Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 01-08-68CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL III. APPROYAL OF ~INI~S IV. PUBLIC HBARINGS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1968 The meeting was called to order at 7~37 P.M., by Chairman Marsters. Present: Commissioners: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon, Larnard Absentl Commissionersl None Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney Harry E. Gill, City Administrator James L. Supinger, Planning Director Jo Ann Turner, Planning Secretary It was moved by.Mrs. LudwlR. seconded .by Mr. LarnardI that the minut~} of Dec~be~.261 19_67, be. approved_as_mailed, Carried 7-0 Ch~irrDan Marsters turned the govel over to Mr~_Halus to conduct the first hearing since he abstained from comentfng or voting on the application. 1. uP-67-247 - JOHN L,_&.~6TRI~IA K, I.~BB (Continued from the December 26, 1967 Planning Cu~uission meeting), To permit two single family residences on a single parcel of land in an R-1 District containing 15,000 sq, ft. (Zoning Ordinance permits two single family residences on a single lot containing more than 12,000 sq. ft.) Location: Northeast corner of the intersection of Pacific and Second Streets. Mr. Supinter presented the staff report, recommending conditional approval. Mr. Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:40 P.M.. There being no comments on said application, Mr~ Halus declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:41 P.M. After a brief discussion among the con~nission, It.~a~ moved by Mr. Oster, seconded by Mrs~ ~udwi8 }hat Res9lution.~o. 934 for UP-67-247 be adopted and subject application be conditionallz appr.pved for the followin~ reasons: The C~,m~ission 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 detri- mental to the property and improvements in the neighbor- hood or the general welfare of the City. 2. The minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing are in- cluded by reference and made a part of the motion. Conditions of approval: l. That prior to the sale of either of the homes, a subdivision of the two properties take place. That street trees be installed per the Master Street Tree Plan. -1- PC Minutes - January 8, 1968 The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Halus, Bacon, Larnard. Noest None. Abstained: Motion carried 6-0. Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Chairman Marsters. Mr. Halus returned the gavel to Chairman Marster$ to continue the meeting. 2, UP-~7-~3~ - ~ERVICE STATION - ~AUL LE~N~R (Continued from the December 11, 1967, Planning Conmaission meeting). Location: West side of '~" Street at the north-bound entrance of the Santa Aha freeway. Mr. Supinger explained that this hearing has been continued to allow the installation of improvements required by the Architectural Committee. He mentioned that the improvements are in process of being installed, however, they are not yet completed, He suggested that,this be con- tinued to the next regularly scheduled Planning C~m, is~i~n meeting, danuary 22, 1968. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:43 P.M. Mr. Bacon opined that he has driven by the station and has noticed that they are making an effort to meet the Architectural Committee's require- ments. It was moved by Mr. Bacon, seconded by Mr..Oster that the _public hearinK for UP-67-237~ Paul Lerner's Service Station be continued-to the n~x~ regularly scheduled Planni~ Comml~sion meetin~--.~uarX 22. 1968, The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon, Larnard. Motion carried 7-0. 3. UP-68-248 - S}k&LL ANIMAL HOSPITAL - M. LOUISE TUBBS To permit an addition to an existing small animal hospital, Site fronts approximately 93 feet on the north side of First Street and is adjacent to and east of the Newport Freeway. Mr. Supinger presented a brief staff report, rec~miiending conditional approval, subject to submission of plans to the Architectural Committee. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:45 P.M. There being no comments from the audience, Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:46. P.M. It was moved by Mr...Oster~ seconded by Mr. Larnard, thct Resoultion No. ~35 be adopted and UP-68-248 be conditionally approved for the fol!owinl reasons: The Commission finds that the establisl~ent, maintenance and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circum- stances 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 p~operty and improvements in the neighborhood or t~e general welfare of the City. As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing are included hy reference and made a part of the motion. -2- PC Minutes - January 8, 1968 Condition of approval:,.~ That plans be submitted to the Arch£tectural Cc~rmittee and that the Architectural Committee be directed in particular to the parking area to be reviewed and worked out. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Websteg, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon, Larnard. Noes: None. .Carried. ,7-0. 4. UP-68-249 - ANTHONY E. COPPOLA To permit a 6 month temporary use permit for an existing single family dwelling in a C-1 (Retail Congnercial) District. Location: On the southeast side of Newport just north of Mitchell. Site of existing building numbered 14192 Newport. Mr. SupinKer presented the s~aff report, repotting the background of subject application. Hr. Supiq~r sOggesced, if the Commission desires to permit the use on a temporary basis, ~hat adeqOate safeguards be provided to insure that the use does not continue bekond ~he alloted period. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7~0 P.M. Mr. Leopard. Hampel, 811 North Broadway, Santa Ana, Attorney, representing Mr. Coppola, explained that they are requesting a temporary Use Permit due to existing problems. He mentioned that during the time the property was in escrow, Mr. Coppola had rented his other home to a family that was out of town and their furniture was coming in and it was the last day for escrow to close and as it approached they simply had no place to move. He stated that M~. Coppola at this time does have his property up for sale and is doing everything possible to sell it and move out. He also mentioned that he will not sell it for residential use. Mr. Hampel stated that Mr. Coppola is looking around for property on which to move the dwelling, in the event that he is unable to sell it and will put the property to commercial use. Mr. ~ampel felt that the question at hand was whether the temporary use permit for residing at the existing location would be detrimental to the gemeral welfare of the persons residing or working in the ne£ghborhood, He explained that the properties ingnediately behind the subject property are R-I, the property across the street are not up to the standards of the properties elsewhere in Tustin and they are being put to a residential use. The properties on each side of subject application are vacant, so with this in mind, he felt that it was rather difficult to see how this would be detrimental to any of the surrounding properties, He felt that the request for the use that is proposed would be appropriate and that the use would be better than just letting it lie idle. ~ha£rman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 7:58 P.M. Mr. Oster asked Mr. Rourke, city attorney, what would be the best way q~ this to insure that no problems would arise after the 6 month period. Mr. Rourke stated that the best way would be to require a cash bond so that the City would not have to expedite any law enforcement tf a problem should arlse. Chairman Marsters asked if the applicant could come in after the 6 month time limit was up and request an extension. Mr. Rourke stated that there was nothing to prohibit the request, and that it would be left up to the discretion of the Planning Commission. · -3- PC Minutes - January 8, 1968 Mr. Oster stated that after viewing thc property he could not' sec where it would be detrimental to the surrounding properties for 6 months, lle mentioned that he wouh! like to make it clear thal the City would not get into a "box" at the time of the end of th,, 6 months. He wanted to go on record that he would not he in favor of granting another extension if this temporary use permit is granted. It was moved by Mr. Oster, seconded by Mr. %.~ebster, that Resolution No. 936 be adopted for UP-68-249 and that subject application be 8ranted for a 6 month period on the. condition t~at the.~pplicant post a bond in cash in an amount equal to $2000.00 and in a form satisfactory to the city attorn.ey. Mr. Halus opined that he would be more favorably inclined if he felt that the applicant had acted in good faith when he allowed escrow to close, knowing that it was not properly zoned at the time. He felt that the applicant was knowledgeable and aware of the situation and yet still allowed escrow to close, knowing that this was not an al- lowed use. Mr. Hampel clarified this by saying that Mr. Coppola was notified of this just the day before escrow was to close. He explained that at this point, Mr. Coppola felt obligated to complete his end of the transaction and previous to tlc/.:; his home had already been rented and was faced with closing escrow the next day and tried to do the best he could with the situation or tie bad no place to move. lle stated that Mr. Coppola does not have the funds to keep the payments up on two pieces of property anti he is trying to find another location in whicl, to move' if he can be given an alloted time. He brought up another point relative to the amount of the bond being requested by the Planning Commission. lle felt that this would certainly work a hardship on Mr. Coppola. Mr. Oster asked Mr. Rourke what would be an appropriate amount for a bond to be posted. Mr. Rourke said that $500.00 to $1000.00 would be adequate. It was moved by Mr. O:;tcr, seconded by Mr. !.!cbster~ that the previous motion be amended to provide for a bond to be posted in the amount of ~750.00 rather than $2000.O0 for the following reasons: The Commission finds that thc establishment, maintenance and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circum- stances 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 thc 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 reference and made a part of the motion. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Bacon. Noes: Halus, Larnard. Carried 5-2. 5. UP-68-246 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD To permit a pole sign in the front setback. Site fronts approximately ]25 feet on the south sidc of First Street and approximately 125 feet on the west side of "I{" Street. Mr. Supinger presented the staff report recommending conditional approval. Chairman Marst¢:r:; opened l:he pnblic portion of the hearing at 8:?0 P.M. PC Minutes - January 8,1968 Mr. W. E. Lentz., representing the applicant submitted photographs of the proposal for the Coumission's review. He stated that the sign is obscured coming from one direction. He felt that the proposal for this sign is in conformance with the ordinance, in addition to getting better identification which is necessary. Mr. Ralus commended Mr. Lentz and the applicant for wanting to conform with the ordinance and working with the City in this manner. Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:25 P.M. After reviewing the photographs the Con~nission was in accord with the proposal and applicant. ~t was moved by Mr. Halus~ seconded ~y Mrs. Ludwig, that Resolution No. ..... 937 be adopted for Up-68-246 and that subject application be granted sub}egt to the followin~ conditions: 1. The existing non-conforming roof sign is removed. 2. That landscaping be installed at the subject location similar to that shown on the Service Station Site Devol0Pme~t Guide, and be approved by the Planning Director prior t0"~he connection of the electricity to the proposed sign. Reasons for approval: 1. The propo'sal would not restr£ct the sight distance at the proposed location. As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing are included by reference and made a part of the motion. Mr. Bacon asked Mr. Supinger if this sign extends 6 feet over the property line -Mr. Supinger stated that it did, however, according to the sign ordinance, this encroachment is permitted, at the height as shown. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon, Larnard. Noes: None. carried 7-0. 6. ZC-68-163 INITIATED BY THE PLANNING CO~I~ISSION The Planning Commission initiated rezoning of property fronting 92 feet on the east side of Williams Street approximately 156 feet south of the centerline of Alliance Avenue from C-1-P to Mr. Su~tn~er presented the staff report, rec~m,endlng approval for the following reasons: 1. Subject rezoning conforms to the Tustin Area General Plan. That subject proposal would remove an island of c~-,~,ercial zoning ceeated by re-.oning now in process on adjacent property to R-3. 3. That an adequate amount of co~nercial zoning will remain along McFadden Avenue to service the area. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:30 P.M. -5- PC Minutes - January 8, 1968 VII. CORRES- PONDENCE VIII. OTHER BUSINESS IX. ADJOURN- MENT Mr. Russell Sullivan, property owner, spoke stating his reasons for wanting it to remain C-1. He felt that because no irmnediate plans were proposed for the property and because thc co~nission felt that it was too small a piece of land for co~ercial, there was no real problem. Itc stated that he basically wanted to get the most for his property and gave a little of the background on subject parcel. Chairman Msrsters. declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:40 P~M~ The Comm~s,,lon expressed mixed feelings on the application and dis- cussed the aspects of economics, future plans for the property and the affect it would have on Mr. Sullivan. Since no immediate plans are proposed and feeling that it is too small to have any commercial significance or value, it was the desire of the Commission to let it remain C-1 until further development has taken place. It was moved by Mr. Oster, seconded by Mr, Bacon that Resolution No. 9~..bg_adppt9d statinR that np ~ctiqn b~ t~ken.on Application ZC-68-163. The abow~ motion was voted by roll call. Ayes{ Oster, Webster, Ludwig, Marsters, Halus, Bacon~ Larnard~ Noes: None. Carried 7-0. NONE NONE It was moved by Mr. Bac~D, seconded by Mrs. Ludwig~ that the .meetin- be adjourned. Carried unanimously. There being no further business before thc Planning Commission, Chairman Marsters declared the meeting adjourned at 8:45 P.M. SE~F. TARY OF THE PLANNING CO~4ISSION CtbklRMAN OF THE PLANNING COM}{tZSSION -6-