Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 CUP 2011-03Report to the Planning Commission DATE: APRIL 26, 2011 ITEM #3 TUSTIN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 2011-03 PROPERTY OWNER: ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF ORANGE 2811 VILLAREAL DRIVE ORANGE, CA 92683 APPLICANT: JIM MARSHALL ST. CECILIA CHURCH 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE TUSTIN, CA 92780 LOCATION: 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE, TUSTIN, CA 92780 GENERAL PLAN: PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL ZONING: PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 (CLASS 3) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUEST: A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE USE OF AN EXISTING MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDING FOR AN ADDITIONAL FOUR (4) YEARS PC Report CUP 2011-03 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4172 approving Conditional Use Permit 2011-03 to allow a four (4) year extension for the use of an existing modular classroom building located at 1301 Sycamore Avenue at St. Cecilia's Church. BACKGROUND On August 25, 1975, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1462 approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 75-18 for the construction of a 7,664 square foot parish hall at Saint Cecilia Church. On December 13, 1993, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3211 approving CUP 93-031 for the temporary placement and use of a 2,490 square foot modular classroom building on the property until December 13, 2000 (Attachment D). On January 10, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3935 (Attachment E) approving CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009 for the construction of a one-story, 5,950 square foot, free-standing office and meeting room and, as part of the approval, allowed the existing modular classroom building that was scheduled for removal to remain until January 10, 2007. On May 23, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3971 modifying Condition 1.9 of Resolution No. 3935 to extend the use of the existing modular classroom building in conjunction with the new office and meeting room building until March 1, 2012 (Attachment F). Permits for the proposed 5,950 square foot building were never applied for or issued and the entitlements for CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009 became null and void after twelve (12) months along with the extension for the use of the modular classroom building. The modular classroom building remains on the property, and the applicant is requesting that it be allowed to remain for an additional four (4) years. Staff has provided several correspondences notifying St. Cecilia Church of associated deadlines and conditions for extensions which have been approved (Attachment C). Pursuant to Section 9270c3 of the Tustin City Code, requests for temporary uses that exceed six (6) months require approval from the Planning Commission. Site and Surrounding Properties The site is located on the northerly side of Sycamore Avenue and surrounded by two-story single-family residential dwellings to the west, multiple -family residential dwellings to the north and east, and the A.G. Currie Middle School and Jeane Thorman Elementary School to the south across Sycamore Avenue. PC Report CUP 2011-03 Page 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The existing prefabricated modular classroom building is a single story structure with the dimensions of forty-one and one-half (41.5) by sixty (60) feet and comprises 2,490 square feet. The building is approximately 11 feet tall. As indicated in the background section of the report, this building was only allowed temporarily. The modular building is proposed to remain at its existing location forty (40) feet east of the Church and twenty (20) feet south of the parish hall. The building is a flat -roof rectilinear structure constructed of cream color synthetic siding that presents a rough trowel finish. The six windows are bronze glass in an aluminum frame and the doors are brown within a bronze metal frame. A covered walkway exists over the sidewalk connected to the building on the west elevation. The covered walkway consists of wood support beams attached to a corrugated sheet metal cover. The design and location of the modular unit does not provide four sided architecture and was not reviewed as if it was proposed as a permanent structure. PC Report CUP 2011-03 Page 4 Modular classroom buildings are regulated by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) which provides certification of modular classroom buildings. Modular buildings which are installed on permanent foundation systems are not subject to registration by the HCD. The existing modular building does bear the required HCD insignia which indicates compliance with the construction standards and regulations in effect at the time the unit was manufactured. Foundation permits and a fire alarm system for the modular building were issued in 1994. No further permitting would be required from the City in conjunction with this approval. The City of Tustin Public Works Department has conditioned the project to remove and replace the existing easterly driveway along Sycamore Avenue which is in a state of disrepair. This condition was previously required with the 2005 approvals and the improvements were not installed. These replacements would need to be installed by August 1, 2011, to allow for construction to take place during summer break and prior to the next school year starting. In addition, due to the continual extended use of the modular classroom building, the applicant is required to pay any applicable fees to the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) for the proposed use. Since the use was originally established as a temporary use, fees were never imposed by the OCSD on the additional square footage of the modular building; however, seventeen years later the modular unit is still in use. Any impact fee paid to the OCSD could be credited towards future development if the modular building were to be removed. FINDINGS In determining whether to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed extension of the modular building for classroom purposes, the Planning Commission must determine whether or not the proposed use will be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood, nor be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, PC Report CUP 2011-03 Page 5 or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin. A decision to approve this request may be supported by the following findings: 1. That the modular classroom building would be temporary and the applicant would be required to post a bond to ensure removal by April 26, 2015. The modular classroom building originally intended to be used temporarily has remained in its location for the past seventeen (17) years and use as a permanent building resulting in unintended impacts to overall parking/traffic demand. No specific parking/traffic analysis was conducted and impacts have not been mitigated due to the nature of its original intent to use the structure for temporary measure. The easterly driveway along Sycamore Avenue which is used to access the facility is in a state of disrepair and will need to be removed and replaced by the applicant prior to August 1, 2011. This improvement was required in 2004 and has not been installed. Rya wiontek Elizabeth A. Binsack Ass ate Planner Community Development Director Attachments: A. Location Map B. Land Use Fact Sheet C. Correspondence D. Resolution No. 3211 E. Resolution No. 3935 F. Resolution No. 3971 G. Resolution No. 4172 ATTACHMENT A Location Map ATTACHMENT B Land Use Fact Sheet LAND USE APPLICATION FACT SHEET 1. LAND USE APPLICATION NUMBER(S): CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2011-06 2. LOCATION: ST. CECILIA CHURCH 3. ADDRESS: 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE 4. APN(S):500-161-23 5. PREVIOUS OR CONCURRENT APPLICATIONS RELATING TO THIS PROPERTY: CUP 93-031: CUP 04-011: DR 04.009 6. SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: SCHOOL WEST: RESIDENTIAL EAST: RESIDENTIAL 7. SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATION: NORTH: MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: PUBLIC & INSTITUTIONAL WEST: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL EAST: SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL 8. SURROUNDING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: NORTH: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAUBUSINESS 9. SITE LAND USE: SOUTH: PUBLIC & INSTITUTIONAL EAST: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL A. EXISTING: CHURCH/SCHOOL B. GENERAL PLAN: PUBLIC & INSTITUTIONAL C. ZONING: PUBLIC & INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT FACTS: NO CHANGE TO EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED: SAME PROPOSED: SAME PROPOSED: SAME ATTACHMENT C Correspondence Community Development Department March 31, 2010 St. Cecilia Catholic Church ATTN: Father Al Baca 1301 Sycamore Ave. Tustin, CA 92780 TUSTIN BUILDING OUR FUTURE HONORING OUR PAST SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW (DR) 04-009 Dear Father Baca: Thank you for your letters responding to the City's letter dated January 6, 2010 regarding the expiration of CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009. As noted in the letter dated January 6, 2010 (Attachment 1), the approval of CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009 authorized the construction of a new 5,950 square foot building along with the associated modular building to remain on site until March 1, 2012. As permits for the proposed building were never issued, the approval and associated approval of the modular building became null and void after twelve months (See Condition 1.3 of Resolution No. 3935). Please note that the modular building was originally approved on December 13, 1993 through the adoption of Resolution No. 3211 (Attachment 2) and was to be removed by December 13, 2000. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (714) 573-3031. Sincerely, �0�'-V—iL swzek Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Letter addressed to St. Cecilia dated January 6, 2010 2. Resolution No. 3211 cc: Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange; 2811 E Villa Real Dr.; Orange, CA 92867 William A. Huston, City Manager Dana Ogdon, Community Development Assistant Director Justina Willkom, Principal Planner Amy Thomas, Senior Planner, Code Enforcement 5 %CddVUmRA*mm ... 80.e0< 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P: (714) 573-3100 0 F: (714) 573-3113 • www.rustinca.org Ir St Cecilia Church Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 March 23, 2010 RECEIVED MAR 26 2010 ':''IMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT Subject: Conditional Use Permit 04-011 and Design Review 04-009 Dear Ms. Binsack, Some time ago, we replied to your letter of January 6, 2010 regarding the proposed construction of a new 5,950 square foot building and the removal of a modular building by March 1, 2012. At that time, we indicated that the new construction was not in the current 5 year plan, and we would notify the City of Tustin when it came up on the next plan. We have not heard whether or not you were in agreement with our request that RESOLUTION NO. 3935 be changed to not require the removal of the 2,490 square foot modular building by March 1, 2012. Would you be so kind as to let us know if that was acceptable to the City of Tustin? Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, (S�- —44 Rev. Alfred S. Baca, Pastor St. Cecilia Church Ce: Most Reverend Tod D. Brown, Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange Mayor Jerry Amante, Tustin City Council William A. Huston, Tustin City Manager 13'71 Sycamore Avenue - Tustin - CA - 92780 (714) 544-32:0 www.stcecilia.org St Cecilia Church RECEIVED JAN 2 j 2010 Elizabeth A. Binsack COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT Community Development Director Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 SUBJECT: CONDITIOAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 Dear Ms. Binsack: This is in response to your letter of January 6, 2010, regarding the proposed construction of a new 5,950 square foot building and removal of a modular building by March 1, 2012. Due to the current economic climate and financial constraints the building project is not on our 5 year operating plan. If and when the financial constraints are removed and the project is included in a new 5 year plan we will notify you and proceed with the appropriate applications for approval. Until the project is placed on a new 5 year plan the current modular classroom building is an important part of our campus and our mission. I request the provisions of RESOLUTION NO. 3935 are changed to not require the removal of the 2,490 square foot modular building by March 1, 2012. I can assure you the modular classroom building has, is and will be maintained in a condition that will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood. You are welcome to inspect the site as it is in the original condition. Sincerely, Rev. Alfred S. Baca, Pastor St. Cecilia Church Cc: Tod Brown, Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange Mayor Jerry Amante; Tustin City Council William A. Huston; Tustin City Manager 1301 Sycamore Street • Tustin • CA • 92780 714. 5"-195n Community Development Department January 6, 2010 St. Cecilia Catholic Church ATTN: Father AI Baca 1301 Sycamore Ave. Tustin, CA 92780 BUILDING OUR FUTURE HONORING OUR PAST SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 TUSTIN Dear Father Baca: On January 10, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission (PC) Resolution No. 3935 (Attachment 1), approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 04-011 and Design Review (DR) 04-009, authorizing the use of a modular building for two (2) years and construction of a new 5,950 square foot building at 1301 Sycamore Avenue. On May 23, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted PC Resolution No. 3971 (Attachment 2), amending Condition 1.9 of PC Resolution No. 3935 to allow the modular building to remain on site for a period not to extend past March 1, 2012. The Conditions of Approval for CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009, as amended, include the following: Condition 1.3 o1 Resolution No. 3935. The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. As permits for the proposed building were never issued, the approval and associated approvals became null and void after twelve months. Please contact the City for a site inspection when the property has been restored to its original condition. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (714) 573-3031. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No, 3935 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3971 3. Administrative Citation Information cc: Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange; 2811 E Villa Real Dr.; Orange, CA 92867 Dana Ogdon, Community Development Assistant Director Justina Willkom, Principal Planner Amy Thomas, Senior Planner, Code Enforcement SACMCadLLettaWSt. Cecilia - modular expiration.doc 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 • P: (714) 573-3100 0 F: (714) 573-3113 0 www.tustinca.org EXHIBIT A Administrative Citation Information In accordance with Tustin City Code (TCC) 1162(d), fines may be assessed by means of an administrative citation as follows: $100.00 for a first violation; $200.00 for a second violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $500.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation. Building and Safety Code (TCC Sec. 8100 — 8999) violations may be assessed at $100.00 for a first violation; $500.00 for a second violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $1,000.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation. The City may also take further legal action including issuing the responsible person(s) a criminal citation and/or abating the violation(s) with the cost of such abatement and/or prosecution assessed against the responsible person(s), the property owner(s), and/or the property as a lien. Should an administrative citation be Issued, the responsible person has ten (10) days from the issuance date of the administrative citation to pay the corresponding citation fine(s). Additionally, the responsible person must take one of the following actions to avoid additional penalties prior to the compliance date specified in the administrative citation: 1) Correct the violation, pay the corresponding fine(s), and contact the City to request a re- inspection, or 2) Pay the corresponding fine(s) and request an extension of time in writing pursuant to TCC 1165(b), which shows a reasonable hardship; or 3) Request a hearing to appeal the administrative citation pursuant to TCC 1166 within ten (10) days from the date of the administrative citation, together with an advanced deposit of the corresponding fine(s). Request for Hearing forms and other information on administrative citations may be obtained on the City's website at www.tustinca.ora. 5:\Cdd\FORM5\Cod. Enkrt...\Admin CRatlen I .VYKWAdeeMM Community Development Department August 5, 2008 Rev. Michael Heher Vicar General 1301 Sycamore Street Tustin, CA 92780 TUSTIN BUILDING OUR FUTURE HONORING OUR PAST SUBJECT: ST. CECILIA CHURCH LOCATED AT 1301 SYCAMORE STREET Dear Rev. Heher: This letter is in response to your letter dated July 11, 2008. In particular, your inquiry regarding the parish's Conditional Use Permit. For your convenience and use, the pertinent documents have been copied from the file on St. Cecilia's Church for Conditional Use Permit 04-011 (CUP 04-011) and Design Review 04-009 (DR 04-009). The applications were for the use of a modular classroom building and the construction of a new office and meeting room building for the church. These records indicate the following history for CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009: January 7, 1964 City of Tustin annexed the property at 1301 Sycamore Avenue. This included a church building, and two buildings for use as a school (preschool through eighth grade). August 25, 1975 Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1462 for CUP 75- 18 for a parish hall. December 13, 1993 Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3211 approving CUP 93-031 for the temporary placement and use of a modular classroom until December 13, 2000. October 25, 2004 Planning Commission reviewed an application to construct a new administrative office and meeting room building. The application also included a request to permanently use the existing modular building (approved in 1993). The Commission expressed concerns: • The light and shadow study • The easement concern 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 • f': (714) 573-' 100 0 F (714) 57,3-31 1 3 W%VW tustinca.brg Rev. Michael Heher August 5, 2008 Page 2 • Alternate placement of the new building and concern with modular building becoming permanent The Commission continued the hearing to December 13, 2004. December 13, 2004 Planning Commission reviewed the proposed changes including temporary use of the modular building for two years; three alternative locations and configurations; and identified an Edison easement on the plan. The Commission directed staff to prepare and return with a report and resolution in support of Alternative 3; allow the modular building to be used for two years; and allow construction for the revised office and meeting building. The meeting was then continued to January 10, 2005. January 10, 2005 Planning Commission reviewed the revised proposal and approved Resolution No. 3935 for CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009 to allow a 2,490 square foot modular building to be use for two years as a classroom and to construct a 5,950 square foot, one- story office and meeting room building at 1301 Sycamore Avenue. January 17, 2005 A letter to the Community Development Director prepared by Fr. Timothy MacCarthy was received. The purpose of the letter was to request clarification of the process of applying for additional extensions of the Conditional Use Permit for the Sammon Center (modular classroom). January 31, 2005 The Community Development Director provided a written response clarifying that the original approval required the removal of the modular facility no later than December 13, 2000. The Planning Commission approved CUP 04-011 and DR 04- 009 with Condition of Approval No. 1.9 of Resolution No. 3935 which required the modular building to be removed on or before January 10, 2007. There were no provisions which would allow the Community Development Department to extend the use past that date. May 23, 2005 The applicant requested modification of Condition 1.9 of CUP 04-011, and DR 04-009 to allow the existing modular building to be used as a classroom until March 1, 2012. The Planning Commission considered the proposal and approved Resolution No. 3971 which modified Condition of Approval 1.9 of CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009 to temporarily use Rev. Michael Heher August 5, 2008 Page 3 the modular building as a classroom until March 1, 2012. Any future request to extend the duration of the use for the modular building required Planning Commission review. With the exception of the revised condition, the Conditions of Approval contained in Resolution No. 3935 remained in full force and effect. Please note that Condition 1.3 of Resolution No. 3935 states: The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Attachment: CUP 04-011 & DR 04-009 Correspondence letters (January 17, 2005 and January 31, 2005) cc: Bishop Tod D. Brown, 2811 East Villa Real Drive, Orange, CA 92867-1932 Fr. Alfred Baca, Pastor, 1301 Sycamore Street, Tustin, CA 92780 Douglas Holland, City Attorney S:\Cdd\Amy\Code Enforcement\Knights of ColumbusNicar General response 072908.docx Community Development Department May 27, 2005 City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Rev. Timothy MacCarthy 714.573.3100 1301 Sycamore Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MODIFICATION. TO CONDITION 1.9 OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 Dear Rev. MacCarthy: The Tustin Planning Commission at a regular meeting on May 23, 2005 approved the subject project. A copy of executed Resolution No. 3971 is attached. This action may be appealed to the City Council by any person by submitting a petition indicating why the action or a condition is being appealed along with an appeal fee as established by the City Council. The Planning Commission's action will become final unless an appeal petition and fee as noted above is received by the Community Development Department within seven (7) calendar days from the date of their action. As required by Condition No. 1.3 of Resolution 3935, approval of Conditional Use Permit 04- 011, Design Review 04-009 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form. In addition, a "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form is required to be signed and notarized by the property owner. Please sign and notarize this form and record it with the Orange County Recorder's Office and return it to my attention. The form will be required prior to building permit issuance. Copies of these forms are enclosed for your convenience. Also attached is a Customer Service Evaluation form. It would be appreciated if you could take a few minutes to complete and return the form to the City. The form will be kept in confidence and your response can be anonymous. Your comments are valuable to us and will enable the City to better serve you and our other customers in the future. Should you have any questions about the Planning Commission's action, please do not hesitate to contact me at (714) 573-3127. Sincerely, Od Ortiviebo--,-/� Associate Planner Enclosure: Agreement with Conditions of Approval Discretionary Permit Approval Resolution Nos. 3935 and 3971 Agreement to Conditions Imposed Form &iCddlChad=P\cup 04-011 PC mtg approval letter -doe Re: Request to modify Condition L9 of Conditional Use Permit 04-011 and Design Review 04-009 To: Chad Ortieb I hereby request extension date for dte use of the modular building until March 1,2012. ,t 170t Syeali*c Aveaue44 Tustin .-Cali%lniu-.92790 71.4.544.3250 9 April 11, 2005 Ms. Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Re: 1301 S.E. Sycamore, Dear Ms. Binsack: RECEI\/ED APR 1.8 1005 COMMUNITY DEVELOP,f EN'l The purpose of this letter is to forward the two new applications signed by Bishop Tod Brown. The applications are for the renewal of the CUP for the Sammon Center and for the construction of the new 1 -story combination office and meeting room building. Attached also is a certified copy of the minutes of our meeting regarding our previous joined application. If you need any additional information please do not hesitate to ask. Yours in Christ, F.un6i� Mcu, C Fr. Timothy MacCarthy, Pastor h ' t11 � din March 2, 2005 Ms. Elizabeth Binsack Planning Director City of Tustin Planning Department Tustin, CA 92780 Dear Ms. Binsack: E Father Timothy MacCarthy tmaccarthy@stceciliak8.org The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on instructions given me by the City Council on February 22, 2005. I had appealed the Planning Commission actions of January 18, 2005,by writing a letter to the City Council on January 28, 2005. After receiving no reply from the City Council I made a presentation to the City Council on February 22, 2005. At that meeting Mayor Bone told me to return to the Planning Commission. And that is where we are today. I still want to build the 5950 square foot, one story combination office and meeting room building. I am unwilling to tear down the Sammon Center until that building has reached its useful life. For business purposes of accrual accounting and depreciation the useful life is about 18 years. I am requesting that the removal date be extended to March 1, 2012. This would allow three contingencies as follows: Contingency #1. Moving the removal date for the Sammon Center to 2012 would allow us time to raise the necessary funds to replace the Sammon Center with a debt free City approved structure for our expanding Parish Family. Contingency #2. By moving the removal date to 3/1/2012, it would allow the Bishop's plans for the new church site at Jamboree and Irvine Boulevard to evolve. If part of our Parish Family in Zip Code 92782 is transferred to the new church we may not need the space we have in the Sammon Center. It could then be returned to landscaping. Contingency # 3. The new church is built at Jamboree and Irvine Boulevard and part of our Parish Family in Zip Code 92782 is transferred. But our Parish Family at St. Cecilia continues to grow and we still need the space the Sammon Center provides. Through Contingency #1 we would have the capital to replace the Sammon Center with a City approved building. I respectfully request that we be given a building permit for the 5950 square foot, one story combination office and meeting room building. 1301 Sycamore Avenue — Tustin — California — 92780 714.544.3250 I respectfully request thlee removal date for the Sammon Cent extended to March 1, 2012. Yours in Christ or�rtctf� Mafr �c� Fr. Timothy MacCarthy, Pastor 1301 Sycamore Avenue - Tustin - California - 92780 714.544.3250 CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS., . 2922 East ,dapmari,'Avenue',- Suite 101 •.Orange, California 92869 ' Phone 714/538.2326 Faz 714/5382328 I • 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 11 12 • 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24' • 25 Tustin Community Development Meeting regarding Conditional Use Permit taken at 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California, on Wednesday, March 2, 2005, commencing at 9:10 a.m., before Elaine R. Uehara, C.S.R. #5857. ,APPEARANCES: For City of Tustin: WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART BY: CINDY R. STAFFELBACH, Esq. 701 South Parker Street, Suite 8000 Orange, California 92868-4760 (714) 558-7000 Also Present: Elizabeth A. Binsack Chad Ortlieb Father Timothy MacCarthy Lucien Escalle David Finney AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION E 1 Tustin, California,'Wednesday, March 2, 2005 • 2 9:10 a.m. 3 4 MS. BINSACK: I guess I'll go first. But I think 5 we probably ought to all identify who we are and what 6 our representation at the meeting is this morning. 7 My name is Elizabeth Binsack and'I'm the a director of Community Development. 9 MS. STAFFELBACH: I'm Cindy Staffelbach with the 10 City Attorneys Office for the City of Tustin. 11 MR. ORTLEIB: I'm Chad Ortlieb. I'm an associate 12 planner for the City of Tustin. • 13 MR. ESCALLE: Lou Escalle. I am here on the 14 committee with Father MacCarthy. 15 FATHER MacCARTHY: I am Father MacCarthy, Pastor 16 of St. Cecilia Church in Tustin. 17 MR. FINNEY: I'm David Finney and part of the 18 building group with Father Tim. 19 MS.•BINSACK: I can start if you'd like and maybe 20 provide a little bit of background and if I make any 21 errors, please correct me. 22 I guess the issue is the modular facility 23 and, again, just to provide a little bit of background, 24 in December of 1993 an application was made by • 25 St. Cecilia's, and as a matter of fact, I pulled the 2 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 10AM : 10AM 10AM :11AM 09:11AM 18 FATHER MacCARTHY: That's correct. The building 19 is still in existence. 20 MS. BINSACK: Sorry. 21 FATHER MacCARTHY: It's still in existence. 22 MS. BINSACK: Okay. In March of 2004 the church's 23 architect, which I believe is Eric Gless, and the 24 archdiocese signed an application authorizing Mr. Gless 25 to act on its behalf and he prepared plans for the ANACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 11AM 09: 12AM :12AM :12AM :13AM 1 file and, Father MacCarthy, you actually signed the 2 application then, so I guess you have been with 3 St. Cecilia's for some time. 4 MR. FINNEY: Fifteen years. 5 MS. BINSACK: And this was a request made then for 6 a modular building approximately 2,600 square feet and 7 it was approved by the Planning Commission then in 1993. 8 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes. 9 MS. BINSACK: And it was approved for seven years 10 and you signed that application, and that modular 11 facility was to be removed in December of 2000. That 12 did not occur; correct? • 13 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes, Ma'am. It is still in 14 existence. 15 MS. BINSACK: No extension was requested by 16 St. Cecilia's and the building again was not removed; 17 correct? 18 FATHER MacCARTHY: That's correct. The building 19 is still in existence. 20 MS. BINSACK: Sorry. 21 FATHER MacCARTHY: It's still in existence. 22 MS. BINSACK: Okay. In March of 2004 the church's 23 architect, which I believe is Eric Gless, and the 24 archdiocese signed an application authorizing Mr. Gless 25 to act on its behalf and he prepared plans for the ANACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 11AM 09: 12AM :12AM :12AM :13AM e, AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION I church and process the application, and we have got that • 2 documentation in the file. it was notarized and that's 3 the application; is that correct? 4 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes, one correction. It's not 5 an archdiocese. We are a diocese. 09:13AM 6 MS. BINSACK: Excuse me. I apologize. 7 FATHER MacCARTHY: That's a big difference. 8 MS. BINSACK: I -apologize for misrepresenting 9 that. 10 Anyway, we met with Mr. Gless. And part of 09:13AM 11 that application in March, even though it was several 12 years after the fact, there was a request to legalize • 13 the structure that was supposed to be removed in 2000 as 14 well as to construct a two-story building at your 15 current facility. 09: 14AM 16 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes. 17 MS. BINSACK: On October 25th, 2004, staff made a 18 recommendation to the Planning Commission to approve 19 both to make permanent the modular facility and the 20 two-story building. Two individuals spoke and noted 09: 14AN 21 their concerns at that hearing and I think, as you will 22 recall, that a majority of the commissioners were not in 23 favor of making the modular facility permanent and 24 requested that a light and shade study be conducted and • 25 the item was continued to December 13th. 09: 14AM e, AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 20 So he came back with a couple of 21 alternatives. There was leaving the building where it 22 was originally, moving the building, or coming back with 23 a single story, but generally the same square footage. 24 Those staff reports were sent to you with the 25 resolutions and to Mr. Gless with all of the conditions. 5 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :15AM 15AM I6AM :16AM :16AM 1 FATHER MacCARTHY: Right. • 2 MS. BINSACK: And on December 3rd staff met and it 3 was actually Chad Ortleib and I met with your authorized 4 representative, Mr. Gless, and discussed various project 5 revisions and an extension of the modular facility. 6 At that meeting -- I mean we talked at length 7 about it, so I'm just going to briefly highlight some of 8 the discussions, and unfortunately you did not bring 9 your authorized representative, so, unfortunately, he 10 can't, you know, sort of add to the discussion. 11 But at that time he said, you know, that he 12 met with the church's board and whatnot. They certainly • 13 want to keep the facility. They don't particularly 14 think that it's fair, but how about 36 months. And we 15 said, well, you know, staff could probably support maybe 16 24 months or something like that while you are 17 constructing the permanent facility and also noted to 18 him that, you know, the church naturally has appeal 19 rights. 20 So he came back with a couple of 21 alternatives. There was leaving the building where it 22 was originally, moving the building, or coming back with 23 a single story, but generally the same square footage. 24 Those staff reports were sent to you with the 25 resolutions and to Mr. Gless with all of the conditions. 5 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :15AM 15AM I6AM :16AM :16AM I And on the 13th of December the applicant -- excuse me, 2 the item went again to the Planning Commission with the 3 three alternatives with the building to be -- the 4 modular building to be continued for two years. 5 A majority of the commissioners, and when 1 6 say "majority" that means at least three of the five, 7 reiterated that they didn't want to have the 8 buildings -- the modular building as a permanent 9 building and directed staff to prepare revised findings 10 and conditions. 11 And also the building had changed. At one 12 point in time it was my understanding that you just • 13 wanted to move the two-story building from the original 14 location further, and then at the meeting Mr. Gless had 15 identified that now you wanted to go to the single 16 story. So the resolution did not reflect that. So we 17 needed to modify the approval to reflect the single 18 story. So we identified that we needed to come back 19 again. So the item was continued again. 20 On January 6th, the report was sent to Father 21 MacCarthy and to Mr. Gless for the January 10th meeting. 22 At that meeting the Planning Commission approved the 23 project for approximately just under 6,000 square foot 24 building and for the two-year temporary use for the . 25 modular building. C1 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :17AM :17AM :18AM :1BAM 1 Father MacCarthy, correct me if I am wrong, • 2but I seem to recall that you were at all three of those 3 meetings. 4 FATHER MacCARTHY: I was at the very first one, 5 but the second one Mr. Finney was there. I couldn't 6 attend. 7 MS. BINSACK: Okay. 8 FATHER MacCARTHY: I might just add as far as 9 Mr. Gless is concerned, our architect, I have never 10 delegated any authority to him in writing. That might 11 be important. 7 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :19AM 1 9A 09:]9AM :2 OAM 12 MS. BINSACK: We can show you the application. • 13 MR. ORTLEIB: He was indicated as the project 14 consultant and it says here "or contact." We did have 15 contact directly through him, but in our correspondence 16 we also put everything directly to you as the applicant. 17 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes, but I want to say this. 18 That I don't recall at any time having put into -- 19 having put into writing that I was delegating authority 20 to him at that time. He is acting for us for sure. 21 MR. ORTLEIB: Uh-huh. 22 FATHER MacCARTHY: But nowhere did I ever delegate 23 him authority. That is just a point I am making. He 24 still acts for us. • 25 MR. ORTLEIB: I see. 7 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :19AM 1 9A 09:]9AM :2 OAM 1 MS. BINSACK: Who is the appropriate person for us 2 to contact? 3 FATHER MacCARTHY: Well, ultimately myself as 4 pastor, but I have representatives here who are in an 5 advisory role. The ultimate authority in the diocese is 09:20AM 6 the Bishop of Orange himself. 7 MS. BINSACK: We will do just a summary probably a or a followup and we will "cc" them as to the outcome of 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this meeting. FATHER MacCARTHY: I think that would be very good 09:21AM to do. MS. BINSACK: okay. I guess one thing I should say is that when the Planning Commission took action on the 10th -- well, you know, typically when things go to the Planning Commission, usually there is one hearing, for example, if they take action, and then there is an appeal period, and those items naturally are appealable to the City Council. This happened, as I said, three times before the Planning Commission and there was a fair amount of discussion regarding that modular facility, and all of those minutes are available to you. As matter of fact, I think it was the December 13th meeting there was a fair amount of discussion because several members of your parish came. AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION M :21AM :2 Lu 09:22AM 0 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :22Am 22AM :23AM :23AM 1 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes. 2 MS. BINSACK: So, again, it was very clearly known 3 that they were only recommending or going to approve a 4 two-year extension. 5 Anyway, I guess the long and short of it is 6 the appeal period ended. So once the appeal period was 7 over, their decision was final, the Planning 8 Commission's decision was final. 9 FATHER MacCARTHY: That's right. 10 MS. BINSACK: And I know that you wrote a letter 11 to the City Council and wanted them to do something. 12 And it is not that they would or wouldn't do something, • 13 but at this point in time they really cannot do anything 14 until you do something. So I guess maybe we should talk 15 about what your options might be at this point in time. 16 FATHER MacCARTHY: Sure. Is this a good time for 17 me to read my letter? 18 MS. BINSACK: Okay. 19 FATHER MacCARTHY: Do we have a copy for her? 20 MR. FINNEY: Yes. 21 MS. BINSACK: Thank you. 22 FATHER MacCARTHY: (Reading). 23 "Dear Ms. Binsack: The purpose of this 24 letter is to follow up on the instructions 25 given to me by the City Council on February 0 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :22Am 22AM :23AM :23AM I the 22nd, 2005. I had appealed the Planning 2 Commission actions of January 18th, 2005, by 3 writing a letter to the City Council on 4 January the 28th, 2005. After receiving no 5 reply from the City Council, I made a 6 presentation to the City Council on February 7 the 22nd, 2005. At that meeting Mayor Bone 8 told me to return to the Planning Commission 10 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 09:24AM :24AM 25AM :25AM 9 and that is where we are today. 10 "2 still want to build the 5,950 square 11 foot, one-story combination office and 12 meeting room building. I am unwilling to • 13 tear down the center until that building has 14 reached its usual (sic) life. For business 15 purposes of accrual, accounting and 16 depreciation, the usual" -- sorry, "the 17 useful life is about 18 years." 13 THE REPORTER: The usual? 19 FATHER MacCARTHY: It's a misprint? It should be 20 "useful," excuse me. 21 "The useful life is about 18 years. I 22 am requesting that the removal date be 23 extended to March 1, 2012. This would allow 24 three contingencies as follows: • 25 "Contingency 1: Moving the removal 10 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 09:24AM :24AM 25AM :25AM 11 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 9:26AM 9:26AM :26AM :27AM 27AM 1 date for the Simon Center to 2012 would • 2 allow us time to raise the necessary funds 3 to replace the Simon Center with a debt -free 4 city approved structure for our expanding 5 parish family. 6 "Contingency 2: By moving the removal 7 date to March 1st, 2012, it would allow the s Bishop's plans for the new church site at 9 Jamboree and Irvine Boulevard to evolve. If 10 part of our parish family in zip code 92782 11 is transferred to the new church, we may not 12 need the space we have in the Simon Center. • 13 It could then be returned to landscaping. 14 "Contingency 3: The new church was 15 built at Jamboree and Irvine Boulevard and 16. part of our parish family in zip code 92782 17 is transferred. But as our parish family at 18 St. Cecilia's continues to grow, we still 19 need the space that the Simon Center 20 provides. So Contingency 1 we would have 21 the ready capital to rephrase the Simon 22 Center with the city approved building. 23 "I respectfully request that we be 24 given a building permit for the 5,950 square . 25 foot, one-story combination office and 11 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 9:26AM 9:26AM :26AM :27AM 27AM I meeting room building. I respectfully • 2 request that the removal date for the Simon 3 Center be extended to March 1, 2012. 4 "Yours in Christ, Father Timothy 5 McCarthy." 6 MS. BINSACK: Thank you, Father McCarthy. By the 7 way, may I get a copy of the transcript that you are 8 going to have produced? 9 MR. FINNEY: Sure. 12 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :27AM :28AM :28AM :28AM :29AM 10 MS. BINSACK: A couple of things that I just 11 wanted to follow up on. You indicate in your letter 12 that you had appealed the Planning Commission's actions. • 13 I think you wrote a letter to the City Council but never 14 made a formal appeal because the appeal period had 15 expired. But my letter with respect to the council not 16 responding back to you, I actually sent a letter to you 17 and that was actually to be in response to set a meeting 18 to talk about what options were available to you. 19 Unfortunately we can't just issue a permit 20 for that single -story building at this point because it 21 is tied to the modular building. What would have to 22 happen at this point, if you would like to request an 23 extension again for that modular facility, as you have 24 noted here, as you have identified in this letter, is 25 that you would have to go back to the Planning 12 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :27AM :28AM :28AM :28AM :29AM 19 FATHER MacCARTHY: December of 2000? 20 MS. BINSACK: Yes. 21 MR. FINNEY: Well, in -- 22 MS. BINSACK: Father MacCarthy is the one who 23 identified that he is responsible for it. 24 MR. FINNEY: I want to identify this. This is the • 25 Conditional Use Permit 93-031 that you are referring to. 13 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :29AM :30AM 9! 30AM :30AM ; 31AM 1 Commission and formally ask for that. FATHER 2 MacCARTHY: For an extension? 3 MS. BINSACK: For the extension. 4 FATHER MacCARTHY: Okay. 5 MS. BINSACK: And what I would suggest that you do 6 is request to amend the Conditional Use Permit that you 7 received the approval for. 8 And so let's just say that plays out. If the 9 Planning Commission approves your request to extend it 10 out to 2012, then you can record the agreement to 11 conditions imposed, fulfill the conditions of approval 12 and move forward. If they deny your request, then, you . 13 can appeal that to the City Council and then they can 14 take your request, you know, under consideration. 15 But I do have a question for you -- and I do 16 want a copy of the transcript. Father MacCarthy, why 17 was the modular facility not removed in December of 18 2000? 19 FATHER MacCARTHY: December of 2000? 20 MS. BINSACK: Yes. 21 MR. FINNEY: Well, in -- 22 MS. BINSACK: Father MacCarthy is the one who 23 identified that he is responsible for it. 24 MR. FINNEY: I want to identify this. This is the • 25 Conditional Use Permit 93-031 that you are referring to. 13 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :29AM :30AM 9! 30AM :30AM ; 31AM 14 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :31AM :31AM 31AM :31AM :32AM 1 MS. BINSACK: Pardon me? 2 MR. FINNEY: The removal of the building, is that 3 this document, Exhibit A of the Conditional Use Permit 4 93-031? 5 MS. BINSACK: Yes. 6 MR. FINNEY: Conditions of approval resolution 7 3211. 8 MS. BINSACK: Okay. 9 MR. FINNEY: This is what you agreed to. 10 FATHER MacCARTHY: I agreed to this here? 11 MR. FINNEY: Yes. 12 FATHER MacCARTHY: That's what's relevant to this 13 question.? 14 MR. FINNEY: You have to understand whether or not 15 this reads that you have to remove the building in "K" 16 number of years. 17 FATHER MacCARTHY: May I address this to you? 18 MS. BINSACK: Sure. 19 FATHER MacCARTHY: (Reading). 20 "Item 1.1, the proposed project shall 21 substantially conform with the submitted 22 plans for the project date stamped December 23 13th, 1993, on file with the Community 24 Development department as herein modified or • 25 as modified by the director of the Community 14 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :31AM :31AM 31AM :31AM :32AM I Development Department in accordance with • 2 this exhibit. 3 "The director may make minor 4 modifications to the plans during the plan 5 check provided such changes are consistent 6 with all applicable code requirements. 7 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions 8 contained in this exhibit shall be complied 9 with prior to the issuance of any building 10 permits for the project,subject to review 11 and approval by the Community Development 12 Department. 13 MS. BINSACK: Condition 1.4 indicates that the 14 building permit is valid for a time period not to exceed 15 seven years. 16 MR. FINNEY: It says five years. 17 FATHER MacCARTHY: Five years. 18 MR. FINNEY: The one we received says five years. 19 But that's not the point. 20 In this, do you understand that if you didn't 21 go within 30 days that you had to tear down the 22 building? 23 FATHER MacCARTHY: I didn't understand that at 24 that time. :32AM :32AM 09:33AM :33AM • 25 MR. FINNEY: Well, that's what this says, but it 09:33AM 15 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 16 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 1 doesn't say, "tear down the building." 2 FATHER MacCARTHY: No, it doesn't. It says, 3 "An extension request maybe granted by the Planning 4 Commission until the applicant request additional time. 5 Said extension request shall be in the form an amendment 09:33AM 6 to this conditional approval and shall be made to the 7 Community Development Department at least 30 days prior 8 to the expiration of the terms of the Conditional Use 9 Permit.' 10 That's what I have. 09: 34AM 11 MS. BINSACK: I'm not sure what document you are 12 looking at. • 13 MR. FINNEY: This (indicating). 14 MS. BINSACK: That's not signed. 15 MS. STAFFELBACH: That's not a signed copy. 09: 34AM 16 MS. BINSACK: It's not a signed copy of the 17 resolution of approval. This is the document that was 18 signed and approved at the meeting. That looks like a 19 draft that was submitted. I can make a Copy of this for 20 you if you would like. But this is what was actually 09:34AM 21 approved on December 13th of 1993. 22 So it looks like you actually got two more 23 years, so they must have modified it at the meeting. So 24 seven years was authorized versus five • 25 MR. FINNEY: But in that does it say, "tear it 09:35AM 16 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION • • a 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23. 24 25 down after seven years"? MS. BINSACK: It was approved for seven years versus five. MR. FINNEY: But does it say, "tear it down"? MS. BINSACK: Yeah, it was a modular approval for seven years and that you could request an extension within 30 days. MR. FINNEY: I wasn't around then anyway. MS. BINSACK: Right. FATHER MacCARTHY: It could have been -- I recall at that time in 2000 I was there that particular time facing surgery and there might be certain things that I didn't fully understand at the time of that document. That would be about the beginning of 2000, so I don't know if that has any bearing on it or not. Meanwhile the life of that fine building still goes on, on the basis of our only source at the present time of any source of insuring moral formation for those who come to US. MS. BINSACK: Okay. FATHER MacCARTHY: And it is used so much for church purposes that it's booked even twelve months ahead. MS. BINSACK: Sure. FATHER MacCARTHY: And it is terribly essential to AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 17 :35AM 35AM 3 6A 36AM SAM 21 MS. BINSACK: Individuals within 300 feet will be 22 notified. Everyone that was noticed the first time will 23 be noticed again. 24 FATHER MacCARTHY: Nothing much to fear on that • 25 respect. wi AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :37AM 09:38AM 38AM. 38AM :39AM 1 my work, as I think I pointed out in my last letter to • 2 the City Council, if you obtained a copy of that. 3 MS. BINSACK: Well, what I would suggest that you 4 do, as I did before, is that if you want to make that 5 request is to amend that condition. 6 Chad, do you have a copy of that resolution 7 by any chance? I don't think I do. 8 MR. ORTLEIB: It is attached to one of the letters 9 that we sent. 10 MS. BINSACK: So it wouldn't just be amending a 11 condition, it would be amending the resolution. 12 MR. ORTLEIB: That's correct. • 13 MS. BINSACK: But you basically want to request an 14 amendment to this Conditional Use Permit and formally 15 request the extension. 16 FATHER MacCARTHY: Okay. 17 MS. BINSACK: And then we can go forward. Now 18 recognize that it does require a public hearing. 19 FATHER MacCARTHY: What's the implications of 20 that? 21 MS. BINSACK: Individuals within 300 feet will be 22 notified. Everyone that was noticed the first time will 23 be noticed again. 24 FATHER MacCARTHY: Nothing much to fear on that • 25 respect. wi AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION :37AM 09:38AM 38AM. 38AM :39AM • r�L 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. BINSACK: No, just so that you are aware of that and, you know, I think we can probably waive the fees for you. FATHER MacCARTHY: All right. MS. BINSACK: We will need an application from you. FATHER MacCARTHY: Okay. We will be able to send you that. MS., BINSACK: You can send that to us and it needs to be authorized. Who signed the original one? Was it Mr. Brown? Who signs on behalf of the diocese? MR. ORTLEIB: The original signature was by Todd Brown as landowner and the applicant was Father MacCarthy. FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes. MS. BINSACK: Okay. Are you going to act as the applicant, Father MacCarthy? FATHER MacCARTHY: As long as I am here, which is going to be a couple more months I suppose, but I am the official applicant. He is the landowner. MS. BINSACK: Okay. FATHER MacCARTHY: I am the applicant. MS. BINSACK: Okay. You are the applicant? FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes. AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 19 :39AM :39AM 4 OAM 40AM 40AM 20 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 9:90AM :40AM :41AM 41AM :41AM 1 MS. BINSACK: Are we to deal with you? • 2 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes, I am the one you will be 3 dealing with. 4 MS. BINSACK: Primarily you or is it going to be 5 both of you? 6 FATHER MacCARTHY: He's one of my right hand 7 people here, chief advisor. 8 MR. FINNEY: He is the man. 9 FATHER MacCARTHY: I am the man. Me with 10 thousands of other things to look after. 11 MS. BINSACK: Sure. I understand. 12 FATHER MacCARTHY: This is just one facet of a 13 gigantic operations. • 14 MS. BINSACK: I understand. Okay. Quite frankly, 15 if you give us the application and probably this letter 16 would suffice. 17 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes. 18 MS. BINSACK: But we do need that application and, 19 you know, where it identifies what the project 20 description is, you will want to identify that you want 21 to amend that Conditional Use Permit. 22 FATHER MacCARTHY: Is there a time limit for that 23 application with the letter of amendment? Do we have 24 certain number of days to do it? • 25 MS. BINSACK: As far as application is concerned? 20 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 9:90AM :40AM :41AM 41AM :41AM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 . 25 FATHER MacCARTHY: Yes. MS. BINSACK: Well, that's really incumbent upon you. FATHER MacCARTHY: Okay. MS. BINSACK: How quickly you want to move. 09:41AN FATHER MacCARTHY: Okay. MS. BINSACK: And I would presume that's pretty quickly. FATHER MacCARTHY: It is, yes. So we can take care of that for you. 09:41AM MS. BINSACK: Okay. So, Chad, do you want to maybe grab an application? MR. ORTLEIB: Sure. (Whereupon, Mr. Ortleib leaves proceedings.) MS. BINSACK: I think you can probably attach this 09:42AM letter to it. You might want to update the letter as far as the date that you submit the application. FATHER MacCARTHY: Sure. MS. BINSACK: So that they are consistent. FATHER MacCARTHY: We can do that. 09:42AM MS. BINSACK: Okay. Do you have any questions? FATHER MacCARTHY: Not anything, but if I can refer to my expert people. Do you have any questions? MR. FINNEY: No. Chad is going to help us with the forms. AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 21 :42AM I MS. BINSACK: Well, he will get one and we will REPORTER: • 2 just kind of take a look at it together and see if you 23 3 have any questions. CUP, 4 FATHER MacCARTHY: Okay. MS. 5 MR. FINNEY: Okay. 09: 42AM 6 FATHER MacCARTHY: Thank you. I don't 7 (Whereupon, Mr. Ortleib reenters proceedings.) 8 MS. BINSACK: You can probably pull your other 9 application if you want to take a look any information 10 that you might have questions about. But on here where 09:43AM 11 it says project description, what you will want to do is 12 just write on there a request to amend Conditional Use • 13 Permit 4-11 and that's to extend the modular facility 14 to -- when was that? 15 MR. FINNEY: March 1st, 2012. 09:44AM 16 FATHER MacCARTHY: Right. 17 MS. BINSACK: Okay. They probably don't need to 18 do the environmental. 19 MR. ORTLEIB: The only reason I brought that was 20 just a matter of questioning if they need plans since 09:44AM 211 the CUP will be revised. 22 THE REPORTER: CUP? 23 MR. ORTLEIB: CUP, 24 MS. BINSACK: Conditional Use Permit. I don't 25 is think so. I don't think we even need -- no. 09:44AM 22 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 23 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 144AM 9:45AM :45AM :45AM 9:45AM 1 MR. ORTLEIB: Okay. 2 MS. BINSACK: And there's that. 3 MR. ORTLEIB: Thank you. 4 MS. BINSACK: And I will give you that letter for 5 your file, too. 6 MR. ORTLEIB: Great. 7 MS. BINSACK: Are there any other questions that B we can answer for you? 9 FATHER MacCARTHY: I can't think of any at this 10 particular time. 11 MS. BINSACK: Okay. 12 FATHER MacCARTHY: Thank you for your kindness and 13 helping us out and hope everything will work out for • 14 all. 15 MS. BINSACK: When do you think you will be 16 submitting an application? 17 FATHER MacCARTHY: Within a week. 18 MR. FINNEY: Yes. 19 MS. BINSACK: Okay. 20 FATHER MacCARTHY: It shouldn't take us that long. 21 MS. BINSACK: Okay, then we will try to get it to 22 a hearing as quickly as we can for you. 23 FATHER MacCARTHY: Okay. Thank you very much. 24 MS. BINSACK: How old is that notification, the 25 radius? 23 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 144AM 9:45AM :45AM :45AM 9:45AM • 25 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 24 :46AM 4 GAM 46AM 1 MR. ORTLEIB: The application was submitted on 2 March 16th, 2004, with that. There is not an actual 3 date on the radius, so I would assume it would be around 4 that time. 5 MS. BINSACK: How many people were on that list, 6 do you know? 7 MR. ORTLEIB: A little under 90. 8 MS. BINSACK: I am just wondering about the age of 9 the list. 10 MR. ORTLEIB: We do have an extra set of mailing 11 labels in the file. 12 MS. BINSACK: Okay. Let's just use that list. 13 MR. ORTLEIB: Great. • 14 MS. BINSACK: Okay. So just the amended 15 application and then we can go forward. very good. 16 Thank you. 17 (Proceedings concluded at 9:46 a.m.) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 • 25 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 24 :46AM 4 GAM 46AM I REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 4 ) ss 5 COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 6 7 I, ELAINE R. UEHARA, CSR #5857, do hereby 8 certify: 9 That said proceeding was taken down by me in to shorthand at the time and place therein stated and 11 thereafter reduced to typewriting under my direction; 12 that the foregoing transcript is a full, true 13 and correct transcript of my shorthand notes. 14 I further certify that I am, neither counsel 15 for, nor related to any party to said action, nor in 16 anywise interested in the outcome thereof. 17 WITNESS my hand this 11th day of march , 18 2005. 19 20 21 ELAINE R. UEHARA, CSR #5857 22 23 24 • 25 AMACK COURT REPORTING CORPORATION 25 a � " Community Development Department February 16, 2005 .St. Cecilia Church Attn: Fr. Timothy MacCarthy 1301 S.E. Sycamore Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 City Of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 714.573.3100 SUBJECT: 1301- S.E. SYCAMORE AVENUEICONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 Dear Fr. MacCarthy: This letter is in response to your letter of January 28, 2005, and the request you made to Chad Ortlieb on February 8, 2005 to set a meeting to discuss your concerns related to Conditional Use Permit 04-011 and Design Review 04-009. If you would like to meet to obtain clarification about the Planning Commissions actions and all the options that are available to you, please contact Eloise Harris at 573-3106 if you wish to arrange a meeting. Please inform Ms. Harris of project consultants or Church representatives that would be in attendance. Should you have any questions, -please contact me at (714) 573-3031 or by electronic mail at EbinsackLa tustinca.oro. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director 5:\Cdd\Chad\OUP\Compiem-ncomplete letter\ CUP04011 ORD4009 1301 SYCAMORE (02-14-05).doc n u "rai—tme nt January 31, 2005 Fr. Timothy MacCarthy St. Cecilia Church 1301 Sycamore Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 E ;ity "Go.-menmai Way i ustin, CA 92780, 714.57 3.3100 SUBJECT: TEMPORARY USE OF A MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDING AT ST. CECILIA CHURCH LOCATED AT 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE Dear Fr. MacCarthy: Thank you for your letter dated January 17, 2005, in which you request - clarification of time extensions that may be available' for use of the moduiar classroom building that is temporarily permitted at St. Cecilia Church until. January 10, 2007, under Conditional Use Permit • CUP 04-011 and Design Review DR 04-009. The original approval of, the modular facility required its removal no later. than December 13, 2000. Please note that Condition 1.9 of Resolution, No.- 3935 approving CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009 requires the modular building to be removed on or before January 10, 2007. There are no provisions which allow the Community Development Department to extend the use past that date. This action was taken by the Planning Commission on January 10, 2005. Congratulations on your retirement and please notifyyour successor of this matter. If you have any questions, please contact Chad Ortlieb at 573-3127. Sincerely, Elizabeth A Binsack Community Development Director cc: Chad Ortlieb SICddLhadlCU?ICpmple= nc�ompLk. i=tt_ACUP04011 DR04009 13C)i SYCAMORE (0; Z%05).d0- DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2005 Inter -Com TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: LI ABETH A. BINSACK, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: ST. CECILIA CHURCH CORRESPONDENCE A letter dated January 28, 2005, was sent to the City Council from Fr. Timothy MacCarthy Pastor of St. Cecilia Church regarding a conditional use permit that was recently processed related to approving permanent use of a modular building as a permanent classroom building and construction of a 5,950 square. foot freestanding one-story building. The information below provides additional background pertaining to this site and letter. Also attached are the minutes from the Planning Commission's hearings. j • On December 13, 1993, a temporary modular classroom building was approved and was to be removed by December 13, 2000. No extension was requested and the building was not removed. • In March 2004 the Church's architect requested construction of a two story building and to make the temporary modular classroom building permanent. On October 25, 2004, staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve both. Two individuals spoke and noted their concerns at the hearing; a majority of the Commissioners were not in favor of making the modular building permanent and requested a light and shade study (applicable minutes attached and highlighted). The item was continued to December 13, 2004. • On December 3, 2004, staff met with the Church's. representative and discussed project revisions to address the concerns raised and a potential 24 -month extension of the modular facility. On December 9, 2004, the staff report and Resolution 3935 were mailed to Fr. MacCarthy and the project consultant. • On December 13, 2004, the applicant and project consultant returned to the Planning Commission with three project alternatives and a request to allow the modular building to be temporarily allowed for an additional two years. The majority of the Commissioners reiterated that they did not want to have modular buildings as permanent buildings. The Commission directed staff to prepare revised findings and conditions because the applicant's desired alternative had changed. Several individuals from the parish spoke in favor of maintaining the temporary classroom permanently at this meeting. — St. Cecilia Church February 3, 2005 Page 2 , . On January 6, 2005, the staff report and proposed Resolution 3935 with conditions were mailed to Fr. MacCarthy and the project consultant. On January 10, 2005, the Planning Commission approved the project for the construction of a 5,950 square foot office/meeting room and the two year temporary use of the modular building. ram I will schedule a meeting with Fr. MacCarthy and his, representative and explain his options. Unfortunately, the appeal period ended on January 174' so his options are somewhat limited. As far as the conditions of approval and the extension of time for the modular facility, the reports, and conditions of approval were provided to Fr. MacCarthy and his architect prior to all three hearings and both were in attendance at all three hearings. The conditions that the Fr. MacCarthy references in his letter are standard to discretionary applications, I will let you know the outcome of the meeting. If you have any questions, please let me know. Attachments: Photos of Modular Classroom Building Minutes of January 10, 2005, Planning Commission meeting Minutes of December13, 2004, Planning Commission meeting Minutes of October 25, 2004, Planning Commission meeting EBSt Cedilla memo to WAH January 28, 2005 Tustin City Council 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 Father Timothy MacCarthy tinaccariliv@slceciliak8.org Dear Mr. Bone, Mr. Davert, Mrs. Worley Hagen, Mr. Kawashima, and Mr. Amante: The purpose of this letter is to ask for your advice on how best to continue on our attempt to build a one-story office and meeting room building on our property at 1301 Sycamore St. In addition we need advice on how to save the Sammon Center from demolition. I had proposed to build an additional building to accommodate larger Pastoral quarters, some office space with the majority of the building being meeting rooms for our many church organizations. With this proposal was a request for a renewal of the conditional use permit for the Sammon Center. At our first presentation before the Tustin Planning Commission I was surprised to learn of the desire by the commission to require me to tear down the Sammon Center. After that hearing I sent Ms. Elizabeth Binsack a letter expressing my concerns with the hearing. (Copy attached) From the comments made at the hearing on January 10, I sent Ms. Elizabeth Binsack a letter on January 17, requesting a written procedure on how my successor, I am retiring June 30, would be able to obtain additional extensions to the conditional use permit for the Sammon Center if he should want and/or need them. (Copy attached) On January 26, 1 received a letter from Chad Ortlieb, Associate Planner, which consisted of a number of pages, all of which related to the "APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009." This packet would require me to agree with the resolution No. 3935 and the conditions in Exhibit A. The packet required my agreement to be notarized. The packet required the Bishop of Orange to sign and that document had to be recorded in the Orange County Recorders Office with a copy to the Director of Community Development. In reading Exhibit A, I was stunned to see GENERAL 1.9 which required that I remove the Sammon Center by January 10, 2007 and after its removal that I landscape the area. In addition, in 1.6, it provides for a civil penalty of $100.00 per day for each violation and for each day the violation exists. There was nothing in the oral comments in the January 10 meeting that addressed the demolition of the Sammon Center. The comments about the Sammon Center were made by Commissioner Pontious and were favorable regarding the Sammon Center and there was no vocal dissention by other Commissioners. Someone in the City of Tustin 1301 Sycamore Avenue - Tustin - California - 92780 714.544.3250 Government, in a positiauthority, was arbitrary and capriciocausing the items t „ to be included in ExhibitlKhich required the demolition of the S on Center , Your Tustin web site says that the Planning Commission ....Prepares and makes recommendations to the City on development; .....makes recommendations to the City Council on zoning; ....makes recommendations to the City Council on subdivisions; ....considers other policies affecting development. Has the Planning Commission made their recommendations to you? Are you in agreement that we must tear down a perfectly good building that is used every day? Just when did Exhibit A get drafted? Was there a public hearing after it was drafted? Do we have to tear down a building that was approved before being built, placed on a permanent foundation, continues to comply with city code, and has not reached its useful life? How will you tell the 4300 families, our parishioners that are Tustin taxpayers that you will require St. Cecilia Church to pay, with parishioner's money, to tear down a perfectly good building that they paid to erect? What Draconian legal precedent allows you to do this? In our first presentation the Commissioners said that the Planning Commission had no control over the city schools and their modular buildings. We have Thorman/Curriejust across the street from us and they have had true modulars for years and we have not been complaining about them. In view of the recent era of openness (open meetings) and transparency (no hidden agenda) in both government and business I believe that the Planning Commission has chosen the Sammon Center so as to set a precedent for future building projects by religious organizations in the City of Tustin. I respectfully request that the City Council remove section "GENERAL 1.9 from Exhibit A, Page 2. As I said in my letter to Ms. Elizabeth Binsack, on January 17, "I agree that we need to maintain the Sammon Center so that it will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of our parishioners and the persons residing in or working in the neighborhood. I agree to maintain the Sammon Center so that it will not be injurious or detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity or to the welfare of the City." I respectfully request that we be allowed to move on with the construction of the one- story combination office and meeting room building while the Sammon Center issue is being acted on. Yours in Christ (,a, , Tim Fr. oth MacCacC arthy, Pastor Attachment 1. Letter to Ms. Elizabeth Binsack dated 11/24/2004 Attachment 2. Letter to Ms. Elizabeth Binsack dated January 17, 2005 1301 Sycamore Avenue — Tustin — California — 92780 714.544.3250 ,". January 31, 2005 Fr. Timothy MacCarthy St. Cecilia Church 1301 Sycamore Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 ;..ancenniel iliay ustin, CA 92780 714.573.3100 SUBJECT: TEMPORARY USE OF A MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDING.. AT ST. CECILIA CHURCH LOCATED AT 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE Dear Fr. MacCarthy: Thank you for your letter dated January 17, 2005, in which you request clarification of time extensions that may be available for use of the modular classroom building that is temporarily permitted at St. Cecilia Church until. January 10, 2007, under Conditional Use Permit CUP 04-011 and Design Review DR 04-009. The original approval of the modular facility required its removal no later than December 13, 2000. Please note that Condition 1.9 of Resolution No. 3935 approving CUP 04-011 and DR 04-009 requires the modular building to be removed on or before January 10, 2007. There are no provisions which allow the Community Development Department to extend the use past that date. This action was taken by the Planning Commission on January 10, 2005. Congratulations on your retirement and please notify your successor of this matter. If you have any questions, please contact Chad Ortlieb at 573-3127. Sincerely, ) ' Elizabeth A Binsack Community Development Director cc: Chad Ortlieb S:\Cdd\Chad\CUP\Complete-incomplete letter\CUP04011 DR04009 1301 SYCAMORE (01-27-05).doc 07 til rW f 1 January L7, 2005 Ms, Elizabeth Binsack Planning Director City of Tustin Planning Department Tustin, CA 92780 Dear Ms. Binsack: Father Timothy MacCarthy timccardiy@stceciliak8.org RECEIVED JAN 2 4 2004 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The purpose of this letter is to request clarification on the process of applying for additional extensions of the conditional use permit for the Sammon Center (Modular' Classroom, 2,490 square foot) mentioned in the minutes of the regular meeting of the . Tustin Planning Commission on December 13, 2004. Commissioner Pontious said ".'.perhaps the Planning Commission should allow the two- year extension for the modular building and additional extensions with inspections, without returning to the Planning Commission for the whole process again." The Planning Commission meeting on January 10, 2005 approved our building project of the one story building and a two year extension of the conditional use permit for the Sammon Center. I need to inform you that I will be retiring on June 30, 2005. The Pastor who comes to replace me will need to know the process required to obtain an additional extension(s) of the conditional use permit for the Sammon Center if he so needs them. I agree that we need to maintain the Sammon Center so that is will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of our parishioners and the persons residing in or working in the neighborhood. I agree to maintain the Sammon Center so that it will not be injurious or detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity or to the welfare of the City. Would you please respond with the required process so I can give it to my replacement on June 30, 2005. Thank you for your assistance and please convey my thafiks to your staff for their help in our project. Yours in Christ it,at Htu, t%' Fr. Timothy MacCarthy, Pastor 1301 Sycamore Avenue — Tustin — California —92780 714.544.3250 vp d t Ms. Elizabeth Binsack PIanning Director City of Tustin Planning Department Tustin, CA 92780 Dear Ms. Binsack: 0 Father Timothy MacCarthy tmaccmthy@stceciliak8.org .. ,, . ,.: .. ,.. .. ,,,, .., . (R'E C E I V E D "'NOV 2 9 2004 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The purpose of this letter is to provide additional information regarding my request to build an additional building on St. Cecilia church property at 1301 Sycamore and to extend our conditionally permitted use status for a current structure called the Sammon Center. The Sammon Center was named after Monsignor Sammon, our first Pastor, who still serves the Diocese of Orange. We have 35 different parish organizations that provide various education programs for our parishioners, from infant to senior, in our current, available, classrooms, which include the Sammon Center. Over six years ago we recognized the need for additional classroom space, in addition to the Sammon Center, as lack of space was denying some organizations from holding sessions. We started a fund drive to provide funds, without borrowing, to build an additional building to provide classroom space, conference rooms for small groups, and improved office space. In June 2003 we reached the point of having the start-up funds to start the planning process for the additional building. Within the Diocese of Orange we received permission to obtain an architect, create plans, develop a construction budget, complete a five-year plan and prepare a presentation. After receiving our Diocesan approval to build we requested a building permit from the City of Tustin. The first presentation to the Planning Commission resulted in several surprises. Our Sammon Center, a permanent structure, meeting all state requirements, was denied conditional permitted use and with it an implied action of demolition. The proposed new building was objected to because of one community complaint and the request for approval was tabled and rescheduled until December. I have been the Pastor at St. Cecilia Church for 14 years. I have married people, seen families created, grow, and become educated in the faith using our little complex of buildings. Our Catholic School is one of the finest schools in the Country. Our School of Religion, which serves our Vietnamese, Spanish, and English speaking communities, on evenings and weekends, instructs hundreds of our public school students in morality and humanity. 1301 Sycamore Avenue — Tustin — California — 92780 714.544.3250 This is not a commerci srness that adds its cost of operation t product. This is a group of people bound�ther by a common goal. I must say th cause us to lose the classroom space in the Sammon Center would move St. Cecilia Church back to the time before the Sammon Center. The parishioners through their nickels, dimes, and dollars built the Sammon Center and to destroy it would send a terrible message to them and mock their financial sacrifice. To cause our church, any church, to tear down a perfectly good building just to prove a point would send the wrong message to the residents of the City of Tustin. We are willing to compromise on the style of the new building from two-story to a one- story building of the same square footage. We request that you extend our conditionally permitted use of the Sarnmon Center. We are planning to participate in the December 13 Planning Commission hearing. Our Architect Aric D. Gless, A.I.A, will resubmit our drawings by November 29, 2004 Yours in Christ -" dl� If � C.J( Fr. Timothy MacCarthy, Pastor 1301 Sycamore Avenue — Tustin — California — 92780 714.544.3250 Community Development Department + November 2, 2004 City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 714.573.3100 St. Cecilia Church Attn: Fr. Timothy MacCarthy 1301 S.E. Sycamore Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 SUBJECT: 1301 S.E. SYCAMORE AVENUE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 Dear Fr. MacCarthy: Thank you for attending the October 25, 2004, Planning Commission meeting where the proposed permanent use of a temporary building and proposed construction of a 5,950 square foot building for St. Cecilia's were evaluated by the Planning Commission. At the meeting, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing to December 13, 2004, meeting to allow St. Cecilia Church to evaluate alternatives for the project. Per Planning Commission Resolution No. 3211, the approval for temporary use of the modular classroom building expired on December 13, 2000. Please be advised that the City has not approved permanent or continued use of the modular classroom building. Staff looks forward to meeting with the St. Cecilia Church development team to ensure that the Planning Commission's comments at the October 25th meeting will be addressed and to identify options and alternatives for the project. We have confirmed a meeting at 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 3, 2004, in the Community Development Conference room in City Hall which is located at 300 Centennial Way. If this time is not possible for you, please contact me at (714) 573-3127 or by electronic mail at Cortliebotustinca.ora. Sincerely, C 0rt110;11-1 Associate Planner cc: Eloise Harris/Permits Plus Update Gless Architects, Inc., Attn: Aric Gless, 4931 Birch Street, Newport Beach, CA 92660 S:\Cdd\Chad\CUP\Complete-Incomplete letter\CUP04011 DR040091301 SYCAMORE Deferred.doc ATTACHMENT D Resolution No. 3211 I. 1 3 4 5 6 71 RESOLUTION NO. 3211 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-031 AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF A PREFABRICATED MODULAR BUILDING FOR CLASSROOM PURPOSES AT THE EXISTING CATHOLIC CHURCH LOCATED AT 1301 S.E. SYCAMORE STREET. The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: 10 A. That a proper application, Conditional Use Permit 11 No. 93-031, has been filed on behalf of St. Cecilia Church requesting authorization to install a 12 prefabricated modular building for classroom 13 purposes at the existing catholic church located at 1301 S.E. Sycamore Street. 14 B. That a public hearing was drily called, noticed and 15 held for said application on December 13, 1993 by the Planning commission. 16 C. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation 17 of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the 18 health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the 19 neighborhood of such proposed use, nor be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in 20 the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin as evidenced _ 21 by the following: 22 1. The proposed prefabricated modular building will not be highly visible to the public 23 right-of-way or adjacent properties given the buffering by the adjacent structures and the 24j setbacks from adjacent properties. 20 2. There is sufficient parking on the site to 26 accommodate the modular building because the existing parking satisfies the parking 27 required for the Church which is significantly greater than that required for school uses. 28 3. The proposal is consistent with the design review criteria established in the Code, is compatible with the surrounding area, and is easily accommodated by the site. 11 12 13 19 15 10 17 18 19 20 21 27 28 Resolution No. 3211 Page 2 4. The project will not require the alteration of surrounding properties or the construction of any off-site improvements that would impact surrounding properties. This project has been determined to be categorically Exempt (Class 1) pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 93-031 authorizing the installation of a prefabricated modular building at the existing Catholic church located at 1301 S.E. Sycamore, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of December, 1993. //<i✓ r KATHY WE114 Chairperson Z� KATHLEEN CLANCY Recording Secretar STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, KATHLEEN CLANCY, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3211 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of December, 1993. KATHLEEN CLANC Recording Secretary EXHIBIT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-031 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 3211 GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the __.. submitted plans for the project date stamped December 13, 1993, on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified or as modified by the Director of the Community Development Department in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director may make minor modifications to the plans during plan check provided such changes are consistent with all applicable code requirements. (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.3 Conditional Use Permit approval shall become null and void unless building permits are issued within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit. (1) 1.4 This Conditional Use Permit allowing the prefabricated modular building shall be valid for a period of time not to exceed seven (7) years from the date of this Resolution. An extension request may be granted by the Planning Commission should the applicant request additional time. Said extension request shall be in the form of an amendment to this Condition of Approval and shall be made to the Community Development Department at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the terms of this Conditional Use Permit. Said public hearing shall be conducted without the need for the applicant's payment of a new application fee. (1) 1.5 The developer shall hold harmless and defend the City of Tustin from all claims and liabilities arising out of the City's approval of the entitlement process for this project. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) SPECIFIC PLAN (2) EIR MITIGATION (6) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (7) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (4) DESIGN REVIEW (8) PC/CC POLICY +** EXCEPTION Exhibit A- Conditions of Approval Resolution 3211 Page 2 (1) 1.6 Approval Of Conditional Use Permit 93-031 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form, as established by the Director of Community Development. (1) 1.7 The church building shall be limited to a total of 659 seats based on the existing 221 provided parking spaces. (1) 1.8 The applicant shall keep said modular unit fully maintained in good repair and in good exterior physical condition. PLAN SUBMITTAL (1) 2.1 At building plan check submittal: (3) (7) A. Provide State (OSA) approved specifications and drawings, and structural calculations for foundation and structural tie -downs (footings). Requirements of the Uniform Building Codes, State Handicap and Energy Requirements shall be complied with as approved by the Building Official. B. Show location of handicap accessible parking, ramp, etc., as classrooms shall be accessible to persons wit:', disabilities. C. Submit complete landscaping and irrigation plans for all landscaping areas affected by the proposed improvements consistent with the City's Landscaping and Irrigation Guidelines. SITE AND BUILDING CONDITIONS (4) 3.1 A trash enclosure with six-foot high .solid masonry walls and solid metal gates shall be provided in a. location that allows access without blocking ingress to or egress from the site, as determined by the Director of Community Development. Furthermore, the trash enclosure shall not be located within ten (20) feet of the public right—of- way. It is recommended that the enclosure be located toward the center or rear of the property along the east property line. The applicant shall provide to the city evidence that the proposed trash enclosure has been reviewed and approved by Great Western Reclamation. (4) 3.2 A photometric study and details of all new exterior lighting fixtures shall be provided by the applicant for review and approval by the Director of Community Exhibit A- Conditions of Approval Resolution 3211 Page 3 Development. All fixtures shall comply with the City's Security Ordinance. No light fixtures shall be permitted which produces light or glare or has a negative impact on adjacent properties. ` FIRE DEPARTMENT (5) 4.1 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, plans shall be submitted to the Fire Chief for approval. The plans shall have exits complying with California Uniform Building Code Sec. 3303 and Sec. 3318. Where exiting is through an adjoining room, a smoke detection as required by sec. 3318(d) shall be installed. (5) 4.2 Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy, fire alarm plans shall be submitted for approval by the Fire Chief and installed. Every building used for an educational purpose shall have a fire alarm system. The alarms for each building shall be interconnected and shall operate all indicating devices using the California Uniform Fire Code Signal. (California Building Code Sec. 515 and Sec. 809). (5) 4.3 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, provide a letter of intended use to the Fire Chief. (5) 4.4 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, provide the locations of all fire hydrants within 150' of the building on the site plan to the Fire Chief. POLICE DEPARTMENT (5) 5.1 The proposed structure shall meet the requirements as set forth in the Tustin Security Code as it relates to locks and hardware. NOISE (1) 6.1 All construction operations including engine warm up shall be subject to the provisionsof the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance and shall take place only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday unless the Building Official determines that said activity will be in substantial conformance with the Noise Ordinance and the public health and safety will not be impaired subject to application being made at the time the permit for the work is awarded or during progress of the work. Exhibit A- Conditions of Approval Resolution 3211 Page 4 PEES (1) 7.1 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall pay the following fees: A. All applicable building plan check .and permit fees to the Community Development Department. B. New development fees to the Community Development Department. C. School District fees to the Tustin Unified School District. D. Major thoroughfare and bridge fees to the Public Works Department. E. Transportation system Improvement Program (TSIP) Fees are required at the time buildingpermits are issued. The applicable fees are $3.31 per square foot of new or added gross square floor area of construction or improvements. Effective January 1, 19940 the applicable fees will be $4.31 plus an inflation adjustment per square foot of new or added gross square floor area. ATTACHMENT E Resolution No. 3935 RESOLUTION NO. 3935 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 TO ALLOW A 2,490 SQUARE FOOT MODULAR BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TWO (2) YEARS AS A CLASSROOM BUILDING AND TO CONSTRUCT A 5,950 SQUARE FOOT, FREE-STANDING, ONE (1) STORY OFFICE AND MEETING ROOM BUILDING FOR THE CHURCH LOCATED AT 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE ALSO KNOWN AS THE NORTHWESTERLY HALF OF LOT FIFTY IN BLOCK ELEVEN OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Conditional Use Permit 04-011 and Design Review 04-009 was filed by St. Cecilia Church requesting approval to temporarily use a 2,490 square foot modular building for two (2) years as a classroom building and to construct a 5,950 square foot, free-standing, one (1) story office and meeting room building for the Church. B. The proposed project is consistent with the policies of the General Plan "Public/Institutional" designation which allows schools and churches. In addition, the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub -element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub -element. The project complies with the Public and Institutional (P&I) zoning district regulations because schools and churches are conditionally permitted, as is requested. The development standards would be established in the conditional use permit. C. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on October 25, 2004, by the Planning Commission and the meeting was continued to December 13, 2004, and subsequently to January 10, 2005; D. That operation of additional Church offices and meeting rooms and the temporary operation of a modular classroom for two (2) years, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the following findings: a) The proposal is consistent with the Public and Institutional Zoning District standards in that religious assembly, schools, and school administrative offices require a conditional use permit and the Resolution 3935 Page 2 development standards are determined through the conditional use permit and design review process by the plans approved by the Planning Commission. The uses are appropriate under General Plan Land Use Element Public/institutional designation in that the school and Church function as quasi -public uses. b) The project maintains all legal non -conforming rights (establishment of the Church and school without a CUP prior to annexation) and is consistent with prior conditions of approval for the parish hall under CUP 75-18. While additional square footage is being proposed, no new uses are being added to the site in that a school currently exists on the property and the use of the modular classroom will be temporary for two (2) years for the school. Church offices and meeting rooms currently exist in the parish hall, and the proposed Church offices and meeting rooms will continue to support the Church. c) As conditioned and described in section (h), the permanent building would be compatible with existing on-site and adjacent uses and meet design review criteria, the modular classroom building would be temporary for two (2) years, and all uses under the subject entitlements would occur inside their respective buildings. d) Sufficient parking would be available for the 5,950 square foot Church office and meeting room use since, pursuant to Condition 5.6, Church assembly in the worship or parish hall would not be operating at the same time as the school, Church offices, and Church meeting room. e) The two (2) year temporary use of the modular classroom would not increase parking/traffic demand because required parking spaces are currently provided on-site, and no increase in students or teachers is requested or approved under CUP 04-011 and DR 04- 009, f) As determined by the Public Works Engineering Division, the net increase in traffic at the project site during the weekday a.m. or p.m. peak hours and/or Sunday peak hour is not anticipated to generate significant traffic impacts, and there is sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed project. g) Increased pedestrian activity to the site as a result of the project will be accommodated in that the applicant and/or property owner would be required to provide sidewalk and drive aprons along Sycamore Avenue in front of the project property that are Resolution 3935 Page 3 constructed to meet current Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements., h) The location, size, architectural features, and general appearance of the proposal will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole, as follows: 1. Height, bulk, and area of buildings: The eighteen (18) foot height of the new building is twelve (12) feet less than the thirty (30) foot maximum height allowed. for a single family dwelling on an adjacent property and the modular classroom would remain at under twelve (12) feet. The Church and parish hall are approximately ten (10) feet taller than the new building but the new building will provide an appropriate transition by reducing height between the existing on-site buildings and the adjacent single family dwellings to the north. The shade and shadow that would be projected onto adjacent properties would occur primarily during the morning hours of winter months into the rear yards of two adjacent single family dwellings, one of which is currently owned by the Church (rectory). The size of the buildings is less than existing on-site buildings and the overall floor area ratio is twenty-three (23) percent which is within the range allowed by the General Plan. 2. Setbacks and site planning: Setbacks are adequate for the project in that the new office/meeting room building is setback in excess of fifty (50) feet from Sycamore Avenue, is setback ten (10) feet six (6) inches from the side property line, maintains approximately the same setback as the single story portion of the existing parish hall, and no windows are located above eight (8) feet on the north elevation which faces adjacent residences. The single story height of the building setback to the side property line results in minimal shade and shadow effects during the morning hours in winter months on primarily one residence adjacent the Church rectory. The modular classroom is buffered from view from Sycamore Avenue since it is behind the existing Church and the south elevation is screened by a dense cluster of regularly spaced trees. / 3. Exterior materials and colors: The project colors and materials would be consistent with existing on-site development as described in Item No. 7. 4. Type and pitch of roofs: Both buildings exhibit flat roofs, which will architecturally integrate with on-site buildings. 5. Size and spacing of windows, doors, and other openings: The windows and doors of the proposed and existing Resolution 3935 Page 4 buildings are appropriate for the style of architecture proposed and would be constructed in compliance with City building code standards. 6. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood: The structures are located on the property to address the need for privacy and minimal shade impacts on adjacent properties as described in Item Nos. 1 and 2. 7. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares: Design of the new building includes orange brick, cream -colored rough plaster, bronze tint windows, and brown anodized window frames, all of which are consistent with the building materials existing on the Church and parish hall. The modular classroom building exhibits cream -color synthetic siding with a faux rough trowel finish. The building color matches the stucco on the proposed building, accents on the parish hall, and the existing school classroom buildings. The modular building's bronze tint windows, brown framing, and brown doors are also consistent with trim colors on the existing buildings. 8. Development guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council: Pursuant to the zoning district standards, the project approval would establish the setbacks and height limitations for the buildings on the subject property. G. The project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3) of the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 04-011 and Design Review 04-009, to temporarily use a 2,490 square foot modular building for two (2) years as a permanent classroom building and to construct a 5,950 square foot, free-standing, one-story office and meeting room building at 1301 Sycamore Avenue also known as the northwesterly half of Lot Fifty in Block Eleven of Irvine's Subdivision, in the City of Tustin, County of Orange, State of California, subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Plannipg Commission, held on the 10th day of January, 2005. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Resolution 3935 Page 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3935 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 10th day of January, 2005. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A - -- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 JANUARY 10, 2005 GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed use shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped January 10, 2005, on file with the Community Development Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are to be consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code and other applicable codes. (1) 1.2 The conditions contained within Resolution No. 3935 must be complied with prior to building permit issuance unless otherwise stated in a specific condition. (1) 1.3 The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may — be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. (1) 1.4 Approval of Design Review 04-009 and Conditional Use Permit 04-011 is contingent upon the applicant returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk -Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. (1) 1.5 The applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, _ elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (2) CEOA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODES (7) PC/CC POLICY (4) DESIGN REVIEW "' EXCEPTION Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04-009 and CUP 04.011 Page 2 (1) 1.6 Any violation of any of the conditions imposed is subject to the payment of a civil penalty of $100.00 for each violation, or such other amounts as the City Council may establish by ordinance or resolution, and for each day the violation exists, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council ordinance. (1) 1.7 The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with any necessary code enforcement action, including attorney fees, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council by ordinance. (***) 1.8 The property owner shall submit written authorization to allow the Building Official and representatives of the Orange County Fire Authority to perform annual inspections of the modular building. The applicant shall pay costs associated with said inspections. (***) 1.9 The 2,490 square foot modular building is temporarily allowed for a period of no more than two (2) years until January 10, 2007, and shall be removed by the expiration date. Upon removal, the area shall be landscaped, unless an alternative treatment is approved in writing by the Director of Community Development. PLAN SUBMITTAL (5) 2.1 At the time of building permit application, the plans shall comply with the 2001 California Building Code (CBC), 2001 California Mechanical Code (CMC), 2001 California Plumbing Codes (CPC), 2001 California Electrical Code (CEC), California Title 24 Accessibility Regulations, Title 24 Energy Regulations, City Ordinances, and State and Federal laws and regulations. Building plan check submittal shall include the following: • Seven (7) sets of construction plans, including drawings for mechanical, plumbing and electrical. • Structural calculations, two (2) copies. • Title 24 energy calculations, two (2) copies. • Elevations that include all proposed dimensions, materials, colors, finishes, and partial outlines of adjacent buildings on-site and off- site where applicable. • The location of any utility vents or other rooftop equipment shall be provided on the roof plan and must be shown to be located a Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04-009 and CUP 04-011 Page 3 minimum of six inches below the roof parapet wall, or as otherwise approved by the Director of Community Development. Details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing the location and anticipated pattern of light distribution of all proposed fixtures. All new light fixtures shall be consistent with the architecture of the building. All exterior lighting shall be designed and arranged as not to direct light or glare onto adjacent properties, including the adjacent streets. Wall -mounted fixtures shall be directed at a 90 -degree angle directly toward the ground. All lighting shall be developed to provide a minimum of one (1) foot-candle of light coverage, in accordance with the City's Security Ordinance. No lights may be installed on the exterior of the north elevation of the 5,950 square foot building. A note shall be provided on the plans that "All parking areas shall be illuminated with a minimum of one (1) foot-candle of light, and lighting shall not produce light, glare, or have a negative impact on adjacent properties." Note on plans that no field changes shall be made without prior approval from the Building Official and architect or engineer of record. Plans shall show that all ground- and wall -mounted mechanical and electrical fixtures and equipment will be adequately and decoratively screened. The screen is considered as an element of the overall design of the project and must be shown on the plans to blend with the architectural design of the building. All telephone and electrical boxes need to be indicated on the building plans and must be completely screened. Electrical transformers need to be shown on the plans as located toward the interior of the project, maintaining sufficient distance to minimize visual impacts from the public right-of-way. (5) 2.2 Any alteration, modification, or addition to a manufactured structure requires a permit from the Division the State Architect (DSA). At the time plans are submitted for plan check for the 5,950 square foot building, the modular building must be shown to be accessible to persons with disabilities as per State of California Accessibility Standards (Title 24) and shown to have sufficient footings and tie -downs. This approval is subject to and conditioned upon the applicant obtaining written approval from the DSA within thirty (30) days of the date of approval for the use of the existing modular unit as a permanent classroom. Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04-009 and CUP 04-011 Page 4 (5) 2.3 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that restrooms are accessible to persons with disabilities as per State of California Accessibility Standards (Title 24). Plumbing fixture units are required to comply with the 2001 California Plumbing Code Chapter four (4) Table 4-1 as per type of group occupancy, or as approved by the Building Official. (5) 2.4 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that openings in exterior walls are not less than five (5) feet from property lines, 2001 California Building Code (Table 5A). (5) 2.5 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that exterior walls are one hour fire resistive of construction where exterior walls are less than twenty (20) feet from property lines, 2001 California Building Code (Table 5-A). All openings need to be protected when walls are less than ten (10) feet from property lines. (5) 2.6 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that each corridor has walls and ceilings of not less than one-hour construction. (5) 2.7 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that corridors serving an occupant load of 30 or more are one hour fire resistive and all openings into the corridor are protected as specified in section 1004.3.4 and 1004.3.4.3 of the 2001 CBC. (5) 2.8 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate an area analysis for all buildings and show compliance with allowable floor areas based on 2001 California Building Code Chapter 5, Table 5-B. (5) 2.9 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that a level floor or landing is provided at all doors. This area shall have a minimum length of 60 inches in the direction of the door swing and 48 inches in the opposite direction of the door swing. (5) 2.10 Prior to building permit issuance, clearance from the Orange County Fire Authority is required. (5) 2.11 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that vehicle parking, primary entrance to the building, the primary paths of travel, sanitary facilities, drinking fountain, and public telephones shall be accessible to persons with disabilities. (5) 2.12 The plans submitted at plan check shall indicate that parking for disabled persons is provided with an additional five (5) foot loading area with striping and ramp and that disabled persons are able to park and access the building without passing behind another car. At least one (1) accessible Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04-009 and CUP 04-011 Page 5 space shall be van accessible served by a minimum 96 -inch wide loading area. (5) 2.13 Prior to grading permit issuance, the applicant shall provide four (4) sets of final grading plans consistent with the site and landscaping plans as prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plans shall include the following: Technical details and plans for all utility installations including telephone, gas, water, and electricity. Three (3) copies of precise soil report provided by a civil engineer and less than one (1) year old. Expanded information regarding the levels of hydrocarbons and ground water contamination found on- site shall be provided in the soil report. All pavement "R" values shall be in accordance with applicable City of Tustin standards. All site drainage shall be handled on-site and shall not be permitted to drain onto adjacent properties. Drainage, vegetation, circulation, street sections, curbs, gutters, — sidewalks, and storm drains shall comply with the on-site Private Improvement Standards. Two (2) copies of Hydrology Report. (5) 2.14 The engineer of record shall submit a final compaction report to the Building Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (5) 2.15 The engineer of record shall submit a pad certification to the Building Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (5) 2.16 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide information to ensure compliance with requirements of the Orange County Fire Authority, including fire flow and installation of fire hydrants subject to approval of the City of Tustin Public Works and/or Irvine Ranch Water District. (5) 2.17 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit for approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best — Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant run-off. This WQMP shall identify the: structural and non-structural measures specified detailing implementation of BMPs Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04-009 and CUP 04-011 Page 6 whenever they are applicable to the project; the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and, reference to the location(s) of structural BMPs. (5) 2.18 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the property owner shall record CC&Rs or another legal instrument approved by the City Attorney that shall require the property owner, successors, tenants (if applicable), and assigns to operate and maintain in perpetuity the post -construction BMPs described in the WQMP for the project. (5) 2.19 The Community Development and Public Works Department shall determine whether any change in use requires an amendment to an approved Water Quality Management Plan. (5) 2.20 Prior to grading or building permit issuance a note shall be provided on final grading and building plans stating that that a six (6) foot high chain link fence shall be installed around the site prior to building construction stages. A nylon fabric or mesh shall be attached to the temporary construction fencing. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for construction vehicles. (5) 2.21 Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, pursuant to the City of Tustin's Security Ordinance and the Uniform Fire Code, street numbers shall be displayed in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The numerals shall be no less than six (6) inches in height and shall be of contrasting color to the background to which they are attached and illuminated during hours of darkness. (5) 2.22 No outdoor storage shall be permitted except as approved by the Tustin Community Development Director. (5) 2.23 The applicant shall comply with all City policies regarding short-term construction emissions, including periodic watering of the site and prohibiting grading during second stage smog alerts and when wind velocities exceed 15 miles per hour. ARCHITECTURE (4) 3.1 All exterior treatments for the 5,950 square foot building shall be consistent with the approved color/material samples and noted on all construction plans and elevations, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department at final inspection. The colors and materials for the exterior of the building shall be consistent the materials on existing buildings and shall include the following: Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04.009 and CUP 04-011 Page 7 Location Material A high quality of features, materials, and colors shall be used throughout the site and maintained on an ongoing basis. Any changes to colors or materials during construction or operation shall be approved in writing by the Community Development Department prior to installation. Sandblasted windows on the elevation facing single family residences shall continue to be provided and shall not be replaced with transparent windows without approval of the Planning Commission. (4) 3.2 All exposed metal flashing or trim shall be painted to match the building. (4) 3.3 No exterior down spouts or roof scuppers shall be permitted. All roof drains shall utilize interior piping but may have exterior outlets at base of buildings, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Community Development. LANDSCAPING (1) 4.1 Complete landscape and irrigation plans that comply with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines shall be submitted at plan check. The irrigation plan shall show the location and control of backflow prevention devices at the meter, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing, and coverage details for all equipment. (1) 4.2 All plant materials shall be installed in a healthy and vigorous condition, typical to the species, and shall be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, trimming, mowing, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering, and replacement of dead or diseased dying plants. All trees and landscaping within the site and the perimeter of the site shall be maintained in a healthy and vigorous condition. Unhealthy or dead trees shall be replaced within seventy-two (72) hours upon notification by the City. USE (1) 5.1 Use of the modular building shall be limited to classroom instruction. (1) 5.2 Previously approved and active entitlements, including Planning — Commission Resolution No. 1462, shall remain in effect and apply in conjunction with Resolution No. 3935. Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04-009 and CUP 04-011 Page 8 (1) 5.3 The property owner shall be responsible for the daily maintenance and upkeep of the facility, including but not limited to, trash removal, painting, graffiti removal, and maintenance of improvements to ensure that the facilities are maintained in a neat and attractive manner. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours of a complaint being transmitted by the City to the property owner/tenant. Failure to maintain said structure and adjacent amenities will be grounds for City enforcement of its Property Maintenance Ordinance, including nuisance abatement. (1) 5.4 If in the future the City determines that parking, traffic, or noise problems exist on the site or in the vicinity, the Community Development Director may require that the property owner prepare an analysis and bear all associated costs. If the study indicates that there is a parking, traffic, or noise impact, the applicant/property owner shall provide interim and permanent mitigation measures to alleviate the problem. (1) 5.5 All activities approved under CUP 04-011 shall be conducted entirely within the subject buildings. (') 5.6 The uses indicated in Groups One (1) and Two (2) of the parking summary may not occur simultaneously without prior approval in writing from the Community Development Director. At plan check and prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall add the parking summary to the site plan. Parkin Ratio I R uired Parkin GROUP I (Church) Existing Church 1/3 seats for 659 seats 219.67 Existing Parish Hall Pursuant to previous entitlements, the parish hall is and has always been With Offices considered an accessory use to the Church. No additional parking spaces are required, but the parish hall may not operate at the same time as the uses in Group 2. Existing Church Offices Pursuant to previous entitlements, the existing Church offices are and have always been considered an accessory use to the Church. No additional parking spaces are required, but the existing Church offices may not operate at the same time as the uses in Group 2. Total Required 219.67 Total Provided 221 Surplus 1 1.33 Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 DR 04-009 and CUP 04-011 Page 9 Parking Ratio Required Parking Room) 9.69 Proposed Office GROUP 2 (School and Church Office/Meeting 1/250 square feet based on 2,423 square feet. Proposed Meeting Room 1/3 persons based on occupancy maximum of 107 35.67 Proposed Office Support 1/250 square feet based on 1,924 square feet 7.70 Subtotal 53.06 Existing School 1/1 instructor and 1/8 students based on 18 instructors and 330 students 59.25 Total Required 112.31 Total Provided 221 Surplus 108.69 (5) 5.7 If Group 1 and 2 uses are proposed to occur at the same time, a parking study and, if determined necessary by the City, a traffic study, shall be submitted to demonstrate that adequate on-site parking and off-site traffic capacity is available to accommodate the proposed uses. The study shall be prepared by a professional experienced in parking and/or traffic studies and submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department and Public Works Department. (5) 5.8 The Church building shall be limited to a total of 659 seats and must maintain 221 on-site parking spaces. (5) 5.9 The property owner shall maintain the modular classroom building in good exterior physical condition as determined by City code enforcement staff. (5) 5.10 The Church school is limited to 330 students and 18 instructors. ENGINEERING (5) 6.1 The applicant shall replace the existing curb cut at the north of the property with sidewalk and curb to City standards. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall remove and replace any missing or damaged public improvements (i.e. driveways, curb and gutter, sidewalk, etc.) along Sycamore Street adjacent to the project. (5) 6.2 Existing sewer and domestic water shall be utilized whenever possible. (5) 6.3 Any damage done to existing street improvements and utilities shall be repaired prior to final inspection. (5) 6.4 Prior to any work in the public right-of-way, an Encroachment Permit shall be obtained and applicable fees paid to the Public Works Department. Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 OR 04-009 and CUP 04.011 Page 10 (5) 6.5 On the plans provided at plan check, current Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements shall be shown at the drive aprons and pedestrian walkways. (5) 6.6 This development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City of Tustin Water Quality Ordinance and all Federal, State, and Regional Water Quality Control Board rules and regulations. (5) 6.7 Project Recycling Requirement — The City of Tustin is required to comply with the recycling requirements contained in the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. To facilitate City compliance with this law, the Project Applicant is required to comply with Section 4327 of the Tustin City Code, which details the requirements for developing and implementing a Waste Management Plan. The plan specifically requires the following: The Applicant, Property Owner and/or tenant(s) need to participate in the City's recycling program. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a solid waste recycling plan identifying planned source separation and recycling programs to the City of Tustin Public Works Department. (5) 6.8 At the time plans are submitted for plan check, the applicant shall submit a water permit application to the East Orange County Water District and is responsible for all applicable water connection fees. Release/approval from the East Orange County Water District shall be obtained prior to receiving water service. (5) 6.9 The developer shall be responsible for all costs related to the installation of new potable and fire -related water services. FIRE (5) 7.1 Pursuant to the "Orange County Fire Authority Plan Submittal Criteria Form," prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit architectural plans for review and approval by the Fire Chief. During the plan review process, the Fire Chief will determine if any addition to and/or modification of an automatic fire sprinkler system is required. The Community Development Director may approve modifications to the approved site plan, building elevations, and floor plans to ensure compliance with Orange County Fire Authority regulations. (5) 7.2 Plans submitted through the City for Orange County Fire Authority review Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 OR 04-009 and CUP 04-011 Page 11 must be delineated with lines demonstrating compliance with 150 foot fire hose pull requirements. FEES (1) 8.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all applicable fees, including but not limited to, the following. Payment shall be required based upon those rates in effect at the time of payment and are subject to change. a) Building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based on the most current schedule. b) Orange County Fire Authority plan check and inspection fees to the Community Development Department based upon the most current schedule. c) New development fees in the amount of $.10 per square foot of floor area to the Community Development Department. d) School facilities fees of $.36 per square foot of new or added gross --. square floor area of construction or improvements to the Tustin Unified School District. e) Payment of the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fees to the Tustin Public Works Department is required at the time a building permit is issued. The current fee is $3.44 per square foot of the new building. If the applicant provides proof of exemption from property tax, the project is exempt from payment of the major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fees. f) Payment of the Orange County Sanitation District No. 7 Sewer Connection Fees shall be required at the time a building permit is issued. The current fee is $1,600.00 per 1,000 square foot of the building area. A credit amount up to the prior category of use may be obtained when applicant provides proof of previous sewer connection receipts. g) Water connection fees to the City of Tustin Water Division at the time a building permit is issued. h) Transportation System Improvement Program (TSIP) Benefit Area — "B" fees in the amount of $3.31 per square feet of new or added gross square floor area of construction or improvements to the Community Development Department. Exhibit A - Resolution 3935 OR 04.009 and CUP 04-011 Page 12 Prior to submittal of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the applicant shall submit a deposit of $2700.00 for the estimated cost of review of the WQMP to the Building Division. The actual costs shall be deducted from the deposit, and the applicant shall be responsible for any additional review cost that exceeded the deposit prior to issuance of grading permits. Any unused portion of the deposit shall be refunded to the applicant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a surety/cash bond will be required to assure work is completed in accordance with approved plans prior to permit issuance. The engineer's estimated cost of the grading, drainage, and erosion control shall be submitted to the Building Official for determination of the bond amount (1) 8.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of forty- three dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above -noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. ATTACHMENT F Resolution No. 3971 RESOLUTION NO. 3971 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING THE MODIFICATION OF CONDITION 1.9 OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 TO ALLOW A 2,490 SQUARE FOOT MODULAR BUILDING TO BE USED UNTIL MARCH 1, 2012, AS A CLASSROOM BUILDING FOR THE CHURCH LOCATED AT 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE ALSO KNOWN AS THE NORTHWESTERLY HALF OF LOT FIFTY IN BLOCK ELEVEN OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. A proper application to modify Condition 1.9 of Conditional Use Permit 04- 011 and Design Review 04-009 was filed by Rev. Timothy MacCarthy for on-site use of a temporarily permitted modular building until March 1, 2012, at 1301 Sycamore Avenue. B. That, with the exception of Condition 1.9, all other conditions of approval under Planning Commission Resolution No. 3935 for Conditional Use Permit 04-011 and Design Review 04-009 will remain in full force and effect for the life of the buildings and uses on the subject property. C. That the modular classroom building would be temporary until March 1, 2012, and all uses under their subject entitlements would occur inside their respective buildings. D. The temporary modular building and the classroom use have been utilized in the same location over the past 11 years without any reported problem or concern. As conditioned, continued use of the temporary modular building will not have a negative effect on the surrounding property owners or impact the availability of off-street parking. E. The project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3) of the California Environmental Quality Act. F. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on May 23, 2005, by the Planning Commission. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves a modification of Condition 1.9 of Conditional Use Permit 04-011 and Design Review 04-009, to temporarily use a 2,490 square foot modular building as a classroom building until March 1, 2012, at 1301 Sycamore Avenue also known as the northwesterly half of Lot Fifty in Block Eleven of Irvine's Subdivision, in the City of Tustin, County of Orange, State of California, subject to the following conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. Resolution 3971 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of May, 2005. r, G ELIZABETH A. BI ACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3971 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 23rd day of May, 2005. ELIZABETH A. BI ACK Planning Commission Secretary - EXHIBIT A MODIFIED CONDITION 1.9 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3935 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-009 MAY 23, 2005 1.9 The 2,490 square foot modular building is temporarily allowed for a period not to extend past March 1, 2012, and shall be removed from the property by the expiration date. Upon removal, the area shall be landscaped, unless an alternative treatment is approved in writing by the Director of Community Development. Any future requests to extend the duration of use for the modular building shall require Planning Commission review. ATTACHMENT G Resolution No. 4172 RESOLUTION NO. 4172 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2011-03 TO EXTEND THE USE OF A 2,490 SQUARE FOOT MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDING FOR FOUR (4) YEARS AT THE CHURCH LOCATED AT 1301 SYCAMORE AVENUE The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Conditional Use Permit 2011-03 was filed by St. Cecilia Church requesting to extend the use a 2,490 square foot modular classroom building for an additional (4) years or until April 26, 2015 at St. Cecilia Church located at 1301 Sycamore Avenue. B. The proposed project is consistent with the policies of the General Plan 'Public/Institutional' designation which allows schools and churches. In addition, the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub -element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub -element. C. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on April 26, 2011, by the Planning Commission. D. That the modular classroom building would be temporary and the applicant would be required to post a bond to ensure removal by April 26, 2015. E. The modular classroom building originally intended to be used temporarily has remained in its location for the past seventeen (17) years and use as a permanent building resulting in unintended impacts to overall parking/traffic demand. No specific parking/traffic analysis was conducted and impacts have not been mitigated due to the nature of its original intent to use the structure for temporary measure. F. The easterly driveway along Sycamore Avenue which is used to access the facility is in a state of disrepair and will need to be removed and replaced by the applicant prior to August 1, 2011. This improvement was required in 2004 and has not been installed. H. This project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 of the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 2011-03 to allow a four (4) year extension for the use of an existing modular classroom building located at 1301 Sycamore Avenue, subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. Resolution No. 4172 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 26th day of April, 2011. JEFF R. THOMPSON Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF TUSTIN I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4172 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 26h day of April, 2011. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 4172 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2011-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL (***) 1.1 The 2,490 square foot modular building is temporarily allowed for a period not to extend past April 26, 2015, and shall be removed from the property by the expiration date. Upon removal, the area shall be landscaped, unless an alternative treatment is approved in writing by the Director of Community Development. Any future requests to extend the duration of use for the modular building shall require Planning Commission review. (1) 1.2 All conditions in this Exhibit shall be complied with including the following deadlines subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department: • Condition 1.11: By April 28, 2011 (within 48 hours of approval of the project), a cashier check be submitted to the Community Development Department. • Condition 1.10: By May 26, 2011 (within 30 days of project approval), a bond shall be submitted to ensure the removal of the temporary modular building at the expiration date. • Condition 1.8: By August 1, 2011, removal and replacement of existing easterly driveway along Sycamore must be completed. Failure to comply with these deadlines will automatically render the approval of CUP 2011-03 to be null and void. (1) 1.3 Approval of Conditional Use Permit 2011-03 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk - Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval' form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (2) CEQA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (7) PC/CC POLICY (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTION Exhibit A - Resolution No. 4172 CUP 2011-03 Page 2 (1) 1.4 As a condition of approval of Conditional Use Permit 2011-03, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. (1) 1.5 Any violation of any of the conditions imposed is subject to the issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Section 1162(a) of the Tustin City Code. Approval of CUP 2011-03 shall serve as a pre -citation notice pursuant to section 1162e of the Tustin City Code. (***) 1.6 The property owner shall submit written authorization to allow the Building Official and representatives of the Orange County Fire Authority to perform annual inspections if necessary of the modular building. The applicant shall pay costs associated with said inspections. (1) 1.7 The applicant shall provide written approval from the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) to extend/make permanent use of the modular classroom. The applicant shall pay any applicable sewer fees. (1) 1.8 Current Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements shall be met at all driveways and sidewalks adjacent to the site. City of Tustin standards shall apply. The applicant shall remove and replace existing easterly driveway along Sycamore Avenue which is in a state of disrepair prior to August 1, 2011. (1) 1.9 Prior to any work in the public right-of-way, an Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from and applicable fees paid to the Public Works Department. (***) 1.10 Within thirty (30) days of project approval, the applicant shall post a bond with the Community Development Department in an amount to be determined by the Community Development Director to ensure removal of the modular classroom building prior to its expiration (April 26, 2015). (2) 1.11 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of fifty dollars ($50.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental Exhibit A - Resolution No. 4172 CUP 2011-03 Page 3 documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above -noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened.