HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 08-14-67MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
August 14, 1967
I.
CALL TO
ORDER
II.
ROLL
CALL
III.
APPROVAL
OF
MINUTES
IV.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
The meeting was called to order at 7:34 P.M., by Chairman
Marsters.
Present: Commissioners: Brand, Halus, Marsters, Webster
Absent: Commissioners: Ludwig, Bacon, Oster
Others Present:
James G. Rourke, City Attorney
James L. Supinger, Planning Director
Jo Ann Turner, Planning Secretary
It was moved by ~<r. Brand~ seconded bv Mr. Halu~.~ that ~ke
minutes of July 24, 1967, meetin8 be approved as mailed.
~otion carried.
1. UP-67-235 - ~iARGARET M. WAITS
To permit a used clothing store.
Mr. Supinger presented a brief staff report giving the background
and history on this application. He recommended that this appli-
cation be granted for the following reasons:
The Coum~ission finds that the establishment, maintenance and
operation of the use applied for will not, under ~hc circum-
stances of the par~icalar case be detrimental to rke health,
safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of thc 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 gcnera~ welfare
of the City.
o
As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence in~rpduced a~
the hearing are included by reference and made a par~ of the
motion.
C.~airman ~iarsters opened the public portion of the hearing
7:37 P.M.
Margaret M. Waits 13652 Red Hill, applicant, stated tha~ ~'o her
knowledge, there have been no complaints regarding this mat~ar.
Chairman Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing
closed at 7:38 P.M.
It was moved by }:r. Halus~ seconded by Mr.,Brand., that kcso!ution
No. 907 for application UP-67-235 be granted for the fo]iowinq
reasons:
The Commission finds that the establishment, maintenance and
operation of the use applied for will not, under th~ circu~n-
stances of the particular case be detrimental to the health,
safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons re-
siding 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 [he
City.
As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence i;~'~n,~uc,'.,l ~'
the i~earing are included by reference, a~d :., ......
motion.
above motion was voted by roll call.
dalus, Marsters. Noes: None. Absent:
':orion carried 4-0.
-1-
PC Minutes - August 14, 1967
2. V-67-192 - J.\CK THONER
Application for a variance to permit:
Detaci~ed accessory structures (carports) on the fron~
one-half (½) of the lot: which arc not attached to a
main building and which do not meet the required five
(5) foot side yard setback.
b. A zero foot side yard setback for said structures~
Mr. Supinger presented the staff report stating that approval with
conditions is recommended. He explained that ~his application is
similar to numerous others we have had recently which resulted in
our initiating amendment of the section rela~ing to the locauion of
accessory buildings. The reasons for conditionally granting this
application are as follows:
That the adjustment hereby authorized will not constitute a
grant of special privileges 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 class-
ification.
Conditions of approval should be:
1. That a minimum of twenty (20) feet be maintained between
the carports and the northerly property line.
That a minimum distance of ten (10) feet be maintained
between all buildings.
3. That the granting of this variance does not include approval
of plans submitted with the application.
Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:40 P.M.
Mr. Jack Thoner - applicant, stated that he did not have any[.hing
to add but would be glad to answer any questions that the Planning
Commission so desired.
There being no further discussion from the audience, Chairman
Marsters declared the '.public portion of'~he'hearing closedl
7 f41
Mr. Halus asked Mr. Supinger where we stood on the ne~,. proposed
ordinance for Accessory Structures. Mr. Supin,qer explained that
a public hearing is scheduled at the nex~City Council Meeting and
if it is approved, it will then have it's first hearing at that
time and become effective within the next 60 days.
Mr. Halus asked Mr. Thoner if he had read the conditions in the
staff report and was he in agreement with them. Mr. Thoner answered
"Yes".
It was moved by M[. Halus,. seconded bv Mr. Brand that Resoluti. on No.
908 be adopted conditionally granting~ppligation No. V-67-192 for
the following reasons:
That the adjt, stment hereby authorized will not constitute a
grant of special p~iviieges inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties in th.e vicinity and district in which
the subject property is situated.
-2-
PC i.;inutes -
iugust 14, 1967
That because of special circumstances applicable to the
subject property, including size, shape., topography, location
or surroundings the strict application of the Zonir;g Ordinance
will deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classi-
fication.
Conditions of approval should be:
a. That a minimum of twenty (20) feet be maintained benwccn thc
carports ~nd the northerly property line.
b. That a minimum distance of ten (10) feet bc nmint~_imed between
all buildings.
c. That the granting of thio variance does not include approval
of plans submitted with the application.
The above motion was voted by roll call.
~:arsters, Halus, Noes: None. Absent:
Notion carried 4-0
,\yes: Webster, Brand,
Ludwig, Bacon, Oster.
3, UP-67-236 - ROBERT E. ~.TILDE
To pennit service ~tation signs with ~ total area of 300 sq.
ft., including:
One pole sign with a maximum overall height of 55 feet,
containing n total area of 141 sq. ft. on each side.
One amull carved wood spanner sign ~..:ountcd between the
canopy support p,osts at the outer pmaps, cont~_ining a
total area of 14.5 square feet.
c. One chevron h~-llmark sign nounted on the roof of the
building containing an area of 3.5 sq. ft.
?~r. Supinger presented the staff report stating that ~i:~ staff has
not been convinced of ony new circuvastances w~.rrnnti..ng th~. approval
of this npplicntion. He stated that the applicant :.;'.:imtnins that
the purpose of the sign is to dr?.w repeat traffic fro;'.', thc freeway.
~.r. Supinger opined that he wns not convinced that ~ 55 ft., 281
sq. ft., sign would ,rio the job an), better than ?. sign complying
with thc Ordinance and recomncnded denial.
Chairmnn lqarsters opened thc public portion of the hearing at
7:45 P.M.
Nr. Robert Wilde, 1943 Eas[ 17th St., Santa Ina, asked thc Co~ission
to strongly consider his proposal nnd gave reasons why hc felt th~
sign needed to be t~is height and size to attract the Newport free-
way traffic, along with the other traffic.
hr. John G~s, business address, 3401 Chnp?.nn ive., Orange, stated
that this definitely w~.s ?. freeway oriented site nh,'! felt that thc
Sign Ordinance was designed to cover ~natters such as this. ]{c
showed photographs that had been taken of thc sign nnd station
loc~tion ~t different %ngles to prove the necessity of this type
of sign.
There being no further co, reheats from thc audience, ...... p.:.n-
:~rsters declare(,, the public portion of the hearing closc:d at
8:O0 P.M.
The Corr:ission discussed the 'location, th, rc".:.on:; ,~'l~,.' ['h~y .!i~! nc:'
f,:.:l there have: bc,:n '.,,y wL[it:ionci ch'.n,' .... " '.'.. ,.
qnd after viewing thc p,~oto~,rnph.,, fo'It I:i,xt , ,,,. ..~... ..- :::.
~ppl icq 1. ion.
-3-
.-'C i<inutes - August 14, !967
It was .-..,~ve~. by. Mr. H':!up~ s~:condc.d by l.,r. Br~.n.d
denied for the following
Thc establish~.cnt, :~.intcnance or oper'~tion of thc
applied for would, under the circu~ast,'~.nces of thc p?.rticu[.':r
case, be detri~.cntal to the health, safety, moruls, ccmforn
and general welfare of the persons residing o:- working in
the neighborhood of the proposed use and it would be injurious
or detrimental to property and improvements in the neighbor-
hood or to the general welfare of the City.
,is additional grounds, the r.~inutes and evidence introduced
at thc hearing are included by reference and made ,?. part of
the motion.
The above motion was voted by roll call.
Marstcrs, Halus. Noes: None. Absent:
}lotion carried 4-0.
,lyes: Webster, Brand,
Ludwig, Bacon, Oster.
4. V-67-193 - GEORGE KOTELES on behalf of Santa Ana Tustin
bledica 1 Pavilion
To permit thc construction of two (2) entry canopies pro-
jecting 8'9" into the required ten (10) ft., front yard set-
back. (Zoning Ordinance permits a three (3) foot encroachment
into the required front yard.)
Mr. Supiqser presented the staff report stating that the design
for the proposed building is very attractive, and ~hat it is
commendable to provide parking facilities in excess of thc :nin-
imum standards set forth in the Ordinance but it is thc opinion
of the staff that the applicant's justification does not mcca
tests for granting a variance and recommended denial.
Chairman Marsters opened the public portion of the hcarimg at
8: 10 P.M.
}ir. Koteles, Architect, explained the parking conditions as he. sa;..,
it, the Architectural concept of thc building and gave a description
of the complete project, feeling that it would be an as'set to the
City. }lc again pointed out how strongly they felt about thc off-
street parking and asked the Cormnission to give it careful coa-
sideration.
There being no further discussion from the audience, Chairman
Marsters declared the public portion of the hearing closed at
8:15 P.M.
The Coranissioners discussed the possilility of reducing the pro-
jection of the canopy, the parking situation conforming to parking
standards, giving their opinion on thc architectural style and felt
that by granting this application, it would be granting special
privileges which was not warranted.
It was moved by Mr. Brand, seconded by :qr. Wcbst'er that .App!ica~ion
No. V-67-193 be denied for the following reasons:
That the adjustment applied for would constitute .'.: grant
of special privileges inconsistent with the li~nitations
upon other properties in th~ vicinity and district in which
the property is situated,
That special circumstances applicable to thc subject proper,'y
including size, si~ape, topoc, raphy, location or surroundings,
do not, beck, use of thc strict application of ;:he Zoning
Ordinance, deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone
classification.
-4-
PC Minutes August 14, 1967
OLD
BUS INqXSS
Ordinance No. 261, adopted in 1964, has previously reduced
the required front yard in the Pr (Professional) District
along Fourth Street from 20 feet to 10 feet.
As additional grounds, thc minutes and evidence introduced
at the hearing is hereby included by reference and made a
part of the motion.
Thc above motion was voted by roll call.
Narsters, Halus. Noes: None. Absent:
Motion carried 4-0.
Ayes: Webster, Brand,
Ludwig, Oster, Bacon.
NONE
VI.
NEW
BUSINESS
1.. TENTATIVE MAP - Tract No. 6447 - Irvinc Development
Tentative Map for proposed subdivision bounded by Red Hill,
Walnut, Navy Way, and the A.T. & S.F. Spur Tract.
Mr. Supinger presented the staff report giving thc history,
backgrcund and statistics of the development. The Planning
Staff's recommendation was for approval subject to the con-
ditions proposed by the Public Works Department as follows:
That street improvements, drainage facilities and related
appurtenances shall conform to City standards as determined
by [he City Engineer.
2. That all utilities shall be installed underground in con-
formance with accepted standards of utility companies.
3. That the subject tract shall be annexed to the necessary
maintenance districts for sanitary sewers and street lighting.
That vehicular access shall be dedicated to the City of Tustin
along both Red Hill Avenue and Walnut Avenue except at street
intersections.
That the strec~ section for Walnut Avenue shall bc 40 feet
from centerline to property line along the northeasterly
perimeter of the subdivision.
That nhe concept for the proposed neighborhood park bc approved
subject to approval of specific plans at a later date.
>~r. Supinser indicated to the Commission that no parking is shown
adjacent to the two private swimming pools, however in the dis-
cussion with the staff and the Irvine Company, wa have indicated
that it would be advantageous to have the parking adjacent to the
two pools and it is his understanding that they will provide parking
for these two locations.
There were several representatives from the Irvine Company including
i.~r. Dick Re,se, Mr. Owens, from the Robert Grant Co., Mr. Anderson,
Consulting Engineer, Mr. Ken Knolls, Irvine Co., Con~munity Planner,
tlr. Kay, Robert Grant Co., and Mr. J. Panchell, Irvine Co.
The Commissioners discussed the aspects of the eight acre neighbor-
hood park, the two swimming pools, underground utilities and
possible signalization of Red Hill and Sycamore. They felt tibet
the egress and ingress of the park might present a orobiem if not
f~rther explored. The parkin,,, i'or the public
i..oois wzl:; another nhqjor conch.',] nl(n~ ~nll(',~,. , :,,. ( . ·
,%,',cure were asked by the Con~nission~rs aad ~., ,.,
lrvine Development representa~ ives.
-5-
PC ~3inuces tugust 14, ].967
The Cou:mLssioners were :)lease",, wi~h thc.. pi:tn ,'~nd ~'.,'~c.r vie~..'~',.,., t~;,'
tract map with tho lrvine Con~pany expressed appreci,:',.io:~ f(;~' ~c.
donatic,~ ~f thc park by :i~e irvinc. Cor.'.pany. f.h'. Br,:n.i ,.)~f~.r,c. ,~i:,
compiimcnt:s to the l. rvln,' Co., and Ehe dcveiopcr for propo~'.'.,,
~'his type of devekopmc~nt rather than more apartr.]onc:; in cbc S:)u~k
Tustin area. iqr. HaLco felt thac the lot size should be a raini~zu:n
size of 5000 sq. ft. anti an average minimum lot width of 50 feet.
It was x',oved hv ,..r. ilaius, seconded bv
No. 909 for Tentative Tract >:ap 6447 be approvec', subject to ~l~e
following conditions:
That street iraprovci::ents, drainage facilities and related
appurtenances shall conform to City standards as
by ti~e City F. ngineer.
2. 'that all utilities shall be installed underground in confor~nancc:
with accepted standards of utility companies.
3. That the subject tract shall be annexed to the necessary mainten-
ance districts for sanitary sewers and street lighting.
o
That vehicular access shall bc dedicated to the City of
along both Red Hill Avenue and Walnut Avenue except at s~:'..-oe:.
intersections.
That the street section for Walnut Avenue shall be 40 feet ~.. ....
centerline to property line along the northeasterly perimeter
of the subdivision.
6. That the concept for the proposed neighborhood park l)c appraved
subject to approval df specific plans at a later dace.
7. Parking will be provided for the two pool areas.
8. Thai: tile minimum lot size will be 5000 sq. ft., with the
average minimum lot width 50 feet.
The above motion was voted by roll call.
Webster, Brand. Xoes: None. Absent:
Motion carried 4-0.
,lyes: Halus ,. i.;arsters,
Bacon, Ludwig, Oster.
Nr. Halus opined that he felt i[ would be well to direct the staff
to pursue the signalization at the appropriate intersection co
start the planning and lay thc groundwork for this area.
iqr.r)fdk Reese stated [hat tile comments made by the PLanning
Commission were sincerely appreciated.
2. PRELIMIN.iRY PARCEL NAP - 40 ACRES - RED iIILL & V.'~LENCIA
Nr. Supinger presented a brief staff report giving the iocat'ion
and hackground of the application, recommending a i<inure ():'d,~r
that the Preliminary Parcel Map be approved and ~hat thc appli-
cant shall have thc Final Nap recorded.
It: was n:oved by :..:r. Braml, seconded by Zr. :-.'ebst.(.lr :h?.c :: E'.',,'.c::c:
Order be adopted t:hat the Pre]ir.;inary Parcel i.;ap be a:-a~rovcd
the applicant imve the Final :.;ap recorded. :.'.et:ion carr£ed
3. CITY BEAUTIFICATION 'AWARDS PROGR,\M
'-"- Supi;l~,or cai ed t.o I':ic aCCcint:ior~ of rhe Co:'.:n:i:;~;i,>': i'.at:
Parks and Recre;~ c ion ....... ' ,- . t ......
~(,i ..... l.,SiOil JlaU t;ll~)l;iI.: ti'(t ;I ~I(.'::iOF,,Ii;tOill w',,',' ,'
City of Tustin Beaul. i. f i,:atio;; Awards Pro~r;:m and
Couxnission mmnbers be, ,::d)oint'od co :;eryc on the Coa;;.:ic,..,. co se]col.
the recipient::; of,..m..,,"' ,~ · ,'~wards. :.h:s. Lud'..,iq and Nr.
appointed to the
-6-
PC Ninutes- August 14, 1967 .~.~..','L, ~.,~.g~{~
VII.
CORRES-
PONDENCE
VIII.
,';'i'HER
P; {...'S ! NESS
4. PROPOSED PLiNNING CO.:~91ISSION POLICY
Regarding Tract and Directional Signs in unincorporated
territory adjacent to Tustin.
Mr. SupinRer submitted a proposed policy for Tract & Directional
Signs in unincorporated Territory Adjacent to Tustin, stating that
the Commission may want more time for study and consideration on
thc matter.
The Commission discussed a time limit for signs in a more definite
manner, feeling that if there was not some stipulation put into
policy, the signs could remain indefinitely.
l,;r. Halus felt that the absent Commissioners should be brought in
with their comments before a decision was made, and reco.v.n~ended that
this item be continued to the ,\u~ust 28th, 1967 Plannin..'z.Cc~mlssion
Meeting. Mr. Brand suggested that phrases along with comments that
were mentioned at the meeting be considered. Ail the Conmnissioners
cone urred.
l. COUNTY TENT\TIVE MAP - Tract No. 6450
~ir. Supin~er gave the background of this applicaticn recon'~cnding
a letter be drafted to the Orange County Planning Department in-
dicating no objection.
The Tentative Tract Nap was viewed by the Co:r. mission and no object-
ions were made, although they felt that thc' Orange County Planning
Commission should be made aware of the City's ~e~uiations~ ~ in the
~-~ District requiring an 80 foot lot frontage, ¥~.hick the develop-
~uent falls short.
:n was moved bv flr. H~lus~ seconded bv l, lr. Bran~l, tl~at: ~;he P!ann~nf~
d.a~t, a letztcr to thc: ~r~,~ ,e County Plannin~ Co:.~;.i~sioa
Director w ~.
voicing no ob iectior: for Tentative :.lad Tract' No. 6450. but
them aware of the CiLv'~, re}.,.,,i,':tions in the E-4 District re(it:ir{,[.-.',..
an 80 foot lot fronta~z,:~, which the develo~.~r.;cn;' falls skort. Carried 4-0.
2. LETTER FROM }i.~RVIN lArD BZVERLIE L,kWRENCF. RE: DAY NURSERIES
Fir: Supinger presented the Ccar,,nission with a le~-:'er relative
to establishing D~y Nurseries in a residential area along
with a proposal. He mentioned that he notified l.;r. and };rs.
Lawrence tibet this has been under consideration, but due to
other priorities has not been able to complete it. He
suggested to thc interested party that they wri[a c letter to
the Commission to help expedite the process.
The definition of "Day Nurseries" was discussed and in was felt
that more time was needed to evaluate this matter.
It was moved by }ir. Halus that this item be continued co the next
regularly scheduled Planninz Cor.;mission Neetin;.,. There was no
second.
Mr. Supinger suggested the possibility of preparing tko suggestions
in proposed ordinance form and schedule it for public kearing which
would give added time to study thc proposal. Thc public hearing
would not be at the next hearing (August 28, 1967) which would
allow additional time.
i,:r. Halus withdrew his previous motion and directed the Planning
Staff to direct a letter to iqr. and Firs. Lawrence stating the
Commission's action.
1. COUNCIL POLICY MANIJ L UPDATING
A letter was submitted by l, largc Breen rcqu,.s; i:~.: ;'I~.'~;' ~11
Council Policy };anuals be ~:t;rncd i~ ~,)bc .~;;d.:;,.,..
-7-
-.\ugus~ 14, ]967
a. :..ee:i rc.:::oval .:iL.m,; 17::h a Y,:rba.
b. Dr,:i. na,,,.-. Yorba ;:n,! Laurie
c. Sign ,.,c Yorba a::d Lau':~e !,;:~-., .
d. 2nf,.n'ce.".'.,nn,: of C i: y O.'d ':::::nces.
,'.i ppr o pr ~/~l:c. i.:~ s a :- uc .." it.:'.:,
i~.][' :}:,".i la ['lle best in~cres~, l~c. al~.:i and v. ei.f;:ra of ti:c: City,
tl~e City
whaL si:oukd be done.
:':'. !k:"..us sLal.'od i.'i~at, if ~:i'le or..!Jnance:.; '..:ere- nec joi:-q, u,: i;c .'~".-
L.Lt.t(,, I it'll t}:cy IK:d ;:.; ..taanl;: :: ¥ ])LiI']%0:4C:;. It iq3S iYcqtlOStt'.:,::.
L}I~'.L t}~,4' ?i,l:lllit%,; :)irate,;..' l'cpL;i't. ;,);.LC:,( ilk ;.~IC II~2NE
aci~adu].cd meeting ,>f in,o::matioa al;ac ]x':,; keen derived afl'er
with ti:o City .idr. iinis~r,',.t, or.
.... ' . .
Il v:as m:.;ved by :ii'. Bi:an:i, seco,id,,, bv
;i:~:o£:].o.g I,,.. ,'id iourl:od. '.'.,"tier:
['hare being no other business before clte Planning
,;;eec/~r, was adjourned aL 9:45"
:..:,Chi'TF~,RY 07 THE PLANNING CO,XDiISSION
CILili~i'iAN d;: 'file PLANNING ~,~,',,-:I~.~.[t).',
-6-