Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 12-11-67MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 11, 1967 CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINU~S IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M., by Chairman Pro-temHalus. Present: Commissioners: Oster, Ludwig, Webster, Halus, Batch, Larnard. Chairman Marsters arrived at 7:35 P.i4. Absent: Con~aissioners: None Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney James L. Supinger, Planning Director Jo Ann Turner, Planning Secretary CORRECTION TO MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 27, 1967: Page 2, Line 4 should read: '~C-67-162" instead of "ZC-67-262". Page 4, Line 42 - The word "not" should be de'Zed under UP-67-2__4_~, Sproul. llom~s Inc.~ of New Mexico. It was moved b3 Mr. Oster, seconded by Mrs. LudwiE, ~.h~..?.~ Minutes of November 27~ ~967 be ~pproved as corrcc~ed___~. Ca___r.z£~_fl-~. 1. UP-67-237 - LERNER OIL COblP,~N'Y - SERVICE STATION Continued from the November 27, 1967 Planning Meeting. Location of subject application: West side of "D" Streat at the north-bound entrance of the Santa Aha freeway. MI. SupinRer recommended that this hearing be continuad to January 8, 1968, to permit the applicant to install the im- provements approved by the Architectural Committee, stating that if the impr~vcman~s sh~ .... d not be installed by this time then further action could be taken. It was moved bY ~K._._o.~er~ .s~cpn¢!e.~_b_v__N~..I~a__rp.sEd, that the. Rublic hearing for revocation relative to UP-67-237 be continued to January 8, ~96B. Motion carr__.____~J~d 7-0. 2, UP-67-243 - SPROUL H~iES Continued from November 27, 1967 Planning Commission at request of applicant. Location of subject application: South side of Main Street at the western City limits of the City of Tustln. .M_r._ SppinRer - presented a brief staff report recon'an~ding conditional approval. He made a correction on the Lanfl L'se St-" ~'.',! Comparison sheet that was submitted to the Commission along wi~h : .u staff report. Under par~inR it is plus 10 rather than 4__s??..?-:. ~ recreation building. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing 7:37 P.M. Mr. Bill Gray, 420 West Nain, Tustin, representative of sr!,.icct application spoke in favor of the proposed project stat'."~C t'~'-c after talking with Mr. Sproul and reviewin5 the proposed plain:; he felt that this would be a good use and very constructive and coranended the City .;~,~ff fez' th~ir effort in the proposed plans. ~C Minutes - 12/11/67 Mr. Denton McGinty, ~epres¢nting Sproul Homes, stated the dei :ription of the proposed ProjeCt ~"iurther added, that some of the techniques of the Mobilehome Districts were being used in this project to house elderly or adult citizens above the age of 25 years. An individual lot for each home owner is the achivement they hope to attain so that each individual has his own lot, but small enough $o that he is not burdened by the requirements of care. He felt that it would be some benefit to the City since it would not require any additional school space as a result of the development. Chairman Marsters - declared this portion cf the public hearing closed at 7:41 P.M. Mr. Dic~ Toal, representing Sproul Homes, in answer to Mr~ Oster's question, stated that there are no existing developments of this type now. The Commission voiced concern relative to density, parking enforce- ment and controlled "adult" occupancy. Mr. Toal explained that the "adult" type occupancy and number of people could be controlled in this type project and hopefully the type of buyers that would be attracted to this, ~uld control the parking situation due to a set of deed restrictions and articles of incorporation which would provide the necessary enforcement pro- cedures for the people that are to live in the homes. He stated that before the project is built that their attorney would meet with the Tustin City attorney and provide a satisfactory set of plans that would be worked out on parking. If the home owners did not enforce parking regulations the Fire Department under the State law does have the right to enforce it. It was moved by Mr. Oster, seconded by Mr. Bacon that Resolution No. 944, for UP-67-24f. be adopted and approved sub~ect to the followin~ conditions: 1. That plans meet the approval of the Fire Department. 2. That all street improvements be installed to the satis- faction of the City Engineer. 3. That appropriate subdivision maps be filed with the City. 4. That the plans for the recreational area and building be submitted to the Architectural Committee for review. 5. That plans for the perimeter wall and landscaping be submitted to the Architectural Committee for review. 6. That street trees be installed in accordance with the Master Street Tree Plan. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Ludwig, Bacon, Hnlus, Noes: Webster, Marsters, Lar~'.ard. Carried 4-3. Mr; SupinKer opined that in view of the concern over thc effect- uation of the proposals, he felt that it would be a good idea to suggest at this time that a draft of the proposed original set- up of this subdivision be submitted at the time the tentative map is submitted so it can be reviewed at the t~e consideration is made. 3. U~%67-244 - JACK-I~?THE-BOX, INC.(Cohen, Oster & Dostal) To permit the operation of a drive-in restaurant at the southwest corner of Newport Avenue and Laguna Road. Mr. Oster excused himself from the Commission at this time, since ~e would be abstaining from voting on subject application along with application V-67-197, -2- PC Minutes - 12/11/67 Mr. Su, in~er prest.nted the staff r~port reco~nnending conditional approval. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the {~e,',ring at 7: 55 P.M. Mr. Cohen, representing the applicant, stated that he would answer any questions that the Commission so desired, lie stated t}~a~ this "redwood" structure was designed for the City of Tustin to fit in aesthetically with the other buildings of the City. Chairman Marsters closed the public portion of the hearing at 7:57 P.M. Mr. Halus felt that this particular piece of property has been an awkward situation for a number of years and that if properly developed, the proposed project would be a benefit to the City. He did question the possibility of this developing into a "teenage" hang-out. ?i.r. Cohen explained that this project has 80% "take-out" business and with a "walk-up" window and fully enclosed air-conditioned patio, he did not feel that this problem would arise. It was moved ..by Mr. Halus~ seconded by Mr. Wqbster~ that Resolution No. 945 for UP-67-244 (Jack-In-The-Box~ be conditionally, granted for the following reasons: The Corranission finds that the establishment, mai. hi:chance and operation of the use applied for will not, under tile circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the healti~, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use and it' will not be detrimental tim property and improvements in the neighbo~-hood er the general welfare of the City. 0 As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at the hearing be' included by reference and made a part of the mot ion. Conditions of approval are: (a) That plans of building elevations, plot plan and land- scaping be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Con'ani ttec. (b) That street improvements be installed and approved by the City Engineer. (c) That street trees be installed per the blaster Streei: Tree Plan. The above motion was voted by roll call. ,lyes: Marsters, Bacon, Halus, Larnard. Noes: None. Carried 6-0. !.:cb:; ter, Ludwig, Abstained: Oster. 4. V-67-197 - JACK-IN-Tthg-BOX - Sigqs To consider the following: a. A pole sign in the required setback area. b. ,\ pole sign in excess of tile height permitted by tl~e oral inance, c, To permit two (2) additional pole signs in excess of that previously mentioned (Sign Ordinance permit~; one (1.) pole :,ign for developments such as that proposed). d, Total ~.;J~t~ area i.n excess of that permitted by the Ordi~a~cc (l~rOposa~ i:; for a total of 574.5 sq. ft. and tim Sign Ordinance pemits a maximum of 300 sq. feet.) -3- ~CMlnutes - 12/11/67 Mr. Supin~er presente~ tJ~..~.taff report recommending thor a pole sign be permitted in the required setback area fronting on Newport Avenue since such a sign would not effectively re- duce the sight distance for traffic entering Ne~ort Avenue. That the remaining requested signs be denied and that the appli- cant comply with the regulations set forth in the Sign Ordinance. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:10 P.M. M~. Co~en, representing the applicant, stated that the subject property is hidden from the freeway somewhat by the way the free- way is constructed at the Newport Avenue underpass. The appli- cant desires to have the signing normally used at its other locations permitted for this location. He felt that hardships were incurred. Mr. Ron Jensen, property owner across the street from the proposed project, stated that he felt that particular corner needed develop- lng to improve the particular area and was in favor of subject application. Mr. George Argyros, 415 West Fourth Street, Tustin, con~nended "Jack-In-The-Box" for the fine cooperation that they have given. He co~nented that they have cooperated in making certain modifi- cations with identifying the building with Tustin and cooperating with the staff. He mentioned that tile proposed freeway off-ramp will be on the southerly 70' of the property which in no way con- flicts with this particular use. He stated that the freeway off- ramp should be approved by the Highway Commission and would be known within the next 90 days, although if it is approved, it will be approximately five (5) years before construction is actually started. He cotm~ented that the Newport Plaza development has had some problems and has lost some of its commercial nature since no colmnercial identification is allowed and has become quite a burden as far as the signs are concerned. He felt that Jack-In-The-Box is making every effort to conform aesthetically and to be an asset to the City, stating that he could understand their need for the identification. The Commission voiced concern relative to definition of '~enu" or "selection board", area the signs would be located, the height re- quested by the applicant exceeding the Zoning Ordinance regulations and the animated sign. Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:30 P.M. After much discussion on the various aspects of the signs, the traffic flow and the required footage, the Commission commended the applicant for their cooperation and desire to compromise. Chairman Marsters called a 5 minute recess. The Planning Comission meeting reconvened at 9:10 P.M. Mr. Dick Pomeroy, 4833 Fruitland Avenue, stated that a boom on a truck was used to check the exact visibility for a 52'ft. sign and also a 35 ft. sign. At 52 ft. he felt that they could get freeway identification. The 35 ft., they felt is necessary to get the visibility of the northbound Newport traffic. Mr. Halus suggested that a motion be proposed in three parts. -4- PC Minutes - 12/11/67 It was moved by ?ir. Halus~ seconded by Nr. Larnard L-ha(m No. 94t~ be adopted for V-67-197 and that the first p;'rt of motion be as follows: Part I. The square footage of the sign be alloy:cd aS a. Three (3) large wall signs, 6' X 6' each, totalli~g 108 sq. ft. b. Six (6) small wall signs, totalling 30 sq. ft. c. The pole sign square footage as pre".ented. Part II. It was moved by Mr. Halus. seconded by Mr. Larnard tl)a_Lt the menu is not considered as a si~.,n with the proviso that uhe ~1o~o Jack-In-The-Box is removed from the menu. Part III. - It was moved by Mr. Halus, seconded by Chairm. an Marster,q, that the height of the pole sign is to be 25.5 ft. consistent with the Sign Ordinance and that the head does not rotate. This body further finds and approves the location of the sign in the setback area and further proviso that the landscaping and subsequent signs are to meet with the approval of the Architectural Commit tee. The above motions were voted by roll call. Part I. Ayes: Webster, Ludwig, Halus, Bacon, Larnard, ?larsters. Noes: None. Abstained: Oster. Carried 6-0. Part II, Ayes: Webster, Ludwig, Halus, Bacon, Larnnrd, Noes: None. Abstained: Oster. Motion carried 6-0. Part III.- Ayes: IIalus, Marsters. Noes: Webster, Larnard. Abstained: Oster. Motion failed 4-2. It was moved by Mr. Bacon) seconded by Mr. Halus~ that Part III of the motion - the height of the pole sign is to be 25.5 ft.~ .and that the head of the "Jack" is permitted to rotate. The above motion was voted by roll call. .lyes: Ludwig, Halus, Bacon, Larnard. Noes: Webster, Marsters. Abstained: Oster. Motion carried 4-2. Mr. Cohen asked if the Cormnission might reconsider t}m last motion stating that they would rather have the 35 foot height than the rotating sign. _It was moved by Mr. Webstq..r.) seconded bv Mr. Halus, that the motion be reopened for consideration ot5 the above request. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: llalus, Bacon, Larnard, Narsters. Noes: None. Carried 6-0. Webster, Ludwig, Abstained: Oster. Mr. Webster and Nrs. Ludwig felt tlmt if the sign did not rolate at all, the sign is even less objectionable. It was moved by Mr. Webster, seconded by. Mrs. Ludwig tha. J: l:h9__;','~':. -- sign be al [owed in the setback area at a hei~ii~t of 35 lintm - '''i[mlJ(~m'.['m. any rotation. 'l'i~e above motion was vote' by roil call. Bacon. Noes: Marsters, lIaJus, Larnard. ~,ot. zo, ended in a Tie Vote 3-3 ,\yes: ¥:01)~; tor Abstained: -5- PC Minutes - 12/11/67 Vm OLD BUSINESS Mr. Oster rest~ned his seat: with the Commission 5. UP-67-245 - CANYON C~MPANY - Extended Care Facility (Convalescent Hospital) To permit a 99 bed Extended Care Facility (Convalescent Hospital) fronting approximately 200 ft., on the northwest side of Newport Avenue and approximately 305 ft., northeasterly of Myrtle Avenue. Mr. Supin~er presented a brief staff report recoLm~,ending conditional approval. Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:35 P.M. Mr. Warren Finley - agent, for the project spoke in favor of the proposed project. Mr. Nuespe, architect for the hospital, ~ave the description of the project and property stating tha~ it would be of Spanish motiff. Mr. GeorKe Argyros, spoke in favor saying that he felt that it would be compatible with what is planned for the balance of the property. There being no other comments, Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 9:40 P.M. It was the feeling of the Commission that this project would fit in well with the surrounding area. It was moved by Mr. Oster~ seconded by Mr. Larnard that Resolution No. 947 for UP-67-245 be conditionally approved for the roll-win8 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 reference and made a part of the motion. Conditions of approval: 1. That plans be submitted to the State Fire Marshall and the Tustin Architectural Committee for approval. That access roads be of adequate width for operation of Fire Department pumpers. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ludwig, Marsters, Bacon, Larnard, Halus. 3. That fire hydrants be spaced and approved by the Fire Department. 4. That street trees be installed per the Master Street Plan. 5. That a parking standard be established as: One (1) space/ each six (6) patient beds plus one (1) space/each staff or doctor plus one (1) space/each three (3) additional employees, Ayes: Oster, Webster, Noes: None. Carried 7-0. NONE -6- PC Minutes - 12/11/67 VI. ~W BUSINESS 1. FINAL MAP - TRACT NO. 6479 (Tustin Meadows) For approval Mr. Supi. n~.cr gave a brief staff report, stating that sub.icct map contains 12]. lots and is a portion of the Irvine Company's Planned Community Development at Redhill and Walnut, approw~.d under Tentative Tract Map 6447. ~ubject map conforms to thc approved Tentative Map. lie recor.~ended that Final :.lap of Tract 6479 be approved subject ro final approval of the City Engineer. It was moved by Mr. italus: seconded by l, lr. Oster that Final l.lap - Tract No. 6479 (Tustin Meadows) be approved subject to finz:l approval of thc City En[,,ineer. The above motion was voted by roll call. ,lyes: Oster, Ludwii;, Webster, Halus, Bacon, Larnard, Marsters. Noes: None. carri.ed 7-0. 2. FINAL PLANS - Portion of Neighborhood Park, Tustin Meadows Mr. Supinger presented the staff report, stating that minor items are still being worked out by the staff, explaining ti~at this can be worked out after the approval of the Planning Commission and prior to construction. }lc recommended approval of a Minute Order approving the final park plans for a portion of the Neighborhood Park in the Tustin Meadows Subdivision, subject to the approval of the Public Works Director. Mr. Halus commended the applicant for the very fine lay-o, ut of the plan, It was moved by Mr. Halus~ seconded bv Mr. Oste.r~ that a Minute Order be approved~ approving the final park plans for a portion of the Neighborhood Park in the Tustin Meadows Subdivision~ subject to the approval of the P~blic Works Director. Motion carried 7-0. VII. CORRES- PONDENCE 1. COUNTY CASE - ZC-67-41 - Richard O. 3chlesinger To change from the R4 "Suburban Residential" and iO0-Ci-IO,000 "Local Business" Districts to the IO0-CI-IO,O00 "Local Business" District with adjusted setbacks, certain property located on the northwesterly side of Red Hill Avenue between Nisson Road and Mitchell Avenue. Mr. Supinger presented a brief staff report recommending that the Planning Conmission oppose the rezoning for the following reasons: Commercial studies as a part of the Tustin Area Ganeral Plan have shown that there is adequate corranercial zoning for the area. 2. The City is desirous of seeing some of the existing commercially zoned land rezoned for residential uses. After discussion among the Corrmaissioners, they concurred with the staff report. It. was moved by ~lr. Oster, seconded by Mr. Larnard, that a letter be directed to Orange County Planning Commission opposing the approval of ZC-67-41 for the following: Studies prepared by thc Advance Planning Division of the County Planning Department as a part of thc Tm;tin Area (]enera]. Plan Study indicate I:hat: thc area is adequa~:~,ly :;crved by c OliililCrc i a 1. ;llTeas. 2. The Comn:io:;ion oppo:;er; the approval of further com:m, rcial zon lng. The above motion (,.'~rri(,d 7.-f). PC Minutes - 12/11/67 VIII. OTHER BUSINESS IX. ADJOURN- MENT 2. COUNTY CASE LW-5989 - Betsey J. Adams To permit the establishment of a day nursery in the E4 "Small Estates" District. Location of the property is on the northwest side of Newport Avenue, approximately 340 feet southwest of !farren Avenue in the north Tustin area. Mr. Supinger .presented a brief staff report recormnending opposition. After discussion on tile subject application and the previous studies made on this area, the Planning Commission concurred with the staff report. It was moved by ~;r. Bacon, seconded by ~ir. !'~ebster, that the Planning Director be directed to prepare a letter to the Orange County Planning Commission stating opposition for the following reasons: 1. Day Nurseries should not be located in an E4 District. 2. 'fhe Con,mission is againsz any extension of con~nercial north on Newport above !.lass Street. The above motion carried unanimously. NONE It was moved by Mr. Bacon~ seconded.by Mrs. Ludwis, ti~at the meeting be adjourned. Carried unanimously. There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Marsters declared the meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. SF.~ETARY OF THE PLANNING COFR'4ISSION · C}L',IRM.\N (~F THE PI~'iNNING CO~RiilSSION -8-