Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-25-68CALL TO ORDER Iio ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 25, 1968 The meeting was called order at 7~32 P.M., by Chairman }iarsters. Present: Commissioners: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon, Larnard, Absent: Commissioners: None Othe, rs Present: James G. Rourko~ City Attorney James L. Supinger, Planning Director Jo Ann Turner,.Planning Secretary It was moved by }Ir. Oste;: seqond~d.by }{rs. Ludwig. that the minutes of March. 11:.1968 be approved as mailed. Carried 7-0. AMEndMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN to show Heavy Density Residential use (25 units/~6're) for the area bounded by Fourth Street on the North, North "B", on the East, First Street on th~ South and North "A" Street on the West. Present designation is ~edium Density Residential use (4 units/acre.) Mr. S~pin~er presented a brief staff report commenting that this a~ea covers the Finley property which was recently rezoned R-3, recommending approval for subject amendment. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:35 P.M. There being no conments or discussion from the audience, Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:36 P . It was moved by Mr._Halus_,_se~onded.by Mr~ Bacon_ that the ;~endment be, a~proved and Resolution No. 958 be adopted recoT~.endin~ the subiect chanae be~approyed aqd an ordinance be...adopted by the City ~ouncil. The above motion ,:as voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon, Larnard. Noes: None. Carried 7-0. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINanCE TO REQUIRE A USE PERMIT for conduct of all live entertainment. Ordinance presently permits live entertainment within a building in all Comlr, ercial and Industrial Districts without a Use Permit. ~r. Supinser recommended that the public hearing be continued to the meeting of Lpril 22, 1968 and that the Chamber of Commerce and all businesses presently operating with live entertainment be requested to comment on the proposed ordinance. Chairman I.~arsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:38 P.M. There being no comments from tlm audience, Chairman 1.1arsters asked the Commission their opinion of continuing the hearing. }ir. Halus opined that he felt thc postponement is very much in order and stated that he strongly felt they should work closely with the Chamber on this particular matter because of the impact on this type of business with the City. Chairman }larsters concurred. It was moved bv }ir. Ooter~ seconded by Ffr. Uebster that the public hearing on this matter be continued to the meeting of April_22~ 1968 and that the Chamber of Con~erce and all busines~es presentlx, operatin~ with live entertaimnent be requested to co,~ent on the propo~e~ ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.. -1- PC Minutes - March 25, 1968 3. V-68-205 - NICHOLAS P. BARLETTA To permit the following: Designation of Fourth Street frontage as the front of the lot. (The legal front of the lot is presently on North "B" Street being the most narrow of the two frontages.) To permit the exclusion of a 2,000 sq. ft., basement area to be used for storage and mechanical systems, from the gross floor area upon which parking require- ments are based. Location: Site fronts 150 it,, on the north side of Fourth Street and approximately 80 ft., on the west side of North "B" Street. Mr~ SuDinger presented the staff report recommending conditional approval. Conditions of approval are as follows: 1. Installation of street improvements. 2. Street trees per the Master Street Tree Plan. 3. That architectural and landscaping plans be submitted to the Architectural Committee for review. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:41 P.M. Mr. Nick Barletta., 139 South Prospect, Tustin, stated that he agreed with the staff report and recommendations but asked if the Commission felt that additional parking requiremmnts would be needed if the storage area was ever used for an air raid shelter. Mr. Supin~er stated that he did not think it would be necessary and ~id not feel that the City should require additional parking spaces for this type of situation. There being no other comments from the audience, Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:45 P.M. %t was moved by MT.. Oster, seconded by Mr, Larnard that Resolution No. 959 be adopted conditionally approving V-68-205 for the following reasons: The adjustment hereby authorized will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is situated. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, 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 be included by reference and made a part of the motion. Conditions of approval: 1. Installation of street improvements. Street trees per the Master Street Tree Plan. 3. That architectural and landscaping plans be submitted to the Architectural Committee for review and approval. That the basement not be used for other than storage and mechanical equipment unless proper parking is provided. PC Minutes - March 25, 1968 The previous motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, IIalus, Bacon, Larnard. Noes: None. Carried 7-0. 4. ZC-68-171 - }ICFADDEN CITRUS COMPANY For rezoning from C-1-P (Retail.Con~ercial and Combined Parking) District to R-3 (Multiple Residential) District. Subject site contains 5.70 acres and fronts approximately 520 ft. on the ~orth side of McFadden Street and 480 ft. on the east side of Williams Street. ~rz_S~pinger presented a brief staff report recommending conditional approval. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:48 P.M. Mr. Richard Alden, representative for the applicant, respectfully requested that the Commission approve the application. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:50 P.M. The question of dedication of right-of-way was brought up and Mr. Supinger. said that this was procedural formality and the appli- cant would have to comply with this standard. It was moved by Mr. O~ter. secqnded .by Mrs. Ludwi~ that Resolution No. 960 be adopted recommendin~ apprpv~l by the City Council and the adoption of an ordinance rezoning subject proper~y f~qm .the C-1-P (Retail Commercial and Combined ~arking) District to the R-3 (Multiple Residential) District for the following reasons: 1. The proposed zoning is in conformance with the General Plan. The rezoning will remove commercial zoning which is not needed to serve the existing or future needs of the area. As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing be included by reference and made a part of the motion. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon, Larnard. Noes: None. Carried 7-0. 5. ZC-68-172 - THE IRVINE COMPANY For rezoning of 117.76 acres from the M (Industrial) District to the PC (Planned Community - Industrial Use) District. Location: Bounded by Valencia, Red Hill, I.,'arncr and the Newport Freeway. Mr._Supinger presented the staff report stating that the purpose of tile application is to establish the same regulations for all areas of the Irvine Industrial Complex, recommending approval. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:50 P, Mr. James Taylor, 8118 Gilbert, Garden Grove, representative for the Irvine Company gave a brief background on just exactly what tile goals of thc Irvine Company are in relation to the industrial complex. He stated that they h~ve some 2000 acres south of the Tustin area which is designated as their industrial complex, co~,,nenting that this application is to place the same type of z6ning and design criteria on the entire area so that no one parcel takes on any particular or greater significance of value because of certain criteria established by a jurisdiction such as the City or the County. Secondly; this gives both the company and the jurisdiction a control on the property when it is sold. -3- PC }linutes - March 25~ 1968 A report was submitted to the Planning Commission by the Irvine Company listing their standards, which Mr. Halus felt would be an asset to the City and stated that he would be very pleased if this type of planned community in the industrial complex ¢ontiguou~ to the City could be encouraged as much as poss%ble. There being no other comments from the audience, Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:55 ~t. was moved bY Mr. Oster~, spcon~qd by Mr. Halus that Resolution No. 961 be adopted recommending approval by, the City Council and the adoption of an ordinance by the CitE Council rezoning subject property from M (Industrial) District to PC (Pla:.ued Cm~amnity - Industrial Use) District for the following reasons: 1. %~e rezoning conforms to the General Plan. 2. T'%e re'~.oning will establish regulations consistent with other properties in the Irvine Industrial Complex. ,.'.c additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing be included by reference and made a part of the motion. Condition of approval: Dedication of ultimate right-of-way for Warner Avenue. The above motion was carried unanimously. V~ OLD BUSINESS VI. IqEw BUSINESS 6, ..UP~_6p:254 - SION DEVELOI~,V.k~ COblPA[~ (Signs) To permit two pole signs as follows: Restaurant Sign - Height 45 feet, area 706 sq. ft. (353 sq, ft. per side) Ordinance permits maximum height of 27.5 ft. and a maximum area of 300 sq. ft. unless business is within 200 ft. of a freeway off-ramp. b, Service Station Sign - Height 60 feet. Area 288 sq. ft. (O~dinance permits maximum height of 26 feet and a maximum area of 150 sq. ft., unless business is within 200 feet of a freeway off-ramp). Location: Fronts approximately 200 feet on the north of McFadden Street and approximately 415 feet on the east side of Tustin Village A letter was submitted to the Planning Commission by Mr. Barry Hon, President of Hon Development requesting that the subject application be removed from the agenda for the March 25, 1968 meeting. His reason being that they would like to submit a new application re- flecting a 60 ft sign. NONE l, ~ARCELMAP - CECIL SUDDABY - For Approval Location: Southeast side of Newport Avenue and the southwest side of First Street Mr. Supinger stated that this proposal is to divide the parcel into two lots, reconunending conditional approval. After a brief discussion and reviewing the map, it was moved by Mr. Halus, seconded by Mr. Larnard that subject map be approved subject to the following conditions: (continued on next page) -4- PC Minutes - March 25, 1968 1. Final approval by the City Engineer. Recordation. 3. Installation of sidewalk on Parcel B. Motion carried unanimously. VII, CORRES - PONDE NCE 2. PARC~gLMAP - ROBERT H. GRAN~ - For approval Location: Northeast corner of the intersection of Red Hill and Sycamore (Tustin Headows) Mr. Supinger stated that subject lot covers the landscaped area at the entrance of Tustin Meadows. Proposal is to deed the area to the subdivision association which will maintain the same, recommending conditional approval. It was moved by_M!. Webster, seconded by }irs. Ludwi~ that subject parcel m~p ~e approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Final approval by the City Engineer. 2. Recordation. Dedication to the Tustin Meadows Co~nunity Association. %he above motion carried unanimously. lo COI~Y CASE - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 6595 - For approval. Location: Walnut Avenue approximately 620 feet west of the centerline of Browning. A letter was submitted to the Planning Co~nission by Mr. Gill, City Administrator, stating that this subdivision does not meet the standards of the City in that lot frontages and street widths are below our requirements, Inasmuch as this map, as filed, does not meet in every instance the Tustin Zoning Ordinance and Sub- division Ordinance, it is felt that comments should indicate that the Commission recommends denial of this map. After reviewing the map and a brief discussion the Corf~nission opposed subject map. It was moved by Mr. Halos, seconded by Mr. Oster that the Planning Director be directed to prepare a letter to the Orange County Plan- ning Co~m~ission pointing out that the map is deficient in meeting City standards in regard to lot frontage and street widths and ask ~hat consideration be given in seeking compliance with Cit~ standards. The abova motion carried unanimously. 2. COUb[fY CASE UV-6045 - ~ilta Dana Dairy Farms To permit:the eotablisament of (1) a drive through retail milk and dairy product~ stet(:, (2) gasoline and oil sales and (3) a transfer dock for routm dairy sales trucks in the R4 "Suburban Residential" District Location: On the northwest side of Ne~ort Avenu~ approximately 123 feet northeast of ~itchell Avenoc, in the south Tustin area. Mr~.Supinger presented a brief staff report stating that Use Variances ~Permitting a use in a zoning district which is not among the listed permitted uses by the Variance procedure} are not permitted in Tustin. In the opinion of the Planning Department this is an improper use of thc Variance procedure. -5- PC M. tnutes o March 25, 1968 It was recommended that the County be informed of opposition to the requested uses being permitted in the R4 "Suburban Residential" District. Mr. A1 Wilspnl 1621 East 17th St., Santa Aha, Realtor, representing ~p~licaht, answered questions that the Commission was concerned with stating that he would like the Commission to carefully consider the application. Mr. Webster stated that the drive-through dairy concept was agreeable but he was concerned about this type of an operation locating in an R-4 District and that it is a request for a Use Variance and preferred l~ t% be attacked from a rezone application. He was not satisfied that this would be in the best interest of the community and that the surrounding uses tend to be, with the exception of a service station, all residential uses. He was not impressed with the lay-out. Mr. Webster stated that the thing that was of concern to him was that this particular area is the one that has a super abundance of commercial- ly zoned property at this time and the property that is in existence is having a great deal of difficulty. The General Plan calls for high density residential in that area primarily and this type of an operation has a tendency to subvert the intent of the General Plan. He did not see any real justification for this operation now in that area. lle' concluded that he was very strongly opposed to this application since it was contrary to the Tustin Area General Plan. Mr~ Halus stated that he felt as strongly as Mr. Webster, stating that he was also concerned about this being used as a dairy route transfer dock and felt that there would be a large amount of truck traffic in this area contiguous to residential, feeling it is not in the best interest of the ¢o~unity. Chairman Marsters concurred with both Mr.Webster and }ir. Halus, S~o~gly opposing this particular Use Variance. Mr~gs~ pointed out that there would be gasoline and oil sales on an unroofed island in the center of the premises which indicate that it is going to be a large operation. It was moved by Mr. Halus, seconded by }Ir. Webster that the Plannin~ $~a~f be directed to prepare a letter to the Orange County Planning Commission expressing in the strongest possible terms that this is not_the appropriate use for a Use Variance and that it is. not a prop9r use for this particular propqrty in this area and is vigorpusly opposed b~v the Tustin Planning Commission. The above motion carried unanimously. VIII. O~tER BUSINESS 1. SIGN ORDIN.%NCE WORKSHOP Mr. Supip~er reminded the Commission that there would be another Sign Ocdinance workshop meeting in the Cai-State .Xgency, Tuesday, }larch ~6, at 7:30 P.M. 2. ARCHITECTURAL MEETING Mr~_Supinger stated that there would be an Architectural Cot~ittee meeting after the regularly scheduled Planning Commission H6eting this evening. 3, COP. RESPOifl)ENCE REGARDING MOTORCYCLE COURSE ON THE IRVIN~ RANCH. One of the Commissioners expressed a desire to have correspondence of this nature forwarded to the Commission in the future so they could be aware of this type of a situation. Suggested that the issue of the Ne~ort widening report also be forwarded to the Commission. IX® ADJOURN- It was moved by Nr. Bacqn, seconded by Mrs. Ludwi~ that the meetin~ MENT be adjourned. Carried unanimously_. 1.leetin~ adjourned at 8:25 P.M. ~"~ .¢,, ~ / . _ . <. 7 /