BA~,~, - (Continued from 10/28/68)
Location: North side of First St., west of "B" Street.
Mr. Orville Myers, C~ty Engineer, submitted a staff report rcco:.<,.~anding
that a minute order be adopted approving the Parcle Map subject to the
following:
Granting of additional right-'of-way for First Street to
provide a total of 50 feet north of the street centerline
in accordance with the Master Plan of Arterial llighways.
2. Removal of all buildings across lot lines.
e
Construction of sidewalk and driveway approaches and in-
stallation of street trees on First Street in accordance with
with the .'..:aster Street Tree and Arterial tlighway Plans.
4. Final approval., by the City Engineer and recordation of the
map.
It was moved by l.'r. O~:ter: seconded by l.'.r. ~-hnn~vc.:~ ...... ,.. that a minute order
_be,ad_o_~_cd; s?,b~cct to the abo~a co??.fl'ion.;. Carried 6-0.
-3-
.PC }]inu~c.s - ik)vc:;:ibc~r 12, 1965
2. APART'.-IF.!;f P.,',!IK'J[?iC, SU!IVEY
Mr. Sup~p. liC.zi presented the staff report along with an "AI)::rtm.-.nt
Parking" survey report scttiug forth thc results of a recent study
relatiw> to the adequacy of parking rcquircm:mts with the following
reco:~:nended standards:
Type of Unit
.Spaces/Uni t*
Bachelor 1
Oam Bedroom 1.5
Two Bedroom 1.75
Three or More Bedroo:~ 2
*At least one parking space par unit shall be provided in a garage or
carport.
In addition to thc above required spaces, a m~nimum of one (1) on-site open
or covered parking space shall be provided for guest parking for each ten
dwelling units or fraction thereof. Said spaces shall be marked for "guest
parking" and thc convenience of said spaces to visitors shall be considered
by the Architectural Cor..m:ittee when plans are considered for Architectural
Review.
Chairman IIalus opined that based on the problems that have been brought to
the Comnission's attention, he felt that there is a need for a little greater
relief. For purposes of consideration he suggested the following;
Bachelor Unit 1.5 spaces (including guest parking)
1 bedroom 2.0 " " "
2 bedroom 2.3 " " "
3 bedroom or more 2.5 " " "
Mr. Su__pji',g?r. stated that this should not be increased any more than absolutel--
necessary, tie felt that every parking space that is added will increase the
cost to the tenant but it also decreases the amount of usable open space
available on the site. Mr. S!H?.inqe.r- felt that the Architectural Co::~nittee
should be relied upon relative to the design of the projects to make sure
that the parking spaces are convenient to the unit.
The Con:;tission discussed matters relative: to parki_n~%_s~_a_ce increase straight
across the board, cor.'..paring the proposed standards with other cities, sacri-
ficing usuable on-site open space, the detrimental and beneficial effects
that could occur with restrictions sctforth.
}Ir. SupSn_flo. r expressed one thought as to par. king on the streets, in which
streets are designed for that purpose.
}ir. George :A.r~¢v__r_o_s_, 415 W. Fourth Street, Tustin, was in aorec:.~n~~ ',- ..... with the
staff's report and felt that Tustin is unique in what it has accomplished
aesthetically. He discussed the necessary facts that affect the builders
relative to apartments such as:
1. A large m::.-.:ber of tenants under 30 years of age.
2. A large grouping of ne;.: family formation.
3. Childless couples.
4. tIousing situation of financing thac m~.k.:~ it diffict:!t to
buy new he,nes, consequently pc, op!e are moving tow. ards
apartnant living.
5. Senior cftizens, after having raised their fmniles, living
in apar tr.'.cnt s.
In conclu.~i.on ha stated that fro:a the parking st'andpoJnt, he felt that
the present ordi'.,n..xnce is a good one.
-4-
}Ir. Boll 1!al], 370 Fourth Street, stated that the apartments be. in,j built
now, really do uot have a parking proble.u and the survey that was taken
recently was on apart,~:ents that ware constructed before the ordinance in
1966 was adopted.
Mr. Cared S:nith, architect front Newport Beach, felt that this has made it
a very difficult job to create the stone type of open area plan that he had
been creating to obtain this type of parking, lle felt that off-site guest
parking should be considered and that consideration should be shown for
the devclop::'..ents where the improvcn:ents of the streets arc put in by the
developers as to off-site parking.
Mr. Kenneth Nelson, 415 W. Fourth St:, stated that he has taken a small
survey by car of some of the newer apartment projects and found that 1..5
spaces per unit seem to al. low ample spaces for parking and had found that
some of the tenants that park along the curb are doing this more for con-
venience, being closer to their apartment than because of unavailability.
He concluded that his survey showed ample parking spaces with the present
zoning ordinance that is in effect.
Mr. Charles Green!:_oo_d_, representative of thc Economic Development Committee
of the Chamber of Co:t-~v, erce, agreed with the staff report stating that fro,n
a commercial and business standpoint, it seems to be pretty well in line
with what it: should be. Mr. Greenwood expressed concern over exact.ls, what the
problems of parking are and stated that the complaints seem to be front the
Police and Fire Departments because of certain areas bei~lg more congested
with parking along the streets than others. }Ie felt that if th. is is the
main reason for increasing parking spaces, then there should be a more
thorough survey due to so,ne of the apartments having been built under pre-
vious requirements.
Chairman llalus co.~a:ended the interested parties with the response that was
shown, The staff report was not unreasonable, consideration of guest parking
may bo appropriate and one of the key parts is that the Architectural Com-
mittee works with the developer to consider street-parking, ingress, egress
and location of parking to the specific units and emphasis should be placed
on the utilization of on-street parking and the traffic flow.
Mr. Sharp felt that the standards and objectives should be clearly defined
as to what is trySng to be solved and felt that consideration should bt
shown in looking at the "mix" of apartment units to get a more comprehensive
review of the survey.
Mr. Webster expressed concern over the ultimate growth of the community and
not to go to an extreme either way, feeling that extremism, whichever way
it goes tends to destroy. He felt that if a parking ratio that is overly
strict is forced onto a project, then developers may start cutting down in
other areas so that it will pay, feeling that it would cause a very unde-
sirable con'~nunity in the future. Mr.-Webster felt that this survey should
be checked in depth to the type of problem before any action is taken.
It was moved by_ i.:r. Sharp: sec__onded .by Mrs° Ludwi_%., that this study be
continued to allow ~ore tin:e for the staff to complete a more definitive
VIII.
CORRES-
PO.~D.',,~C.;
.analysis of par~;i~.~ s,',...ndarc~ for ,.:a].t~.nl,. Residential deve!or, ment in the
C~ty of Tu.~_'~_in to__t!~e D.ace:.~fl~_je? 9o__1768~ P__l._au_~nin~% Co:;:r~ission meetin,I.
Mr. Sharp felt that it should be determined x...'hether or not the sample that
is in the present report is reprcseu[:ative or not and stated that he would
be agreeable to work with i-~r. Supinge. r in any capacity that would be of
benefit in this matter.
The above r.~otion carried 6-0.
1. COUNTY T:U.Ti'ATIVE T}L\CT MAP b~O. 6777
' ..... of thc intersection of Jeffrey Rd and
Location: ~loztm..~.,t corner ·
Valencia Avenue; (appro:,:. 2~ r.:iles southeast of Tustin)
Mr. Snp~n$c.r presented a brief staff re;port sug~c, sting that the County be
infor:?ad t',mt it our unJer.~;~a?.d~r.~.~ that ai.,ree~:ents have b,',.en wo:-l:ed out
rclativ.a to t'i'.e aff~.c['.~ of El Toro a:¥! the Xnrire Corps Air I.'aci!ity on
this proi:,t,r~'¥ an'! tl~.? City h::.4 no c C:m m :: '' ~ ~ ~ '
--5--
It was moved by i.;~'. Sb. arp_~ seco:'::led bv i.;r. l.;c!,:;I.,.~r that: ti~(, al,ove
i~fot'::',:~.t'im~ bo su!~:.~i! I:e:! to tl;e Ormh3..cl Cou;~t:X__l:l_::r_2.ui__uZ 1_2.2:1~t:__.- Carried 6-0.
IX.
OTiIER
BUS I~X Ii S S
A workshop on the Sign Ordin::uce x..'as scheduled by the C/t:y Council
for Friday, November 15th, at 7:30 P.I.i. in Chief Sissel's
O~ ~. ~.C.( .
Mr, Gill requested that the Co~ission appoint a represent'at, ire to
attend.
Chairman Halt:s suggested that as many try to atteud as possible.
Mr. Webster, 14rs. Ludv;Jg and Nr. Halus will be in atteudance.
2. YOUr[I IN Go\r}'iRi'Z,".EN'P. I,U.";CIIEO:'~
A Youth in Government Luncheon is scheduled for Thm:sday, November 14th.
'Those in attendc, nce, will be Chairman IIalus, Mrs. I,udwig, Mr. Oster and
Mr. Supinger.
3. LETTF, R i"RO~-.I I.;R. ROLkXKE R!';: R,.ZO.~_~,~,. ~., .... ~x CO:'TDIT].O.XS
A letter from the Ci~:y Attorney, }~r, Rourke, was submitted to
the Planning Com:nission rel.~.ttive to conditional rezoning for their
perusal.
Xe
ADJOIrRN-
It was moved bX Mc. Shardt seconded bX14r. Mahone¥ that the meeting be
adjourned. Notion carried 6-0.
Meeting adjournc:d at 9:30 P.M.
CHAItb'4AN OF THE PI,ANNI.'.iG CO:.;.',IISSIO;N'~
-6-