HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 10-11-11SPECIAL MEETING
TOUR OF THE LEGACY
NEIGHBORHOODS A, B, C, F, AND G
LEFT CITY HALL AT 5:Q0 P.M.
TOUR DESTINATIONS:*
Orange County Rescue MissionNillage of Hope,1 Hope Drive, 5:20 p.m.
Advanced Technology and Education Park, 15445 Lansdowne Road, 5:30 p.m.
Orange County Social Services Tustin Family Campus, 15405 Lansdowne Road, 5:35 p.m.
Heritage Schoo1,15400 Lansdowne Road, 5:40 p.m.
Orange County Sheriff s Regional Training Academy, 15991 Armstrong Avenue, 5:45 p.m.
Columbus Square Clubhouse, 15214 Columbus Square Street, 5:50 p.m.
Tustin Rail Station, 2975 Edinger Avenue, 6:00 p.m.
Columbus Groves Clubhouse, 16601 Sonora Street, 6:20 p.m.
The District at Tustin Legacy, 2437 Park Avenue, 6:30 p.m.
re times are
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 11, 2011
7:00 p.m. CRLL TO ORDER
given INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Chair Thompson
ROLL CALL: Chair Thompson
Chair Pro Tem Puckett
Commissioners Eckman, Kozak, Moore
Staff Present Elizabeth A. Binsack, Director of Community Development
Lois Bobak, Assistant City Attorney
Dana L. Ogdon, Assistant Director of Community Development
Justina Willkom, Principal Planner
Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner
Ryan Swiontek, Associate Planner
Edmelynne V. Huffer, Associate Planner
Adrianne DiLeva, Recording Secretary
None PUBLIC CONCERNS:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Approved 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -SEPTEMBER 27, 2011, PLANNING
COMMISSION.
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 1
Approved 2. APPROVAL OF CODE AMENDMENT 2011-06, DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. 1407 -BODY ART ORDINANCE.
On September 13, 2011, a public hearing was duly noticed and
called by the Planning Commission on Code Amendment 2011-
06. The public hearing was continued to September 27, 2011, at
which time the Commission adopted Resolution No. 4181
recommending that the Tustin City Council approve Code
Amendment 2011-06, subject to confirmation by the Planning
Commission as part of the Consent Calendar on October 11,
2011.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission confirm that the revisions to Draft
Ordinance No. 1407 correctly reflect the direction provided by
the Commission on September 27, 2011.
Motion: It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Eckman, to move the Consent
Calendar. Motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Adopted 3. DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 1397 CLARIFYING THE MEANING OF
Resolution No. LEGAL NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES IN THE
4183 as amended CITY OF TUSTIN.
On September 27, 2011, the Planning Commission considered
the proposed Ordinance 1397 and continued the public hearing to
October 11, 2011, to allow staff to address concerns brought up
by the Planning Commission and the general public. The
concerns are as follows:
1 } The issue of value (i.e. fair market, appraised, assessed,
replacement, reasonable, etc.} far the purpose of repair,
maintenance, andlor replacement;
2) Impact to existing historic resources;
3} The time period in which the owner would
Statement of Evidence;
4) Incorporation of suggested evidence
Investigative Procedures dated August 30,
proposed Ordinance;
5} Zoning Code versus Building Cade;
6) General Plan Consistency.
need to provide
listed in the
2011, onto the
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The Planning Commission should consider the Initial Study and
the Negative Declaration provided as Exhibit 1 to Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4183 and recommend it to the Tustin
City Council as adequate for Code Amendment 11-002
(Ordinance No. 1397).
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Tustin Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4183
recommending:
1) That the Tustin City Council find that the Negative Declaration
prepared for Code Amendment (CA) 11-002 (Draft Ordinance
No. 1397 - as amended) is adequate; and,
2) That the Tustin City Council adopt Draft Ordinance No. 1397 - as
amended, to provide clarity, consistency, and reduce ambiguity
related to nonconforming uses and structures in the City of
Tustin.
director Presented the staff report for Code Amendment 2011-02 including a
discussion of issues related to value, impact to historic resources,
investigative procedures, building versus zoning code clarification, and
General Plan consistency. Two case studies were presented to clarify
each of these issues and the prior misrepresentations made therein.
Staff addressed Planning Commission questions and concerns.
Commission questions/concerns generally included further clarification of
the case studies used within staffs presentation, assessed valuation effect
on nonconforming structures, time period for statement of evidence, "hall
pass" for historic structures, clarifying structures in commercial versus
residential zones, the use of subdivision maps and zoning maps
recognizing the use of a property, and clarification of the term "standards."
The Public Hearing opened at 7:54 p.m.
The following members of the public stepped forward:
Deborah Rosenthal
Steven Jones
Markus Brown
Bret Fairbanks
Nathan Menard
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 3
Public comments and concerns generally included clarity in using the
zoning code alone, use of assessed valuation with regard to
nonconforming structures, inconsistency with the Historic Building Code,
lack of clarity regarding burden of proof, and misrepresentation of property
in the zoning code.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:22 p.m.
Bobak Provided clarification based on prior public comments and concerns.
Stated that Tustin City Code Section 9297 which defines a legal
nonconforming use refers to the zoning regulations in effect at the time the
structure was built. Stated that subdivision maps created before 1947
serve as one zoning-type form of regulation. Further elaborated that the
California Historical Building Code is an exemption to the regulations set
forth in the California Building Code. It provides special building code
regulations for historic buildings, but it is not an exemption from zoning
regulations.
Planning Commission discussion generally included approving draft
Ordinance No. 1397 as written, pending addition of the word "zoning"
inserted at various points throughout the draft Ordinance for clarification
and to remove the word "regulations," and modification of dates specified.
Motion: It was moved by Moore, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No.
4183 as amended. Motion carried 5-0.
Adapted 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2011-17, LIVE ENTERTAINMENT.
Resolution No.
4186 as amended A request by OCSA, Inc. (Super Antojitos restaurant) to operate
live entertainment in conjunction with an existing restaurant
located at 341 E. 1St Street. Sections 3232 and 9270b(3)(e) of the
Tustin City Code requires approval of a conditional use permit for
the presentation of live entertainment.
APPLICANT: OCSA, Inc., (Super Antojitos)
PROPERTY OWNER: Dinosha, LLC
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: This project is Categorically Exempt
pursuant to Section 15341 (Class 1) of
the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 4
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4186,
approving Conditional Use Permit 2011-17 authorizing the
operation of live entertainment in conjunction with an existing
restaurant located at 341 E. 15t Street.
Swiontek Presented the staff report for CUP 2011-17.
Staff addressed Planning Commission questions and concerns.
Commission questions/concerns generally included specifications of the
noise ordinance, and hours of regulation of live entertainment.
The Public Hearing opened at 8:47 p.m.
The applicant, Jose Lopez, stepped forward. Mr. Lopez
requested that the hours of operation of live entertainment be
extended to 1:00 a.m. He further clarified that the preferred hours of
operation for live entertainment are from 9:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m.
Bruce Fangmeier stepped forward representing the residents of
Tustin Plaza Apartments. Mr. Fangmeier stated that he has
concerns regarding the live entertainment being extended to 1:00
a.m., and would prefer to regulate the noise to a reasonable level. If
noise control measures are implemented, he is in support of the
proposed Conditional Use Permit.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:52 p.m.
Planning Commission deliberation generally included supporting the
Conditions of Approval as written to limit the hours of live entertainment
until 12:00 a.m., and included adding measures of control for vehicle
parking, establish a training manual for employees, and installation of a
self-closing door for noise control.
Motion: It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No.
4186 as amended. Motion carried 5-0.
Adopted 5. CODE AMENDMENT 2011-05, ALCOHOL BEVERAGE SALES.
Resolution No.
4184 as amended Walgreen Co. has submitted a code amendment application to
revise Tustin City Code Sections 9232a1.(a) and 9271dd(1).
Tustin City Code Section 9232a1.(a) allows off-site sales of
alcoholic beverages by rights when located within a building and
permitted business with at least 15,000 square feet in gross floor
area and where the alcoholic beverages sales area does not
exceed ten(10) percent of the gross floor area. Section 9271dd(1)
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 5
requires approval of a conditional use permit prior to the
establishment of an afF-site alcoholic beverage sales
establishment that are less than 15,000 square feet or when the
alcoholic beverages sales area exceed ten (10) percent of the
gross floor area and that these types of establishments are
subject to distance requirements to sensitive uses. The proposed
Cade Amendment 2011-05 would reduce the threshold of gross
floor area from 15,000 square feet to 12,000 square feet.
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNER:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
RECOMMENDATION:
Walgreen Co., Michael Redstone
Steven M. Brown
This project is Categorically Exempt
pursuant to Section 15270(A) of the
California Code of Regulations
(Guidelines for California Environmental
Quality Act). CEQA does not apply to
projects which a public agency rejects
or disapproves.
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4184,
denying Code Amendment 2011-05, a request to amend Sections
9232a1(a) and 9271 dd(1) to allow off-site sales of alcoholic
beverages businesses with mare than 12,000 square feet as
outright permitted uses in the Retail Commercial (C-1) zoning
district and require approval of conditional use permits for
businesses with less than 12,000 square feet gross floor area and
where the alcoholic beverages sales area is more than ten (10)
percent of the grass floor area and subject to distance
requirements to sensitive uses, respectively.
Huffer
Presented the staff report for Code Amendment 2011-05.
The Director proposed a modification to the agendized recommendation,
recommending denial of Code Amendment 2011-05 to City Council.
Commission questions/concerns generally included clarification on the
15,000 square foot threshold and ABC requirements referencing square
footage of a property.
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 6
Tustin Police Officer Khaya Breskin stepped forward to address Planning
Commission questionslconcerns. Officer Breskin stated it is a combination
of the circumstances of the building's location, not the square footage
alone, which contributes to Tustin Police Department supporting staffs
recommendation to deny the subject project.
The Public Hearing opened at 9:14 p.m.
Jennifer Chavez stepped forward representing the applicant. Ms.
Chavez stated that Walgreens would like to be able to offer beer
and wine sales to maintain the "one-stop-shop" atmosphere in the
store. Ms. Chavez proposed that the 15,000 square foot threshold
requirement be reduced to 12,000 feet, and stated that retailers
with 12,000 square feet of floor space have similar uses to those
with 15,000 square feet. Stated nearly 1,200 customers signed a
petition in support of the Cade Amendment, and a letter of support
from Gerry Aust of the Rotary Club was also received...
The Public Hearing closed at 9:24 p.m.
Moore Stated he was in favor of supporting the Code Amendment; and of making
the modification to reduce the threshold of gross floor area from 15,000
square feet to 12,000 square feet.
r~ozak Stated he has concerns from a public policy standpoint of "where to draw
the line" if the code was amended to reduce the square footage for this
location.
Eckman Stated he believes regulations placed on a retail establishment based on
square footage are not necessary. Recommends revisiting the ordinance
to include consideration of the concentration level, crime rates, history
and background of the applicant, and disciplinary action at the location.
Supports the Code Amendment reducing the threshold of gross floor
area from 15,000 square feet to 12,000 square feet.
Puckett Stated that based on the recommendations of staff and the Tustin Police
Department, he proposes denying the subject project.
Thompson Stated there are already many alcoholic beverage establishments within
the area. Respects the recommendations made by the Tustin Police
Department and Redevelopment Agency to deny the Code Amendment.
Requested that the opinion of the Police Department and Redevelopment
agency be clarified in the resolution.
V/otion: It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No.
4184 denying Code Amendment 2011-05 to City Council as amended.
Motion carried 3-2, with Moore and Eckman dissenting.
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 7
Adopted
Resolution No.
4185 as amended
6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2011-16, ESTABLISHMENT AND
OPERATION OF A CONVENIENCE STORE.
A request by 7-Eleven, Inc. to establish and operate a 24-hour
convenience store within a 2,952 square foot tenant space
located at 13842 Newport Avenue #E. Sections 9232b10 and
9235c1 of the Tustin City Cade require approval of a Conditional
Use Permit far canvenience stores.
APPLICANT: 7-Eleven, Inc.
PROPERTY OWNER
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
RECOMMENDATION:
Tae Sung Lee & Myong Ok Lee
This project is Categorically Exempt
pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 1) of
the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4185,
approving Conditional Use Permit 2011-16 authorizing the
establishment and operation of a 24-hour convenience store
within a 2,952 square foot tenant space located at 13842 Newport
Avenue #E.
Swiontek
Presented the staff report for CUP 2011-16.
Commission questions/concerns generally included outdoor storage
space, 7-Eleven's intent to request an ABC License to sell alcoholic
beverages, and compliance with Tustin City Code regarding temporary
sign permits.
The Public Hearing opened at 9:46 p.m.
Jennifer Guenther stepped forward representing the applicant. Ms.
Guenther provided a presentation for the Commission which
outlines the details of the project, and discusses the more modern
canvenience store that 7-Eleven is evolving into. Noted that this
application is far a convenience store only, and an alcohol
beverage license will be requested subsequently. Stated 7-Eleven
is dedicated to becoming part of the community through support of
local community events. Addressed concerns regarding sale of
tobacco to minors through stating that 7-Eleven conducts extensive
training regarding tobacco sales to ensure that children in the
community stay safe.
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 8
Dr. Roger Minkle stepped forward representing the residents living
within close proximity to the subject project. Dr. Minkle has
concerns regarding traffic from the driveway, street, and
intersection surrounding the subject property. He has additional
concerns regarding litter control, the subject location not selling
alcohol, and tobacco sales to minors; especially with 7-Eleven
being within close proximity to Tustin High School. Requested a
traffic study and regular policing be done at the intersection
adjoining the property.
The Public Hearing closed at 9:54 p.m.
Planning Commission deliberation generally included supporting the
proposed project, and public concerns were addressed regarding litter
control and traffic control measures.
Motion: It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No.
4185 as amended. Motion carried 5-0.
REGULAR BUSINESS:
Received and 7. FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION - TUSTIN LEGACY AND RAIL
filed STATION TOUR.
The primary purpose of the discussion is to provide a forum for
the Commission to generally discuss the tour and to make
recommendations for future tours.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission receive this report and provide
direction to staff.
Thompson Led the follow-up discussion of the Tustin Legacy and Rail Station Tour.
Stated staff provided the tour and several venues including: the Village
of Hope, Advanced Technology, OC Social Services, Heritage School,
OC Sheriffs Training Facility, Columbus Square, Metrolink Station,
Tustin Ranch Road, Columbus Grove and the District were visited.
Sated it was great to see the progress made on these sites. Asked if his
fellow Commissioners had anything to discuss regarding the tour.
Puckett Stated staff did a wonderful job and it was a beneficial tour.
Report was received and filed.
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 9
STAFF CONCERNS:
8. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN AT THE OCTOBER 4, 2011, CITY
COUNCIL MEETING.
The Director reported on the following:
• Stated Dana Ogdon made a presentation to City Council on the
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment. This item is set for a
second reading.
COMMISSION CONCERNS:
Eckman . Attended Tustin Tiller Days. Had a great time with his daughter, and
hoped all the non-profit organizations were successful.
Puckett • Thanked City staff for a successful Tustin Tiller Days.
Moore • Enjoyed attending Tustin Tiller Days and riding on the trolley with
his fellow Commissioners.
Kozak • Enjoyed being part of the Tustin Tiller Days parade;
• Thanked staff for their work this evening on all the agenda items.
Thompson . Was sorry he missed Tustin Tiller Days;
• Attended the TCA board meeting along with Mayor Amante.
ADJOURNMENT:
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for
Tuesday, October 25, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at
300 Centennial Way.
JEFF R. THOMPSON
Chairperson
ELIZABETH A. BiNSACK
Planning Commission Secretary
Minutes -Planning Commission October 11, 2011 -Page 10