HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 PC MINUTES 8-12-14
MINUTES
ITEM #1
REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 12, 2014
7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER
Given INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Smith
ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairperson Thompson
Chairperson Pro Tem Lumbard
Commissioners Altowaiji, Kozak, Smith
Staff Present Elizabeth Binsack, Director of Community Development
Lois Bobak, City Attorney
Justina Willkom, Assistant Director of Community Development
Dana Ogdon, Assistant Director of Community Development
Scott Reekstin, Principal Planner
Amy Stonich, Senior Planner
Edmelynne V. Hutter, Senior Planner
Ryan Swiontek, Senior Planner
Samantha Beier, Assistant Planner
Adrianne DiLeva-Johnson, Sr. Management Assistant
Vera Tiscareno, Executive Assistant
PUBLIC CONCERNS
Ms. Hilda Plummer, resident at 13661 Green Valley Drive, voiced her
concern for the safety of the neighborhood children due to a possible
rehabilitation home being located near San Juan Street and Tustin
Avenue.
Thompson asked that Staff check with Code Enforcement or law
enforcement on safety involved. Per Binsack, Staff will follow up with Ms.
Plummer on outcome.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JULY 22, 2014, PLANNING
Minutes of the COMMISSION MEETING.
July 22, 2014
meeting, as RECOMMENDATION:
amended.
That the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the July 22,
2014 meeting as provided.
Motion: It was moved by Lumbard, seconded by Kozak, to approve the July 22,
2014 Minutes, as amended. Motion carried 5-0.
Minutes – Planning Commission – August 12, 2014 – Page 1 of 7
PUBLIC HEARING:
Adopted Resolution 2. ZONE CHANGE 2014-001, SUBDIVISION 2013-01 FOR
No. 4263. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17665, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
2013-01, AND DESIGN REVIEW 2013-002 FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF SIX (6) SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1381-1391 SAN
JUAN STREET
REQUESTS:
1. Zone Change (ZC) 2014-001 to change the
zoning from R3-2700 to R3 2650 to reduce
the minimum lot area per family unit from
2,700 square feet to 2,650 square feet to
allow the development of six (6) residential
condominium units.
2. Subdivision (SUB) 2013-01 for Tentative
Tract Map (TTM) 17665 for the subdivision
of an approximately 1/3 acre site consisting
of one (1) numbered lot and one (1) lettered
lot for the development of six (6) single
family detached condominium units.
3. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2013-01 for
the development of condominium units in the
R3 Zoning District, pursuant to the criteria of
the Planned Development (PD) District.
4. Design Review (DR) 2013-002 for the
design and site layout of six (6) single
family detached condominium units and
related improvements.
APPLICANT: Alfonso Maciel
A&A Drafting
2017 W. Alco Avenue
Santa Ana, CA 92703
PROPERTY
OWNER: Shaygan Family Trust
19 Spike Moss
Irvine, CA 92603
LOCATION: 1381-1391 San Juan Street
Minutes – Planning Commission – August 12, 2014 – Page 2 of 7
ENVIRONMENTAL:
This project is statutorily exempt pursuant to Section 15270(a) of
the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California
Environmental Quality Act). CEQA does not apply to projects
which a public agency rejects or disapproves.
If Zone Change 2014-001, Subdivision 2013-01, Conditional Use
Permit 2013-01 and Design Review 2013-002 are not rejected or
disapproved, a new environmental review will be conducted
accordingly.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4263,
recommending that the City Council deny:
a. Zone Change 2014-001, a request to change the zoning
from R3-2700 to R3 PD-2650 to increase the allowable
density of the site to allow the development of six (6)
residential condominium units.
b. Subdivision 2013-01 for Tentative Tract Map 17665 for
the subdivision of an approximately 1/3 acre site
consisting of one (1) numbered lot and one (1) lettered lot
for the development of six (6) single family detached
condominium units.
c. Conditional Use Permit 2013-01 for the development of
condominium units in the R3 Zoning District.
d. Design Review 2013-002 for the design and site layout of
six (6) single family detached condominium units and
related improvements.
Thompson Thompson stated, for the record, that he met with the applicant and the
architects at the site on July 27, 2014 to gain an understanding of the
layout of the site to discuss the issues and possible solutions.
Altowaiji For the record, Altowaiji met with the applicant and Staff six (6) months
ago. He advised the applicant to work with staff, as well as the adjacent
property owners, on the lot line adjustment.
Reekstin Presentation given.
Commission’s concerns generally included: Units sharing drive-way
access; lack of parking spaces; various zoning districts; and maintenance
of the property.
Reekstin In response to the Commission’s concerns, Reekstin stated that the
concern is not “sharing the driveway”, but only that the shared driveway
does not provide any parking spaces (only the rear driveway provides
Minutes – Planning Commission – August 12, 2014 – Page 3 of 7
access to garage and guest parking); zoning allows up to five (5) units on
the property; homeowners associations property maintenance seems to
be an issue with other condominium units within the City.
7:34 p.m. Public Hearing Opened.
Ms. Plummer’s concerns generally included: Parking issue; she asked if
the applicant would consider underground parking; and lack of street
space for trash cans on trash day pick-up which causes sanitation issues
due to non-pick up.
Mr. James Maring’s, concerns generally included: Parking issue and that
the neighboring school parking affects residential parking.
Mrs. Maia Bourquz’s concern is parking being an issue with or without the
proposed project.
Mr. Bernard Bourquz commended Reekstin on his presentation. His
concerns generally included: Garages in neighborhood being used for
storage, not for cars; parking issue; and homeowner’s association’s
challenge of property maintenance due to low rate of participation.
Ms. Donna Karlen’s concerns generally included: Parking issue and the
lack of street space for trash cans and the vacant lot overgrown with
shrubs.
Mr. Ronald Nestor, representative for Mr. Shaygan, provided a Power
Point presentation.
Mr. Robert Snodgrass was concerned with the lack of parking.
8:08 p.m. Public Hearing Closed.
Commission’s deliberation generally included: Staff and/or Council not
being given a chance to review Mr. Nestor’s Power Point presentation
prior to the meeting; Commission’s consideration of the discretionary
actions since the concern is “spot zone” change and the legal
interpretation; building height; 5% minor adjustment was not part of
Commission’s consideration; asked if units would only be frontage along
Red Hill Avenue; confusion with which standards are being applied;
flexibility with parking; attempt to preserve “community”; infill; adding
footage to the Right-Of-Way; suggested Staff work with the applicant and
neighbors on finding solutions on mitigating parking issues; asked if a
zone change would be necessary if the applicant made one of the units
affordable; and that all Commissioners take into consideration all
concerns of the public.
Bobak Bobak’s response to the Commission’s questions generally included:
Staff did not receive any letter in advance (legal or otherwise contrary to
the staff report) of the meeting; asked the Commission to direct specific
questions to staff and then address those issues in a staff report to
Minutes – Planning Commission – August 12, 2014 – Page 4 of 7
Council; the Commission does have discretion and referred them to the
list of actions in the staff report; no property owner has a right to
“maximum development” on his/her property unless permitted as a matter
of right (i.e. CUP); the application states condominiums (which can legally
be separately sold to multiple owners) which is why a CUP would be
required but not with apartments (which are generally owned by one
owner); spot zoning’s basic principle – should not zone individual parcels
of property in a way that gives the owners of that property significant
advantage over adjacent properties that do not have that same advantage
or disadvantage; and no other property in the City has zoning designation
(R3 2650) that the applicant is asking for.
Reekstin Reekstin explained height differences in various zoning districts and that
Planned Development Standards do not specify height, but do apply to
this project; 5% minor adjustment is for a building site area which is a
different concept than lot area per family unit, which would be the
minimum size for the entire lot and this site exceeds the minimum
requirement; the property was annexed in the 1980’s and it is likely the
property is a “carryover zone” from the County Standards.
Binsack Ms. Binsack’s responses to the Commission’s questions generally
included: Explained the various zoning districts; the City encourages infill
development and has goals and objectives to meet (i.e. affordable
housing); she explained the piecemeal approach; Binsack stated a
comprehensive evaluation on an environmental analysis would benefit
nearby property owners if the City required one of the units to be
affordable; and if a Density Bonus (and application) are requested on a
unit and a very-low unit is proposed, then the City has an obligation to
grant the concession, but it is not the case in the application presented to
the Commission.
Motion: Item was moved by Lumbard, seconded by Smith, to adopt Resolution
No. 4263, as provided, denying the application. Motion carried 4-1.
Altowaiji dissented.
Binsack As a point of clarification, all items are appealable by the City Council,
however, no need for an appeal since it is a recommendation to the City
Council and will be tentatively scheduled in September. Notification of the
Council meeting will also be sent out to the attendees.
REGULAR BUSINESS:
Approved the 3. COMMENDATION AND TUSTIN HISTORIC REGISTER
recommended NOMINATION ARTZ BUILDING – 150 & 158 W. MAIN STREET
actions and will
forward to City The City of Tustin is nominating the property at 150 & 158 W.
Council for Main Street for a commendation and addition to the Tustin
recognition. Historic Register Plaque Program. Typically, the Tustin
Preservation Conservancy or the Tustin Area Historical Society
would nominate a property; however, a City-initiated nomination
is being brought forward to recognize that the building was
Minutes – Planning Commission – August 12, 2014 – Page 5 of 7
constructed 100 years ago in 1914.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission: Approve the nomination of 150 &
158 W. Main Street to the City’s Commendation Program and
Historic Register Plaque Program; select “Artz Building 1914” as
the most appropriate historical name and date of construction of
the property; and, forward the commendation to the City Council
for recognition.
Thompson Thompson recused himself since he owns property in close proximity to
this location, although there does not appear to be a conflict and stated
it was “out of abundance of caution”.
DiLeva-Johnson Provided a presentation of the item.
The Commission commended DiLeva-Johnson on a job well done on the
staff report.
Lumbard Lumbard asked for clarification on the name on the plaque. Suggested
luminaries and busts be located at this property.
DiLeva-Johnson DiLeva-Johnson clarified that the name will be “Artz Building” (year
separate).
Motion: Kozak moved to approve the nomination, seconded by Altowaiji, to move
forward with the commendation to the City Council for recognition.
Thompson abstained.
STAFF CONCERNS:
Binsack The Tustin Pioneer Program was accepted at the last Commission
meeting and now staff will be reaching out to vendors on the busts and
pedestals and will keep the Commission apprised of the outcome. The
draft Commercial Design Guidelines (CDG), with the Commission’s
comments incorporated will be presented at a future public forum.
Binsack thanked those Commission members who participated with the
MIG interviews. The next steps will be to interview key community
leaders and then host a public workshop (first workshop tentatively
scheduled in early Fall).
COMMISSION CONCERNS:
Kozak Kozak commended Staff on the Public Hearing item. He continues
participating in the Concerts in the Park and thanked Parks & Recreation
rd
for the “great lineup”. He also stated that school begins September 3
and to please be aware of children walking to/from school while driving.
Kozak stated he was meeting with MIG Friday, August 15, 2014.
Altowaiji Altowaiji commended staff on their hard work with the Public Hearing staff
report.
Minutes – Planning Commission – August 12, 2014 – Page 6 of 7
Smith Smith asked if the City had requirements promoting water use (i.e. water
restrictions in order to preserve water).
Lumbard Lumbard suggested Staff take a look at the overall zoning and plan in the
community and how the City’s goals may conflict with what current
language says on how things are designated. “Stage 2 Water Alert Due
to Drought Awareness” was announced on August 5, 2014.
Thompson Thompson requested Staff write a memo to the Commission on Water
Conservation Measures that may be affecting zoning administrator
decisions that are made (i.e. not issuing building permits for pools) to help
with awareness; attended an OCTA Citizens Advisory Committee earlier
this day.
Binsack Binsack stated the City does have a Water Conservation ordinance in
place, and other various model ordinances for landscaping improvements.
8:51 p.m. ADJOURNMENT:
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for
Tuesday, August 26, 2014, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at
300 Centennial Way.
Minutes – Planning Commission – August 12, 2014 – Page 7 of 7