Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1967 09 05 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL September 5, 1967 CALL TO Meeting called to order at 7:32 P.M. by Mayor Mack. ORDER iIo PLEDGE OF Led by Mayor Mack ALLEGIANCE III. INVOCATION Led by Councilman Coco. IV. ROLL Present: Councilmen: Mack, Klingelhofer, Coco, CALL Miller, Ring Absent: Councilmen: None Others Present: City Administrator Harry Gill City Attorney James Rourke City Clerk Ruth Poe Planning Director James Suplnger V. APPROVAL OF Moved by Miller, seconded by Klingelhofer, that MINUTES minutes of ~ugust 21st meeting be approved as mailed. Carried. VI. PUBLIC 1. VARIANCE 67-189 APPEAL - Continued frc~ ~/21~67 HEARINGS TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING VARIANCE APPLICATION NO. 67-189 TO PERMIT AN ADDITION ON EXISTING HOME 2½' FROM REAR PROPERTY LINE, LOCATED AT 1271 LANCE DRIVE, TUSTIN. Hearing opened at 7:34 P.M. Mayor Mack stated that at the last meeting Mr.'Winn. was directed to supply t~e Council with the name of the builder, file a notarized statemen~ that he was not aware that the builder did no~ have a building permit, and to be present at this meeting. Mr. Dean Evans, representing the a~plicant, informed the Council that Mr. Winn is in the hospital~ but 5hat Mrs. Winn was present. Statement and name of builder had been filed with the City August 30th. There being.no further comments or objections, the hearing was declared closed at 7:36 P.M. -~ In answer to questioning by Councilman Miller and ~ Mayor Mack, Mrs. Winn stated that she did no~ know the present whereaDouts of Noah Morris, builder. She understood that th~man.doing the work was a licensed contractor. 2ouncilman Ring stated that as Mr. and Mrs. Winn ~ad done everything the Council had asked, he felt that this Variance should be allowed subject to the recommendations set forth by the Building Department. Council Miha~e 9/5/67 Pg. 2 Moved by Ring, seconded by Kiingelhofer, that appeal of the decision o~ the Planning Cowmission on V-67-189 be granted and that the following conditions set forth by the Building Department be met: 1.No opening be permitted in the northeasterly wall. 2.The door between the dining room and room addition be removed. 3. Mr. Winn have a licensed electrical contractor check all wiring and certify to the Building Department in writing that all wiring meets the requirements of the City. Councilman Coco said he would refrain from all discussion as he was not present at the initial hearing and he is a close neighbor of the Winns. Above motion carried by roll call. Ayes: Mack, Klingelhofer, Miller, Ring. Noes: None. Abstained: Coco. 2. USE PERMIT 67-236 - APPEAL - ROBERT E WILDE TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 67-236 TO PERMIT SERVICE STATION SIGNS WITH A TOTAL OF 300 SQUARE -- FEET INCLUDING ONE POLE SIGN, ONE WOOD SPANNER SIGN, AND ONE ROOF SIGN, ALL LOCATED AT NORTHWEST CORNER OF SEVENTEENTH AND CARROLL WAY. Hearing opened at 7:40 P.M. Mr. Supinger presented the staff reports and findings of the Planning Commission. He also stated a need for standards to be written into the Ordinance as it is difficult for the Planning Commission to make a decision on these signs and difficult fori the applicant to know just what standards will be applied in the judgement of these applications. Mr. Robert Wilde, applicant, spoke in behalf of the granting of this Use Permit, presenting his justifi- cations and stating that application is made on the basis of Section35.00 of the Sign Ordinance which state~ that a business within 200 feet of a freeway off-ramp may exceed the stated heig'ht and size limitations subject to a Use Permit. He felt that the s~gn applied for would serve both the freeway and Seventeenth Street traffic. He also stated that Standard Oil Company considers this a freeway,'location and as such, it will be a Company operated station. If it were not so considered, itswould be a Chevron Station operated by an independent businessman. Mr. John Ginos of Standard Oil Company, stated tha~ this was considered a freeway station and that thought is given to the type of traffic on a freeway. They feel that the NewpoEtFreeway is primarily commuter-type traffic ~'a p~0ple seeing the sign day after day would know~where to stop. Mr. Ginos Council Minutes 9/5/67 Pg. 3 informed the Council that they had had a sign truck out to the location and had tested the sign at various heights and positions and determined this to be the proper location for their needs. He then showed the Council pictures taken of the sign f~om various locations and read the appticant's justifications as presented to the Commission. In answer to questioning by the Council, Mr. Ginos stated that the decision as to whether a station is company operated or a dealer station rests with the home office in San Francisco. This station had been proposed to the home office as having adequate signing to address the freeway, thereby in keeping with the policy of a company operated freeway station. If sign addressing freeway is not approved,they would have to go back to the home office and advise them of this and the decision would then be theirs to make as to the type of station. He felt it a reasonable assumption that it would then be con- sidered an independent station. Mr. Ginos stated he did not feel that a development on the South would obstruct the visibility unless it was a high rise development. If granted at 55'"'feet, it would be the highest sign in the area and in his opinion other stations in the area under similar circumstances would also be entitled Eo a like sign. Under further questioningr Mr. Ginos said that they had not gone into the residential area to see how the sign would be viewed. He then offered to bring she s~gn truck back fo~.~further v~ewing by the Council if they so desired. Councilman Miller stated that a similar situation exists in his neighborhood where a service station sign was put up that can be seen from the houses on his street and the neighbors are unhappy. There would be a similar situation with the res2den~s of this area if the past action on s~gns in commercial developments in this area is any indication. Moved by Miller, seconded by Coco, that the recommendation and decision of the Planning Commission be upheld. In answer .to Mayor Mack, Mr. Supinger stated that the maximum height allowed by the Sign Ordinance would De 24 feet if it were not under these circumstances Dr 20 feet plus 6 inches for each 30 feet from a residential district. Councilman Coco stated that there are four main directions for this station: North and South on the Freeway and East and West on Seventeenth Street. % sign within the terms of the Ordinance would take ~are of Seventeenth Street both East and West~ 35 feet would take care o~ Southbound freeway traffic. Two zhings of concern for a Northbound freeway ~affic sign of 55 feet are that ~he applicant has ~<D~ yet ~c~e in with a plan to the Planning Co~missi~ that is in conformance with the Ordinance. Counci~.~l-an Coco stated he ~s seriously concerned with t~e precedent and the snowball affect that we can ioo~ for ~n approaches to the City. 9/5/67 Above motion carried by roll call. Ayes: Mack, Klingelhofer, Coco, Miller, Ring. Noes: None. Absent: None. 3. VARIANCE 67-193 APPEAL - SANTA ANA-TUSTIN MEDICAL PAVILION __ TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING VARIANCE APPLICATION NO. 67-193 TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ENTRY CANOPIES PROJECTING 8'9" INTO REQUIRED 10' FRONT YARD LOCATED ON SOUTH SIDE OF FOURTH STREET BETWEEN MOUNTAIN VIEW AND "A" STREETS. Hearing opened at 8:10 P.M. Mr. supinger presented Planning Commission action. Mr. Don Christeson, Real Estate Developer of 1441 East Seventeenth Street, San.ta Ana, presented a picture of the medical facility planned for East Fourth Street. Mr. Christeson stated that the property consists of 1-3/4 acres of Professional property. Plans call for 96 car spaces which, with 14 doctors, allows seven cars per doctor. They could cut this by 70% under the City Ordinance, but parking is a critical condition. The canopies applied for would.provide covered walks and they hope to be allowed loading zones at the entrance of the building. The canopies have no structural effect, it is an architectural feature. Any deviation from the plans would affect the design of the facility. Mr. Bob Hall, owner of the property immediately East of the development, stated.he had reviewed the plans and had no objections to this plan a~d spoke in favor of the covered walkways. There being no objections or further comments, the hearing was declared closed at 8:20 P.M. In answer to questioning by Councilman Miller, Mr. Koteles, architect of the building, stated that at the beginning they were within the City requirements but after getting into working drawings, everything began to grow including the number of parking spaces,.the stall lengths, suite design, etc. The effect of the building is that of a walled pavilion with a central patio. The building runs some 400 feet and they need something projecting forward to break the facade. Even if parking stalls were built to County standards, the canopies would still be projecting two feet into the setback. Any change would w~aken the concept. Councilman Coco stated he had mixea emotions about this as it is a beautiful building, but he is con- cerned with what seems to be a trend o~ architects to design and then come in for a variance. As stated in. this case, it just sort of grew. The trend is there and as an engineer, he could not help but feel that they could come closer to conforming to the Ordinance. Council Minutes 9/5/67 Pg. 5 Councilman Miller stated he would like to be able to grant this, but can't see where it will end. If this is granted, the City might as well change the setback. We have had one experience of changing a setback and then having to change the Ordinance. Unless it could be found that this is an exceptional, special case he could not see a clear way to approve this Variance. Mr. Rourke said that he could not see where it would be considered a special case just because of the building extending from one street to another. Mr. Christeson said their reason for the application is that they want to build the very best with maximum parking. Their main goal is not only to make money, but is to develop a first class facility in all ways that will be a credit to Tustin for a long time to come. Councilman K!ingelhofer stated that as far as he is concerned, the parking stall requirement in most cases is m~nimal, but in most cases it is not in the best interest of the owners to have just the required space. Maximum parking is not necessarily doing the City a service - it is 3ust smart business. As much as he must applaud the architectural ediface, the principle of the setback does have value and bearing and for that reason, it is difficult to permiL this ~ppeai. Councilman Coco felt that it is up to the applicant To think about it and come back. We do have hard and fast rules regarding variances. The Council must decide whether it grants special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the area whether circumstances applicable to subject property as to topography, size, shape and so on, deprive subject property from' privileges enjoyed by other properties in the area. Moved by Coco, seconded by Klingelhofer, that denial by the Planning Commission be upheld. Councilman Klingelhofer stated that his reason for seconding this motion was that he was the one who moved that the setback in this area be reduced to 10 feet and he felt this line should be held. xn answer to Councilman Ring's question as to how ~any more pieces of property are yet to be developed in the area that a precedent would affect, the Souncil felt it could be a precedent for the whole City, not just Fourth Street. Above motion carried by roll call. Ayes: Mack, ~lingelhofer, Coco. Noes: Miller, Ring. Absent: None. VII. OLD ORDINANCE NO. 366 - First reading BUSINESS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REZONING AND PREZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. ZC-67-158 OF HATCH. 2loved by Miller, seconded by Klingelhofer, that Ordinance No. 366, approving ZC-67~158 of Hatch, have first reading by title only. Carried unanimously. ~.~ Council MinU~s- 9/5/67 pg .3 6 2. ORDINANCE NO. 367 - First reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. ZC~67-157. Moved by Ring, seconded by Miller, that Ordinance No. 367, rezoning property on Application No. ZC-67-t57 have first reading by title only. Carried unanimously. 3. ORDINANCE NO. 365 - Second reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 157, ZONING ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED, RELATIVE TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. Moved by Ring, seconded by Miller, that Ordinance No. 365 have second reading by title only. Carried unanimously. Moved by Miller, seconded ~y Klingelhofer, that Ordinance No. 365, amending Ordinance No. 157 relative to accessory structures, be passed and adopted. Carried by roll call. Ayes: ~iack, Klingelhofer, Coco, Miller, Ring. Noes: None. Absent: None. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 890 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF -- TUSTIN RELATIVE TO LONGEVITY OF SERVICE. Mr. Gill stated'that the original Resolution was drafted as a result of discussion in a budget session. Since the~, Mr. Williams has presented findings of a survey of other cities. Mr. Gill said he has no strong feelings on this at this'time and perhaps the Council would want to give this further thought. Mayor Mack suggested that this be deferred to a workshop. Moved by Coco, seconded by Ring, that Resolution No. 890, relative to longevity of service, be taken off the calendar. Carried. VIII. NEW 1. ORANGE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT - TUSTIN AREA BUSINESS AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS'. Moved by Miller, seconded by Rinq, that correspondence from the County Planning Director~regarding Tustin area amendment to the Master Plan of Arterial Highways be referred to the City Planning Director and CitV Enqineer for analysis and discussion with County staff for future recommended action by City and County. Carried. 2.TRAVEL REQUEST - INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS. Moved by Ring, seconded by Kljngelhofer, that the Building. Inspector, Plumbing, be authorized to attend the International Association of Plumbing and MechaR'iCal Council Minutes 9/5/67 Pg. 7 Officials conference in San Francisco October 22 through October 27, 1967, and to incur all necessary costs at City expense. Carried. 3. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS Moved by Coco, seconded by Ring, that demands in the amount of $37,730.20 be paid. Carried. OTHER City Administrator BUSINESS 1. Request of Boys' Club of Tustin for consideration to look into further plans with regard to enlarging the. area of the leased property. Councilman Miller stated that in his letter of August 30th, Mr. Jensen, President of the Boys' Club, stated that it has been demonstrated graphically the things they proposed to have done. It has not been demonstrated graphically to his complete satisfaction. The Council has only seen one drawing and there may be alternate ways of doing what they wish. Councilman Miller said he would like to see the Council hold a hearing and have the Boys' Club representative show the Council other graphic presentations demonstrating what they wish to do. ~2oved by Ring, seconded by Klingelhofer, that a hearing be held on the matter of revising the agreement with the Boys' Club of Tustin. Carried. .. Report on Planning Commission residency require- ments in other cities. Councilman Coco commented on the fact that on!9 e~ght cities are included in the report and requested that all the Orange County cities be polled by tele- phone to insure requirements of all Orange County cities. C~ty Attorney None X. INFORMATION I. Correspondence from Governor Reagan regarding AND property tax cut read by Clerk. CORRESPONDENCE 2. Fire rating report - Chief Hilton. Mr. Gill was asked to congratulate Chief Hilton on his complete and comprehensive fire rating report. ]. City of Tustin Beautification Award Plan -Parks and Recreation Commission · . Storm Drain Deficiency.Report - B. L. Wheelock .e. Henry Badger - regardihg Ordinance No. 338. CQunci 1 Minut~"s 9/5/67 Pg. '"8 OTHER City Council BUSINESS Councilman Miller reported on a complaint lodged by Mr. Thomlinson of a drainage problem at the Northeast corner of Amaganset and Acacia. Mr. Gill said he would have it investigated and contact Mr. Thomllnson. XII. ADJOURNMENT Meeting declared adjourned to a personnel sessmon. Present: Councilmen Mack, Klingelhofer, Coco, Miller, Ring, City Attorney Rourke and City Administrator Gill Moved, seconded, and duly carried that meeting be adjourned. MAYOR CITY ESERK