Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 07-10-67MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSI6N July 10, 1967 CALL TO ORDER II, ROLL C~L III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M., by Mr. Halus, Chairman Pro Tern Present: Absent: Con~nissioners: Halus, Bacon, Ludwig, Sharp, Oster Commissioners: Brand, }larsters. Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney James L. Supinger, Planning Director Jo Ann Turner, Planning Secretary It was moved by Mr. Sharp, seconded by My. Oster, that the minutes of 3une 26th, 1967 meeting be approved as mailed. Motion carried. 1. UP-67-234 - George E. Meurs To permit the modification of previously granted UP-66-216, to permit the establishment of a mobilehome park. The pro- posed plan calls for a reduction in a density of proposed mobilehome spaces and a modified street and lot layout. Mr. Supinaer presented the staff report and recommendations. He submitted a comparison report of the previous plan with the new proposal as follows: UP-66-216 Proposed Modifica~ion Park Area 349,360 sq. ft. 349,360 sq, ft. 8 acres 8 acres Lots 81 76 Lots/acre 10 9.6 Parking 2/lot plus 2/lot plus 6 guest spaces 10 guest spaces The proposal exceeds the standards applicable in the MHP (Mobilehome Park) District of our Ordinance. The City staff is in unanimous agreement that the current proposal is an improvement over the previously approved plans. Mr. Supinger recommended that UP-67-234 be approved subject to the following conditions: That in the event that, and at such time as, twenty-five (25) percent or more of the mobilehomes on the property are occupied by families with a child or children under the age of twelve (12),recreational area of not less than twelve hundred (1,200) square feet shall be provided at or near the center of the subject development. 2. Fire Access gates at Main Street shall meet the specifications of the Fire Chief. 3. }lain Street and Williams Street shall be improved to City standards. 4. Private drives shall be improved to standards prescribed by the City Engineer. Plans for the proposed six (6) foot wall and landscaping around the perimeter of the park and for the ~tility building shall be submitted to the Architectural Coum,ittee for approval. -1- PC Minutes - July 10, 1967 Page -2- OLD BUS I N-ES S }:r. Halus opened the public portion of the hearing on UP-67-234 at 7:33 P.M. Mr. Eeurs, applicant was present for questioning and stated that the Street Engineering Department requested that all avocado trees be removed along ~;ain Street and plant new ones. There being no further cot:ments, the public portion of the hearing was closed at 7:35 P.M. Mr. Halus asked Mr. Supinger to pursue the matter on the avocado trees internally and if at all possible, would encourage the maintenance of the trees, feeling that they are an asset to the area. It was moved by }:r. Oster.~.s~cond~d by }ir. Sbarp that Resolution No. 900 for UP-67-234 be approved subject to the following con- ditons: That in the event that, and at such time as, twenty-five (25)percent or more of the mobilehomes on the property are occupied by families with a child or children under the age of twelve (12) years, a recreational area of not less than twelve hundred (1,200) square feet shall be provided at or near the center of the subject development. 2. Fire access gates at Main Street shall meet the specifi- cations of the Fire Chief. 3. Nain Street and Williams Street shall be improved to City standards. 4. Private drives shall be improved to standards prescribed by the City Engineer. Plans for the proposed six (6) foot wall and landscaping around the perimeter of the park and for the utility building shall be submitted to the Architectural Committee for approval. The Planning Commission requests that the appropriate governmental bodies consider the possibility of keeping the existing trees with sufficient safeguards and to retain its natural beauty. That a Use Permit be ~ranted for the following, reasons: The Con=nission finds that the establishment, maintenamce 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. The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Ludwig, Sharp, Bacon, Halus. Noes: None. Absent: Brand, }~rsters. }|orion carried 5-0. 1. ,h~,'E. NI)MENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 157 - Accessory Structures (Continued from June 12th, 1967 meeting) i, lr. Supine, er asked that this matter be continued to July 24, 1967 because the staff has not completed a new draft. PC Minutes - July 10, 1967 Page -3- vi. NEW BUSINESS VII. CORRES PONDENCE It was moved by }ir. Bacon, seconded by Mr. Oster that ,~endment to Zoning Ordinance No. 157 - Accessory. Structures be continued to the July 24th Planning Com~nission meetins. Motion carried unanimously. NONE 1. COUNTY CASE UV-5929 - Melven Genser Outdoor Signs To permit the location of a temporary directional sign for a period of three years in the R4 Suburban Residential District. Mr. Supinger - presented a brief staff report stating the reasons he felt the application should not be granted. The Planning Commission concurred with Mr, Supinger amd felt that since this was a new sign, it should be considered in view of our sign regulations. It was moved by Mr. Sharp, seconded by Mrs. Ludwig that UV-5929, Melven Gensen Outdoor Signs, be denied because the subject pro- posal would conflict with the City's sign regulation in the following ways: 1. It would be more than one mile from the subdivision advertised. 2. It would be much larger than permitted by the Sign. Ordinance of the City of Tustin. 3. }~ximum time permitted by our ordinance is one year with one 6 month extension. Further extensions would be permitted only by the Planning Commission. The above motion cart:md unanimously. 2. COUntY CASE UV-5927 - William G. Sommerville To permit the construction of a 71-unit apartment development on a parcel containing less than the required area in the R4 Suburban Residential District. Mr..Supinser presented the staff report, stating his reasons for denial. After a brief discussion among the Commissioners, they felt very strongly against recommending approval, of UV-5927. Mr. Sommerville, applicant, stated that he did not agree with Mr. Supinger's report and did not see that the density in any way would hurt any contiguous property. It was moved by Mr. Sharp~ seconded by Mr. Oste~ that a letter be directed to Orange County Planning Commission, informing them in the strongest terms that the Planning. Commission o~oses the aDproval of_Application UV-$92~, for the followin~ reasons: 1. The proposed density is 6.5 times greater than that indicated on the General Plan. 2. The proposed density is nearly twice as great as that permitted by the existing zoning. The above motion carried unanimously. PC ~.[inu~es - july 10, 1967 Page -4- 3. COU:,'TV CASE I?.'-5976 Si.',rra Downs #3, Inc. To permit ;'he continued use of a temporary sales office and four (4) t[:mporary signs in connection therewith for a period of one y~r for the firs~ sale of homes in Tract No. 5415. (Influ,':nt'ia]. Square - a condomini:u~.~) >~.. S2,)~.:!]er presented a very brief staff report reco~nending a limi.;.ation of 6 mo;~ths on ti~e proposed uses. The Planning Commission voiced their opinion of hope that the Orange County Planning Dept., would seek to secure conformity in the areas in close proximi~:y to Tustin, with our Sign regulations. lqr. Halus asked i,~r. Supinger when some kind of policy statement would be prepared relative to signs that are contiguous to the City. Mr. Supin~er stated that lie realized it was important but could not give any exact date or time, but the staff would prepare something on this matter as soon as possible. Mr. Oster was in accord with l.:r. ]lalus, but felt that each sign would hav,'~ to be considered individually. I~: was moved by ;-~r. Oster, seconded by Mr. Bacon that a limitation of s~x (6) r::.~;n:;~ on ~]e proposed u:;es bq ,'~.?-~-oved for UV-5926, for their continued use with no further extensions. Motion carried 5-0. 4. COUNTY CASE UV-5931 - Saddleback Medical Development Company To permit the e:;tablishment of a hospital and the reduction of thc :'~.~¢',u~red number of off-street parking spaces in connection therewiti~ in the R4 Suburban Residential District. i. lr. Supinger presented a brief staff report stating that the applicat~. is substantially the same as that was considered by the City under PZ-67-104 which ended with a tie vote by the City Council and conse- quently was not approved. He stated that in view of the recent action by the City, lie suggested that the County be informed of the City's action on PZ-67-104. It' was mow:d by Mr. Bacon, seconded bv ,X;r. Oster that a letter be preparcd for thc Orar.~ge County Piannin~l Department referring them to the City Council's action on PZ-67-104. Motion carried unanimously. 5. COUntY CASE CP-1311 - K-S-H Inc. To permit the construction of a warehouse addition to an existing piastzc extrusion plant in the 100-Mi-20,000 Light Industrial District. Mr. Sup.in!.]er stated that the proposal is to add a 10,000 sq, ft. ware- house to ci~e existing plastic extrusion plant, recommending that the County be informed that we have no objections to this proposal. It was moved by Mr. Sharp~ seconded by Mrs. Ludwig~ that a. letter be prepared to the Orange Cpunt.y_Plannin~. Department that we have no o.b~ections to CP-1311. Motion carried unanimouslY. BURGER CHEF SYSTEMS - Irvine Blvd., and Elizabeth Way ! Burger Chef Sv.qtem~ reque~t,~ ~.hat the City of Tustin consider the · ~ ~, .". ..... ' ~,-,..~' '~.~.r~ ~',~%~ w~th n plo~ plan and land :. .,.~..., ..~ . ........... , i .....', ....;l.:, ,,~.,~io~; ~ gi~ ~ ~'~ of PC Minutes - July 10, 1967 Page -5- Mr. su.nin,%er explained that after the Architectural ,X:eeting of June 30, !967, a letter had been prepared to Mr. McCune suggesting changes of the proposed building. A copy of this letter was given to the Planning Con'~nission. Mr. S',:.oinzer stated that most of the recommendations of the Archi- tectural Commi,~tee were minor in nature dealing with the need for detail landscaping, revising the parking area and soforth. The major reccc, mendation was in relation to the building as a whole. The Cor.~ai~ee felt that the proposal should not be approved. It was suggested that the exterior elevations be revised to utilize warm materials such as brick, stone and wood. In addition the following was noted: (a) Detailed landscaping plans are necessary, including names and sizes of materials. (b) Ail landscaped areas must have irrigation. (c) Mechanical equipment on the roof of the building should be architecturally screened. (d) Driveway/backup space on the northwest side must be increased from 22 feet to 25 feet minimum. (e) Street trees are required as per the Master Street' Tree Plan. Mr. McCune and Mr. Bob Knolls presented revised plans for the Commission to view. Xr, Halus called a 5 minute recess for the reviewing of the plans. };eeting reconvened at 8:15 P.M. It was ~oved by ~.:r. Sharp, seconded by i,;r. Bacon that the revised ~ians b~: referred back to the Architectural Cor, mittee for the recom- mendation of this body. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Knolls opined that he felt that the Committee shoul~ be aware that this piece of ground is not being purchased by Burger Chef but that it is being leased. He stated that they had spent a of time and trouble trying to convince the City of Tustin that they would like to put this establishment in the City and felt that this type of sandwich cafeteria operation and building seems to be best suited for this location. Mr. i,~cCune mentioned that this would be a 100 seat sit-down restaurant and not a drive-in like the others. VIII. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Trans-Robles_Signs Mr. lialus stated that at the last Planning Commission Meeting, June 26, regarding the Trans-Robles Development, a resolution was passed to allow them to maintain three (3) signs, in which the Commission felt that this action was appropriate. Ail three (3) signs at Yorba and Laurie Lane were to be removed by the applicant and as of this date nothing has been done to re- move those signs. Mr. Halus asked Mr. Supinge~, as a representative of the City, to take the action to pursue whatever channels that are appropriate for removal of the non-conforming signs at the earliest possible time and report back to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting if the signs have not been removed by ~hat time. Mr. Halus felt that the ~.r~ission has been more than lenient with the applicant. IX. ADJOb~iZNT was r..ove¢i .... Racon? seconded by Mr. SharD, tha.t the ~..eetin~ be ad~o~:~nad. :<orion ca~'ricd unaniu;ously. Adjourned at 8:30 ?.M. Ci.LII~Z,,\N ?Y;O-T'~' OF T'[%., ?'i', .":"-::..% C~i;IS~'ION -- " I