Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 05-09-66MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1966 I. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M.,~by CALL Chairman Hefner. Zb ORDER II. Present: Commissioners: Brand, Bacon, Marsters, Hefner, ROLL Halus, Sharp, Oster. CALL Absent: Commissioners: None Others Present: City Administrator, Harry Gill . Kenneth Bryant, City Attorney's Office Planning Director, James Supinger Assistant Planner, James Taylor III. It was moved by Halus, seconded by Sharp, that the minutes APPROVAL of the meeting of April 25, 1966, be approved as mailed. OF Motion carried. MINUTES Before commencing hearings, Mr. Hefner welcomed the City's new Planning Director, Mr. James Supinger, and the new Planning Secretary, Diane Baig. IV. 1. TO PERMIT THE CONTINUATION OF A NON-CONFORI~NG TRUCKIldG PUBLIC COMPANY AT 355 WEST FIRST STREET, TUSTIN. HEARINGS Mr. Taylor presented the Staff Report, which included inven- tory of equipment, both for Lang and Green and the Finley Trucking Company, a report from the City Attorney's Office, and correspondence between the City Administrator and Lang Ord Green Company. Chairman Hefner then opened the haaring to the public. Speaking against the continued use were: Jerome Kidd, Fred Downey, Mr. Mustion, Philip Griset, William K. Tolan. Their unanimous opinion of the present use was that, due to the in- creased amount of noise and the heavy incoming-outgoing traffic, their rest is constantly disturbed, and therefore, this is a heavier use than the previous non-conforming use. Mr. Kidd presented a list of equipment both for the previous use (Finley Trucking Co.) and the present use (Lang and Green), showing that there were a greater number of vehicles involved in the present operation. He also mentioned the late hours of operation and the greater amount of noise. Mr. Mustion asked for a clari- fication of the term non-conforming existing use. i~Ir. Taylor answered.. Mr. Philip Griset was 'of the opinion that a resi- dential area was not the proper location fora trucking yard. Mr. Kenneth Green spoke for the firm of Lang and Green. He stated that, although he is the first to admit that there is some noise, this is not a heavier use. He also stated that he has not yet received a formal, written complaint from any of Planning Minutes-5/9/66 Paae 2 the homeowners present at the meeting, or any other formal complaint. Mr. Green mentioned the difficulty of adhering to a set schedule with an operation of this nature. He feels that his operation is not a heavier use than the previous one; and reiterated his willingness to cooperate with homeowners and the City; and also reiterated his request for a formal, written complaint. The hearing was then declared closed to the public. Mr. Halus asked Mr. Bryant to define exactly the nature of the hearing and the Commission's responsibility in this parti- cular case. Mr. Bryant stated that it was the responsibility of the Planning Commission to determine whether or not the present use is so dis- similar as not to be under the definition of a similar, non- conforming use. The members of the Commission then discussed at. some length the various reports and items of information presented for this hearing and questioned members of the audience, as well as Mr. Bryant of the City Attorney's Office, to clarify some of the statements made during the hearing. Moved by Halus, seconded by Brand that this use be considered a heavier use than the prior use, based on the information pre- sented for the hearing. The motion was voted against by Mr. Oster. In his opinion, the evidence presented did not show conclusively that this is a heavier use. After a brief discussion, Halus modified his motion to state that this is a heavier non-conforming use, based on hours of operation. Votes: Ayes: Halus Noes: Oster, Sharp, Bacon, Brand Abstain: Marsters (Owner of the property) The motion was denied. *'a After further discussion concerning the exact definition of a non-conforming use, it was moved by Oster. seconded by The motion was carried. Moved by Halus, seconded by Brand, that the Planning Commission find that the use under discussion is a heavier non-conforming use, based on hours of operation. Motion failed due to tie vote. ** Motion made by Mr. Sharp (see minutes of 5/23/66 Votes: Ayes: Oster, Sharp, Halus, Bacon, Bra4~d, Hefner. Noes: None Abstain: Marsters Plannine Minutes-5/9/66 Pa e V. 1. APPEAL OF RECO~TDATIONS GF ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE OLD RE: POLE SIGN FOR HGWARD JOHNSON RESTAURANT BUSINESS This matter was continued from the April 25, 1966, meeting for the purpose of conducting an on-site inspection of the sign under discussion. Mr. Taylor presented the Staff Report, including a rendering of the sign in question, which was given to the members for their inspection. Chairman Hefner then requested comments from the members. There being no questions or comments, Chairman Hefner asked for comments from Mr. Peabody, representing Howard Johnson Restaurants. Mr. Feabody stated that most of the points had been made at the last meeting, and restated his case very briefly. He men- tioned that the five hundred and ten (510) square foot sign is the standard sign and has been accepted by every town in which these restaurants are located. the recommendation of the Architectural Committee be disapproved. The motion was unanimously carried. Mr. Taylor requested clarification of the fact that this sign was to be two hundred forty-eight (248) square feet oer face. Chairman Hefner took due notice of the fact. VI. APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT MAP 6200 NEW BUSINESS This matter was continued to the May 23, 1966, meeting, VII. 1. COUNTY CASE z.C-66-30 - To change from the R1 "Single Family CORRES- Residence" District to the C1 "Local Business" District, certain PONDENCE property located on the South side of Fourth Street, 150 feet westerly of Tustin Avenue, in the east Santa Ana area. Moved by N.alus. seconded by Marsters, that the Planning Staff be directed to send a letter to the County of Orange to the effect that this body has no adverse comment to make. However, if owner intends to use this property for a service station site, that such site be developed consistent with Service Station Site Standards of the City of Tustin and those under study by the County of Orange. 2. COUNTY CASE. ZC-66-32 - To change from the R1 "Single Family Residence" District and C1 "Local Business" District to the C1 "Local Business" District with adjusted setbacks, certain property located at the Southwest corner of Fourth Street and Tustin Avenue in the east Santa Ana area. The Commission felt that this was a logical use for the property and consequently had no objections to this Zone change. Plannine Minutes/5/9/66 Paae 4 VIII. 1. STAFF OTHER BUSINESS Chairman Hefner presented Mr. Taylor with a resolution commen- ding him for his services during the interim period between the previous Planning Director and the arrival of Mr. Supinger. The Planning Commission further directed the City Administrator to draw up a Resolution to commend Mr. Taylor for his services to the City. Mr. Taylor will be leaving the City at the end of May, 1966. IX. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:09 P.M. CHAIRMAN PLANNING SECRETARY E R_ R A T A PLANNING CO~Iv1ISSI0~I ?~1INUTES Mav 9, 1g66 The following is a correction to the Minutes of the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission, May 9, 1966: PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. TO PERMIT T~ CGNTINUATION OF A NCN-CONFORMING TRUCKING COi~PANY AT 355 WEST FIRST STREET, TUSTIN. Paee 2: The second motion should read as follows: "After further discussion,concerning the exact definition of a non-conforming use, it was moved by Oster, seconded Sham , that............"