HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 07-18-88~ ~- ACT I O N AGENDA
" TUSTIN PLANNING COI~ISSION
REGULAR HEETING
,July 11, 1988
REPORTS
NO. 1
7-18-88
CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL:
Present: Puckett, ~e~l. Baker, Le deune
Absent: Ponttous
PUBLIC CONCERNS'
(Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda)
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE :COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL
OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S 'TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE
YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
1. Reorganization of the Commission
Commissioner #etl opened nominations for the Chatrm~n of the Planntng Commission.
Cxmmlsstoner Le deune nominated ComBlsstoner Baker, Commissioner Puckett seconded the
noBlnatton. Natal nattons ~ere closed.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Le deune seconded tO elect Commissioner Baker as
Chalrmn. Hotton carr;~,d 4-0.
Chatrman Baker opened nominations for 'Chairman Pro-tern of the Planning Co~risston.
Commissioner #et1 nominated Comrisstoner Pontlous, Conntstoner Le deune seconded the
nomtonation. Nondnattons ~ere closed.
Commissioner get1 moved, Le deune seconded to elect Commissioner Ponttous as Chatrman
Pro-tm. gotton carrted 4-0.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
(ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED
ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO
SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS .PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE
VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR
PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.)
2. Minutes of the June 27, 1988 Planning. Commission meeting
3. Final Parcel Map 88-179
APPLICANT'
K.W. LAWLER AND ASSOCIATES
2832 WALNUT AVENUE, SUITE A
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680
Planning Commission Action ,~enda
July 11, 1988
Page two
OWN ER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENV I RONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
THE COLLINGS COMPANY
COLCO LTD.
17320 RED HILL AVENUE #190
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705
SOUTH SIDE OF SEVENTEENTH STREET, APPROXIMATELY 370 FEET EAST OF
ENDERLE CENTER WAY.
PC-C PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT~ (CLASS 15) FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
TO SUBDIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
Final Parcel Map 88-179 to the City Council by adoption of Resolution No. 2514 as
submitted or revised.
Resolution No. 2514 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 88-179.
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner
CoeIlsstoner Puckett moved, kletl seconded to approve the consent calendar. I~otton
caPPted 4-0.
.
POBLIC ItEARING$
4. General Plan Amendment 88-01, Zone Change 88-01 and Tentative Parcel Map 87-201
APPLICANT/
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
E NV I RONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
THE IRVINE COMPANY
550 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
FREEWAY ACCESS RESERVATION AREA SOUTH OF TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
PLANNED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL
1) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-01 AND ZONE CHANGE 88-01: AN
ADDENDUM TO EIR 84-2 HAS BEEN PREPARED.
2) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-201: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 15.
1) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-01: TO RECLASSIFY THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION ON THE GENERAL PLAN MAP FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY
TO PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROJECT AREA.
2) ZONE CHANGE 88-01: TO REZONE THE PROJECT AREA FROM PLANNED
COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED COMMUNITY'COMMERCIAL.
3) TENTATIVE MAP: TO RECONFIGURE TWO EXISTING PARCELS TO
CREATE TWO POTENTIAL DEALERSHIP DEVELOPMENT SITES.
Recommendation' It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend
approval to the City Council of:
le
.
Draft addendum to Tustin Auto Center EIR 84-2 by adoption of Resolution
2510;
General Plan Amendment 88-01 by adoption of Resolution 2511;
Plannlng Commission Actloh ~genda
Ouly 11, 1988
Page :hree
e
Zone Change 88-01 by adoption of Resolution 2512~ and
Tentative Parcel Map '87-201 by adoption of Resolution 2513.
Resolution No. 2510 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR 84-2 AND ADDENDUM AS
REQUI~ED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
Resolution No. 2511 A RESOLUTION OF THE~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
AMEND THE LAND USE MAP OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE 1-5
FREEWAY, TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER
Resolution No. 2512 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
RECOMMENDING REZONING OF AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE I-5 FREEWAY,
TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF THE AUTO
CENTER, AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL, FROM PLANNED
COMMUNITY TO PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL AND INCLUDING THE
INCORPORATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS KNOWN AS THE EAST
.TUSTIN AUTO CENTER.
Resolution No. 2513 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-201
LOCATED ON THE. NORTH SIDE OF:THE I-5 FREEWAY, EAST OF TUSTIN
RANCH ROAD, SOUTH OF THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF THE AUTO
CENTER, AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL.
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner
Comlssloner Puckett moved, Wetl seconded to reco.maend approval of draft adde.Klum to
the Tustln Auto Center 'EIR 84-2 to the City-:Council by-adoption of Resolution No.
2510. I~otton carried 4-0.
Commissioner Wet1 moved, Le deune seconded to recommend to the City Council approval
of General' Plan Amendment 88-01 by the adoptton of Resolution No. 2511. Motlon
carried 4-0.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Le deune seconded to reco.mend approval to the City
Counct1 "of Zone 'Change 88-01 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2512. Motion carrted
4-0.
Co, missioner Wetl moved, Le deune seconded to recommend to the City Council approval
of Tentative Parcel Map 87-201 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2513 with one minor
revl sion. Motion carrted 4-0.
Conditional Use Permit for a Master Sign Program for the Tustin Market Place;
and an Amendment to Design Review 87-37, for the Desi.gn Review for the proje..c.t,
on the Landscape Concept for the Entertainment Village and fdr the storefront
glazing.
Planning Commi sslon Action .,genda
July 11, 1988
Page four
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
DONAHUE SCHRIBER ON BEHALF OF THE IRVINE COMPANY
3200 BRISTOL, SUITE 660
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
SUSSMAN/PREJZA & COMPANY, INC.
1651 18TH STREET
SANTA MONICA, CA 90404
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BRYAN AVENUE & JAMBOREE ROAD
APPROVAL OF A MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE AND
A REVISION TO THE LANDSCAPE CONCEPT FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT VILLAGE
(FROM CANOPY TO PALM TREES) AND ALSO A MODIFICATION'iTO THE STOREFRONT
GLAZING STANDARD (FROM GREY TO CLEAR GLASS).
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CLASS 3)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2516, approving a master sign program for the Tustin Market Place and
amendments to Destgn Revtew 87-37 as tt affects the landscape concept for the
Entertainment Village and the storefront glaztng standard.
Resolution No. 2516 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
'CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-15 FORA MASTER
SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE AND AMENDING DESIGN
REVIEW 87-37, REVISING THE LANDSCAPE CONCEPT FOR THE
ENTERTAINMENT VILLAGE AND THE STOREFRONT GLAZING STANDARDS
Presentation: Steve Rubin, Senior Planner
Commlstoner We1] moved, Puckett seconded to approve the Master Stgn Program for the
Tusttn Market Place,' amend Destgn Revtew 87-37 as tt affects the** landscape concept
for the Entertainment Vlllage and amend the storefront glazing standards by the
adoptlon of Resolution No. 2516. Notlon carted 4-0.
OLD BUSINESS
6. Abandoned Right-of-Way
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue their
discussion on this matter until August 8, 1988.
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
Commissioner Wetl moved, Puckett seconded to continue the issue of the abandoned
right-of-way until' August 8, 1988." Notion carried 4-0.
7. Design Review No. 88-13
APPLICANT:
DADDY-O 'S RESTAURANT
PAUL MARTINO
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
Planning Commission Action ~genda
July 11, 1988
Page five
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
E NV I RO NME NTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
JOHNSTOWN AMERICAN
23201 LAKE CENTER DRIVE
EL TORO, CA 92630
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
C-2 CENTRAL COMMERCIAL
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 1
AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL EXPOSED NEON TUBING ON AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT BUILDING LOCATED AT 174 E. MAIN STREET.
Recommendation: Deny the request for the use of exposed neon tubing by the adoption
of Resolution No. 2517.
Resolution No. 2517 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
DENYING THE REQUEST FOR THE USE OF EXPOSED NEON TUBING AT 174
E. MAIN STREET
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community DeveloPment
Co, ltsstoner #et1 ,oved, Puckett seconded to deny the request for the use of exposed
neon tubing by the adoptton of [tesolut'to'n'" No. 2517 as revtsed. Norton carrted 4-0.
8. Rancho Maderas
APPLICANT':
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
WESTERN NATIONAL PROPERTIES
630 THE CITY"DRIVE SOUTH
ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92668
LOT 14, TRACT 12763
MODIFICATION TO DESIGN REVIEW 87-32
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2515 approving exterior architectural revisions to the Rancho Maderas
project originally approved by Design Review 87-32 as submitted or revised.
Resolution No. 2515 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING EXTERIOR BUILDING MODIFICATIONS TO
DESIGN REVIEW 87-32 A 266 UNIT PROJECT LOCATED ON LOT
14 OF TRACT 12763
Presentation' Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
Co.mai ssloner Puckett moved, Wetl seconded to approve exterior archi tectural revisions
to Design RevtSW 87-32 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2515. Notion carried 4-0.
Planning'Commission Actto,, Agenda
July 11, 1988
Page slx
STAFF CONCERNS
9. Report on Ctt¥ Council Actions taken at July ..5, 1988 meeting
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Dtrector of Community Development
No Planntng Commission actton necessary.
COH#I SSZON CONCERNS
ADJOURBtENT
At 8:40 p.m Cmmntsstoner He11 moved, Puckett seconded to adjourn to the next regular
scheduled meettn9 on July 25, 1988 at 7:00'p.m. Norton carried 4-0.
AGENDA
TUSTIN PLANNING CO##ISSION
REGULAR MEETING
,July 11, 19aa
CALL TO ORDER'
7'00 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGZANCE/ZNVOCATZON
ROLL CALL-
PUBLZC CONCERNS:
Puckett,"Weil, Baker, Le Jeune, Pontious
(Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda)
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL
OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE
YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
1. Reorganization of the Commission
CONSENT CALENDAR:
(ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED
ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO
SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE
VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR
PSBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR KZ~OVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.)
.
Minutes of the June 27,. 1988 .Planning Commission meeting
3. Final Parcel Map 88-179 ~
APPLICANT:
OWNER-
LOCATION-
ZONING'
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS'
REQUEST'
K.W. LAWLER AND ASSOCIATES
2832 WALNUT AVENUE,.SUITE A
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680
THE COLLINGS COMPANY
COLCO LTD.
17320 RED HILL AVENUE #190
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705
SOUTH SIDE OF SEVENTEENTH STREET, APPROXIMATELY 370 FEET EAST OF
ENDERLE CENTER WAY.
PC-C PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
TO SUBDIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS. ' ·
(CLASS 15) FROM THE
Recommendation' It t s recommended that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Final Parcel Map 88-179 to the City Council by adoption of
Resolution No. 2514 as submitted or revised.
Planning Commission Agenda
July 11, 1988
Page ~wo
Resolution No. 2514 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
~USTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 88-179.
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. General Plan Amendment 88-01, Zone Change 88-01 and Tentative Parcel Map 87-201
APPLICANT/
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
THE IRVINE COMPANY
550 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
FREEWAY ACCESS RESERVATION AREA SOUTH OF TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
PLANNED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL
1) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-01 AND ZONE CHANGE 88-01: AN
ADDENDUM'TO EIR 84-2 HAS BEEN PREPARED.
2) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-201: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 15.
1) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-01: TO RECLASSIFY THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION ON THE GENERAL PLAN MAP FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY
TO PLANNED COMMUNITY,COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROJECT AREA.
2) ZONE CHANGE 88-01: TO REZONE THE PROJECT AREA FROM PLANNED
COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
3) TENTATIVE MAP:- TO RECONFIGURE TWO EXISTING PARCELS 'FO
CREATE TWO POTENTIAL DEALERSHIP DEVELOPMENT SITES.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend
approval to the City Council of:
®
2,
Draft addendum to Tusttn Auto Center EIR 84-2 by adoption of Resolution
2510;
General Plan Amendment 88-01 by adoption of Resolution 2511;
Zone Change 88-01 by adoption of Resolution 2512; and
Tentative Parcel Map 87-201 by adoption of Resolution 2513.
Resolution No. 2510 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR 84-2 AND ADDENDUM AS
REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
Resolution No. 2511 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
AMEND THE LAND USE MAP OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE I-5
FREEWAY, TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER
OF THE AUTO CENTER, AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL.
Planning Con~nisslon Agenda
July 11, 1988
....... "- Page three
PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued)
Resolution No. 2512 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
RECOMMENDING REZONING OF AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE 1-5 FREEWAY,
TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF THE AUTO
CENTER, AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL, FROM PLANNED
COMMUNITY TO PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL AND INCLUDING THE
INCORPORATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS KNOWN AS THE EAST
TUSTIN AUTO CENTER.
Resolution No. 2513 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-201
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE 1-5 FREEWAY, EAST OF TUSTIN
RANCH ROAD, SOUTH OF THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF THE AUTO
CENTER, AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL.
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner
Conditional Use Permit for a Master St~nI Pro~raml..for the Tustin Market Plac.e..;
and an Amendment to Design Review 87-37, for the Design Review for '~he project,
on the Landscape Concept for the Entertainment Village and for the storef, ront.i
glazing.
APPLICANT'
LOCATION-
REQUEST'
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS-
DONAHUE SCHRIBER ON BEHALF OF THE IRVINE COMPANY
3200 BRISTOL, SUITE 660
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
SUSSMAN/PREJZA & COMPANY, INC.
1651 18TH STREET ~
SANTA MONICA, CA 90404
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BRYAN AVENUE & JAMBOREE ROAD
APPROVAL OF A MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE AND
A REVISION TO THE LANDSCAPE CONCEPT FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT VILLAGE
(FROM CANOPY TO PALM TREES) AND ALSO A MODIFICATION TO THE'STOREFRONT
GLAZING STANDARD (FROM GREY TO CLEAR GLASS).
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CLASS 3)
Recomn~ndation: It is recon~nended that the Planning Con~ni ssi on adopt Resolution
No. 2516, approving a master sign program for the Tustin Market Place and
amendnents to Design Review 87-37 as it affects the landscape concept for the
Entertainment Vi 1 lage and the Storefront glazing standard.
Resolution No. 2516 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-15 FOR A MASTER
SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE AND AMENDING DESIGN
REVIEW 87-37, REVISING THE LANDSCAPE CONCEPT FOR THE
ENTERTAINMENT VILLAGE AND THE STOREFRONT GLAZING STANDARDS
Presentation: Steve Rubin, Senior Planner
Planning Commission Agenda
July 11, 1988
Page four
OLD BUSZ#ESS
6. Abandoned Right-of-Way
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue their
discussion on this matter until August 8, 1988.
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
7. Deston Review No. 88-13
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
DADDY-O'S RESTAURANT
PAUL MARTINO
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
JOHNSTOWN AMERICAN
23201 LAKE CENTER DRIVE
EL TORO, CA 92630
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
C-2 CENTRAL COMMERCIAL
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 1
AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL EXPOSED NEON TUBING ON
RESTAURANT BUILDING LOCATED AT 174 E. MAIN STREET.
AN EXISTING
Recommendation: Deny the request for the use of exposed neon tubing by the adoption
of Resolution No. 2517.
Resolution No. 2517 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
DENYING THE REQUEST FOR THE USE OF EXPOSED NEON TUBING AT 174
E. MAIN STREET
Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
8. Rancho Maderas
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
WESTERN NATIONAL PROPERTIES
630 THE CITY DRIVE SOUTH
ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92668
LOT 14, TRACT 12763
MODIFICATION TO DESIGN REVIEW 87-32
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2515 approving exterior architectural revisions to the Rancho Maderas
project originally approved by Design Review 87-32 as submitted or revised.
Resolution No. 2515 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING EXTERIOR BUILDING MODIFICATIONS TO
DESIGN REVIEW 87-32 A 266 UNIT PROJECT LOCATED ON LOT
14 OF TRACT 12763
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
Planning Commission Agenda
July 11, 1988
Page fi ve
STAFF CONCERNS
9. Report on Ctty Council Actions taken at July 5, 1988 meetin_g
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Dtrector of Community Development
CONNI SSION CONCERNS
AOaOURNMENT
,Adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting on July 25, 1088.
TO:
PLANNING COHHISSION
FROM:
C(]H~NITY DEVELOPflENT DEPARTHENT
SUBJECT:
PI.ANNING COHHI$$ION RE-ORGANIZATION
, /
RECOIIqENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission follow procedures noted below to
elect a Chairperson and Chairperson Pro-tem.
BACKGROUND:
As a matter of standard procedure, the Planning Commission re-organizes once a
year by appointing a new Chairperson and Chairperson Pro-rem. This usually
occurs at the first Planning Commission meeting of the new fiscal year.
In reorganizing and appointing a new Chairperson and Chairperson Pro-rem, the
Commission should undertake the following actions:
®
Chair should open nominations. Each nomination should receive a first and
second.
e
The chair should then close nominations and call for a vote for
Chairperson.
e
Upon completion of vote, current Chairperson will relinquish their seat
and will turn gavel over to Chairperson.
e
New Chairperson will open nominations for Chairperson Pro-rem. Each
nomination shall receive a first and second. Nominations should be closed
and the Chairperson should call for a vote for the Chairperson Pro-tem.
-Christine Shingleton ~
Director of Community Development
CAS:pef
MI-NUTES
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 2 -
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 27, 1988
CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIAIICE/IN¥OCATION
ROLL CALL:
Present: Puckett, Net1, Le Jeune, Ponttous
Absent: Baker
PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited 1:o 3 mtnut~s per person for 1terns not on the agenda)
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL
OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE
YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
(ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED
ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO
SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE
VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR
PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.)
1. Minutes of the June 13, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting
Commissioner Puckett moved, Ponttous seconded to approve the consent calendar.
Morton carrted 4-0.
PUBLIC 'HEARING
2. Tentative Parcel Map. 88-206
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
SOLMAR DEVELOPMENT CO.
1201 E. HUNTER AVENUE
SANTA ANA, CA 92705
MR. AND MRS. CHANG
CHAMPION FOODS
1302 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
1302 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
M-INDUSTRIAL
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 15)
TO SUBDIVIDE ONE, 2.5 ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO SEPARATE LOTS.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning commi ssion approve
Tentative Parcel Map 88-206 by the adoption of Resolution 2508
as submitted or revised.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 27, 1988
Page two
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner
Commissioner Well asked if the lots would share parking.
Staff noted that each lot would have to stand independently in regard to their
parking needs.
The public hearing was opened at 7:08 p.m.
The public hearing was closed at 7:09 p.m.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Pontious seconded to recommend to City Council the
approval of TentativeI Parcel''1 Map 88-2106 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2508.
Motion carried 4-0
NEW BUSINESS
3. Desion Review No. 88-13
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
E NV I RONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
DADDY-O'S RESTAURANT
PAUL MARTINO
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
JOHNSTOWN AMERICAN
23201 LAKE CENTER DRIVE
EL TORO, CA 92630
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
C-2 CENTRAL COMMERCIAL
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 1
AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL EXPOSED NEON TUBING ON AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT BUILDING LOCATED AT 174 E. MAIN STREET.
Recommendation: Deny Design Review 88-13 by Minute Order;
Presentation: Christine Shtngleton, Director of Community Development
The Director stated that the applicant had written to request the continuation of
this public hearing until the July 11, 1988 Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Puckett seconded to continue the subject item to the
July 11, 1988 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 4-0.
Density.... Bonuses and Other Incentives
- Recommendati on:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission discuss the
subject matter and determine an appropriate policy direction to
deal with all present and future requests for density bonuses or
other incentives for residential developments.
Presentation: Steve Rubin, Senior Planner
Planning commission Minutes
June 27, 1988
Page three
Commissioner Pontious questioned if there are any other ways to deal with this issue
bestdes density bonuses.
Staff responded that there is a possibility of including such things as reducing or
waiving permit fees, reducing or waiving planning application fees, subsidizing or
instal ling certain public improvements or a combi nation of these thi rigs.
Commissioner Puckett asked what the bottom line was.
,,
Staff indicated that if the developer doesn't provide the appropriate amount of low
to moderate housing units they would not be allowed to utilize the extra units.
Commissioner Well asked if Tustin has its "'Fair Share" of affordable housing.
The Director indicated that SCAG's Regional Housing Assessment Model of 1983 is
currently being revised. She noted that the East Tustin development adds a large
number of households to the City and that the military base has over 800 households.
The City is involved in County programs that attempt to meet our low and moderate
income ~housing need. The City has gone on record protesting revised lg88 SCAG
figures as the military housing was not subtracted from the number of availabe
units. This will have a major impact on how the City will update its housing
element.
Commissioner Well asked if the City is obligated to supply affordable housing because
of redevelopment funds.
The Director noted that all of the powers that the Redevelopment Agency has would be
tools available for use of housing set-aside funds.
Commissioner PonttOus asked for a definition of "quali fyi ng resi dent".
Lois Jeffrey, stated that she dld not have a specific definition but would return
with a firm definition..
Commissioner Puckett indicated that she would be in favor of a lower number of
density units i n return for granting certain i ncenti yes.
Commissioner Ponttous stated that she would be more lenient in granting bonuses in a
condominium situation rather than for apartments. She also was concerned that there
would be adequate parking.
Commissioner Le Jeune agreed with the concern regarding parking and encouraged staff
to look into it very carefully.
Commissioner Pontious noted that a combination-of the density bonuses and incentives
wod'ld be desireable elements that would best utilize the property.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 27, 1988
Page four
Commissioner Well noted that density bonuses could become a' problem. She stated that
the extra, square footage has to come from somewhere. She indicated that she felt
that the current condominium products coming before the Commission are very tiny and
did not feel that they could get any smaller. She stated that the bonuses would
cause'variances for parking, open space, recreational facilities and that she would
prefer to see the City provide financial help with the infrastructure. She indicated
that the closer people get together the more trouble there is; that the crime rate is
higher in the apartments in the City, therefore, she is against density bonuses.
Commissioner Pontious agreed with Commissioner Well on the apartment issue. She
indicated that condos would be better; that when people make an investment they tend
to take better care of their property and keep the area more respectable.
Commissioners Puckett, Le Jeune and Well agreed that there should be density bonuses
for condominiums but not apartments.
The Director indicated that there is a wide range of alternative approaches that
could be explored. A set of objective criteria regarding parking, density,
recreational facilities, condominiums, square footage and ownership restrictions
could be established. In the case of a project outside of the redevelopment area it
would not be as easy to obtain a financial bonus, therefore, the Commission needs to
carefully consider other criteria.
The Director noted that the Commissioners would be provided with the correspondence
the City recently sent to SCAG regarding our "Fair Share" affordable housing figures.
It was agreed that staff would further research the options available regarding
density bonuses and other incentives and return findings to the Commission at a later
date.
5. Reorganization of Planning Commission
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner
Recommendatt on:
Receive and file.
No Planning Commission necessary at this meeting.
STAFF CONCERNS
6. City Council Action Agenda for June 20,. 1988
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
City Council action was taken on the following issues:
Airport Noi se Moni tori ng
Cultural Resources Distri ct
Street Name Committee
Residential Community Care/ Drug and Alcohol facilities
Planning Commission Minutes
June 27, 1988
Page fi ve
CORqlSSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Well inquired about the Parks and Recreations Committee.
Commissioner Pontious noted that there were some tables set up outside some of the
newer restaruants in town, specifically the new yogurt shop in the Courtyard shopping
center, and asked if the Commission could be provided with a copy of the newly
adopted Outdoor Dining Guidelines.
Commissioner Le Jeune noted his concern regarding umbrellas with advertisements
located at Roma D"Italia.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:48 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Puckett seconded to adjourn to a workshop
to discuss the sign program for the Tustin Market Place on July 6, 1988 at 5:15 p.m.
in the Council Chambers and then to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission
meeting at 7:00 p.m. on July 11, 1988.
Chairman
Penni Foley
Secretary
Report to the
Planning Commission
T.r, pm Nn ?~
DATE: dULY 11, 1988
SUBdECT:
APPL I CANT:
ONNER:
LOCATION:
·
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST'.
FINAL PARCEL MAP 88-179
K.W. LANI. ER AND ASSOCIATES
2832 WALNUT AVENUE, SUITE A
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680
THE COLLINGS COMPANY
COLCO LTD.
17320 RED HILL AVENUE ~190
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705
SOUTH SIDE OF SEVENTEENTH STREET, .APPROXIMATELY 370 FEET EAST OF
ENOERLE CENTER #AY.
PC-C PLANNED COMMUNI~ COMMERCIAL
THIS PROdECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 15) FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
TO SUBOIVIOE ONE PARCEL INTO 'rwo PARCELS.'
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Final
Parcel Map 88-179 to the City Council by adoption of Resolution No. 2514 as
submitted or revised.
BACKGROUND:
On May 9, 1988 the Planning Commission approved Use Permit 88-8 and Design
Review 88-4 for a 62,000 square foot mixed use office and retail center. The
project contained four buildings on a site plan with two distinctive use areas.
This plan incorporated three retail buildings which faced Seventeenth Street and
one office building along Vandenberg Lane.
Subsequently the applicant processed a Tentative Parcel Map to create two
parcels from the one existing lot. This lot configuration would facilitate
separate property ownership of the retail area by Colco Ltd. and the office
portion by First Fidelity who plans to occupy the majority of the office
structure floor space.
Community Development Department
F_
Planning Commission Report
July 11, 1988
Final Parcel Map 88-179
Page two
The Tentative Parcel Map was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission
on May 23, 1988. The Tentative Map was subsequently approved by the City
Council on June 6, 1988. The property owner has met all conditions of approval
on the Tentative Map.
CONCLUSION
Staff has reviewed the proposed Final Map for conformance with the Tentative
Map. All conditions of approval have been met and the Map is ready for Council
approval. Therefore, staff suggest that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution No. 2514 recommending approval of Final Parcel Map 88-179 to the City
Counci 1.
Sent or P1 anner
Christine A. Shlngl~F. tbn,
Director of Community Development
LCP: CAS: ts
Attachments:
Final Parcel Map 88-179
Resolution No. 2514
Corn rnunity DeveloPrnen~ Department
ALL OF ?ElrrATIV[ KM- BI'I?I PAR C E L
SHEET I DF Z SHEETS
i PARCELS
BLOCR MODULE
MAP NO. 88- 179
IN T~E fflTY GF TUSTIN, ~U~I O~ Q~[, STAT~ ~F ~ALIF~RNIA.
~ M.BEAL. L.~. 4~S DATE Or SURVEY: JANUARY. I~M · '~ P~
~E A. ~A~N
. BY
OdlSl' S CSSTIFICATE
vs. T~S UNM(.HSIGMSn. BEING ~ P~IXS ~Vl~ MY IK~O TI~ I~lE~ IN ~K ~0
ST. JKS f~ ~.. U.S.A., L~., A NI mG ~W~TII~,
h' ~'"~*~ ~ ~-~- -
~ATI ~ ~l~ll)
)
·
.,
~Y ~lC IN ~ ~ ~1~ ~A~
~ PIIKIP~ ~ or ~IK~ IS
~UKV~VOi' $ CKITI Ir ICATF
..
THIS W I,/A.~ P#KPA#KU BY HK (~t UNDKF NY DIK~I(m MI) IS ~flFI) ~l~m A Fl#U) SUUV~Y
#F~IST#ATI~W ~XPIMAI'Iqm I)ATI~f
COUNTY SURVHYOIt'S CVrYllrlCATl~
S TI~C#NICAL~Y CUMRI,(.'T I~I.AT.IVJ~ TO ~311, PAMCKL HAP mJ4MD&RY.
·
DATED THIS -- DAY. OF -- 19
c.i. NEL~Mi BYt
(3XMTY SUSVKYOi DEPUTY
PL,,~MING CUlMISSION CSSTll;ICATK
I, , qKCI,KTAKV OF THI, CITY or TUb~TIN PLANNIK CONHISSIUN, DO
NSlliY CJUITIIFF THAT Tills ~AP UA~ SUmITTI,D'TO TH# TO,TIN PLAN#tH C~MNISSIUN AT A
I'I~GUJ.,AJI METING TH"II~ ON THI, DAy OF , ' , 19 , &Jib TOI,'I,I,UE'QN
&~ COIIIqMMIK ~ T#S TI~TATIVS NA~ ~ FILKU, )~4~i~l~D ,MiD APPHOVI,O SV ~AIU PI,AN#lNG
(~IMISS ION.
DASD Tills ~OAV OF' , I") .
I, UtlANGK (,~IUlITY FMJUO COIn~UL DIST#1~"T WU,IX(# t)F AN IC.A~)3M~NT
AND IMTKS CUN~K#VATION I,I,C011N(.U IN IKXN(M)~'), I'A(:F :l~#, ())'VICI&t. KKC~mOS.
2. TiW ClXINTY OF ~UdGI,, IM~UWl, O~ A VKHI~JL,AS AL:[:KD:; ~(:HT.~
IJ(JCUNItl/T #1,UNdHtU tM IMXM~ 92b6, PA(;# 123 (ii; OFFICIAl.
3. CI~Y OF TUSTIS, NULU~I' Off VkHfC~li.4# ACCHHfi l,l(.'lrT.~ ~) ITTH 5~rlKFF AS UKUI-
(~TSD tM~ F.N. 1'0-1026, IIS(.YMID~H IN fMlU~ I~), PM;I~.'; 44 AMI) 45, OF PAl,titi- HAPS*
4. FIHFJ4AN*S FUND TN~U~&NCt[ 'HUNt,MY, WXd~I op' AN ~ASir/q~NT
~4~#I~SS, HAIHTKNAKS A~ I,SPAll, I,EGUIILII~D IN m~ I'll&S.
SSCIFrAS¥, CITY U~ TtISTIN
P~INC ~ISSION
CITY CL~K* S
STATS OF CALIFORNIA) SS
COUNTY 01~ O#AW~ )
I IIllllV CKITIFY THAT 'fijiq HAP VAI' PItFSI,ICTKI/ ~
TIIH CITY of T~STIM AT A HlU:U~AI, MI(STING THKHKUF IIK~.D
Il/__, AND THAT THI,IL'UP~H SAID CUUNCll. OlD, iV AN
APP#OVK SAID W.
AND DID AL~O APPIOVE 'SUIIJKCT MAP P~ItSUAMT TO TNK P~OVISI(mS OF $~CTION b6416(a)(3)
(A) OF THI, SUBDIVISION ~AP &CT.
IJATID THIS __D&Y oF , 19
HAETK. VYIIN Ip'l
STATK 1)F
C~NHn'Y Ol' (mAN(;K )
I III(HKDY CF#TIFY THAT, ACL~IMUING TI) THK ##CO#US L)F NY OYFICY. THK#F AI,F N4) I.IKN.*i
A~AIII~T TIIK I.A#D ~WK#KH I'Y Tills HAr M ANY FAST T#K#~()¥ ~'(m IJ#PAliJ STATF. (.~NIHTY,
NUNICIPAh tJ~ I.(X:&I. 'F,UKS (m .%PKCIAI. A~SK~'~N~.JCTS CO~LK(.'T#I) AS T&XI,S. I,XCKPT 1'AXE.%
~w SFHCIM, AS~K~.'~l~ln',~ ~(SJ.KC'TKI) A.~ TAXKS NOT YK'r
IJ&TKI) THI~ I)&Y t))' ........ . t9 .
.~*TATK (IF CAI. I FONN f A )
(.~ffJ~rrY ()~ ()((AW;F
I IIF#K#Y C#NTiFY TO TIIF #FUOSI)I,I, ()P' ~Af~K C(XJNTY TIIAT TIIF P#OVI.I;ION,~ ()~' THP:
I)lVl,~l(m NAP ACT ilAVP: I,KFN (~]NPIolKP ¥1TI! k~CA#I)IN4; t)):l,O~l'r.~ ~1) S~(:lJ#~ T#F PAY#FNT
OJ; TAXH.~ t)K ,~PHCIAI, AHfiKSSNKNT,(; (~t,hF.(~'KI) A:; TAXK.~ (IN TIIF I,ANI) (:~K#):IJ #Y Till(: #AP.
I)ATKf) T#I,~ ....... IJAY ()J~ ......... · Ida__...
L1NI)A U, #()HFNTS ~y:
i:~,~IC--~-F: TIIF /K)AI,I) OF SIJPKHVISOI,S ' (~vpirrY
ALL. OF Tfl,.NTATIYE P. IL SS-1'141
S#EE'T 2 OF 1, MIEETS
~ PARCELS
Llll ACRES
OAT[ OF SURVEY: ,JANUAR'Ir 19lC
SCALE: !' · 40'
MONUMENT lITES:
p. ii tl4 144 ~ 41,. iNLU, S ITII&IWlSE IITil.
)'--INIIILIITIE llf~lll II~TAIIC& PIK f. lJL ISII44'%
45.
0~---- IIIICATI, I I" I,P. TAll, lB LS. 4d~l eR EPIEMII
PARCEL. MAP NO. 88-179
IN TNE CITY OF' TUSTIN, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF' CALIFORNIA
ANNA M. SEAL L.S. 4qSS DATE OF' SURVEqf:JANIIARI, IIS!
K.W. LAWLEK AND ASSOCIATE:i, INC.'
O, ASIS OF BEARINGS:
I' %llllT Ill llllll
· ·
IIEl I1" Kelly PER P. ll. Ill. Il-lei& IIClIIil
iii III Iil, Pills 44 % aS If PI, IIIL MAPS.~IIIII
III II~lll fltlllTl~ f-M3filllldL
NOTE:
ii i
///'////IIIIICATES iii - VENIr. uLAI &Gel. SS.
· ·
IIII ~1 II f.
FILI. C.S.~./'~--' 14q, 44' f, E41.}l,')~','~'"'\ ,Ill.41'
MIl. WINES. / I~ ~['~
I&I PEN I*.IL / [:
"'"' /l' I ~ SEVENTEENTH STREET
id ~r wi IMIL · T&& L,'b. 4t%t.
~//:....,..-, h:" --,*-,:.....:... . .. ,,t.,,.,,,.,..,
...... : / '. · , . '/
fAT IIIfnali ' I % ~/ '~'~44JI"~'~l-44~O~"/L/ ~ I~ Itlr
_ ~ b;~ ~ '
~-~_~ bt~ ,. I \ =':l~. "' '"'"~ '" '"' -'-~= -' ~:~ ~'~
PARCEL
. ~.,sz Acm
· .,:.~' . ,.,~,,
NIIoIi~EZ'I . ~. Il.lO' Wttt I.C.r.C.I.
,o.,,. ~ ~-'..,"~,- ~,,,,~,',., ,,~-"~.
IL I151. I~,
I
· ,. :.. PARCEL ~
'"'.:" ' I.Stt ACRES
P(I. P.M. ltO/44q,,lS.
Ltl1% 1 KK. ~ ~[f. A~CEPTT~ COL PCL.]
5.%l. STAMKS L.S. T41q.
Pti F.M. I~ 144~4&.
' I~NT ~AL
z- t. ~..o TiC, :. u~u ' .~ /
. %v
t.~q*~l. PER ~ "''-~-~'
.L.S. ~41~. P&I P.K ISl144%4~
trl. IIITIINL SIT-'*
#IITNIIG. LSTI, l'f
lite. AIIGL[.
IMS NI. II STilt, Pti
LT. z'~,14 PEK lB.IA J&OI44q''41L
1
2
3
4
5
6
?
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 [
19~
21
22
23
24
RESOLUTION NO. 251.4
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 88-179.
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planntng Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That Final Parcel Map No. 88-179 has been submitted by the
Col 1 trigs Company.
B. That a Publtc Hearing was held by the Planning Commission on
May 23, 1988. At this hearing the Planning Commission
recommended approval of Tentative Parcel Map 88-179 to the City
Council. Subsequently, the City Council approved Tentative
Parcel Map 88-179 on June 6, 1988.
C. That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tusttn
Area General Plan and Subdivision Map Act.
D. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
E. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of
.development.
F. That the design of the Subdivision or the proposed improvements
are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably i.njure fish or wildltfe tn thelr
habitat.
G. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements
proposed will not conflict with easements acquired by the
public-at-large, for access through or use of the property
within the proposed subdivision.
He
That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements
proposed are not ltkely to cause serious publtc health problems.
I. That the Final Map is in substantial conformance with the
Tentati ye Map.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 2514
Page two
II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council
approval of Final Parcel Map No. 88-179 and also authorizes the City
Manager to execute any subdivision bonds or agreements for the
subject tract.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the day of . ,, 1988.
·
Chairman
Penni Foley,
Secretary
Report to the
Planning Commission
T~m ~Jn ~.
DATE: JULY 11, 1988
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT/
OIOIER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENV I RONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
GENERAL PLAN AI"IEND#ENT 88-01, ZONE CHANGE 88-01 AND '"TENTATIVE
PARCEL HAP 87-201
THE IRVINE COHPANY
550 NEHPORT CENTER DRIVE
NEHPORT BEACH, CA 92660
FREEWAY ACCESS RESERVATION AREA SOUTH OF TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
PLANNED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL
1)
2)
1)
2)
3)
GENERAL PLAN AHENDIqENT 88-01 AND ZONE CHANGE 88-01: AN
ADDENDUM (NO. 88-01) TO ETR 84-2 HAS BEEN PREPARED.
TENTATIVE PARCEL HAP 87-201: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 15.
GENERAL PLAN AIREND#ENT 88-01: TO RECLASSIFY THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION ON THE GENERAL PLAN HAP FROH PLANNED COFU4UNITY
TO PLANNED CO#MUNITY COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROJECT AREA.
ZONE CHANGE 88-01: TO REZONE THE PROJECT AREA FROM PLANNED
CQRI~NITY RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED COI~UNITY COIqMERCIAL.
TENTATIVE HAP: TO RECONFZGURE THO EXISTING .PARCELS TO
CREATE THO NUMBERED AND THREE LETTERED LOTS.
RECOI4MENDATI ON:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City
Council of:
®
®
Draft Addendum No. 88-01 to Tustin Auto Center EIR 84-2 by adoption of
Resolution 2510;
General Plan Amendment 88-01 by adoption of Resolution 2511;
Zone Change 88-01 by adoption of Resolution 2512; and
Tentative Parcel Map 87-201 by adoption of Resolution 2513.
SLII~ARY:
The original Auto Center land use plan called for a 8.27 acre freeway access*
reservation area for the purposes of installing a full cloverleaf interchange at
C~m mu~i!v Development Dep~rtm~n_t i ........................................
Planning Commission Report
General Plan Amendment 88-01,
Zone Change 88-01 and TPM 87-201
July 11, 1988
Page two
the I-5 Freeway and Tustin Ranch Road. The final design of this interchange has
resulted in an excess parcel of land (5.05 acres in size) in the original
reservation area which is adjacent to the Tustin Auto Center.
Since the property is no longer needed by Caltrans, the property owner wishes to
revise the Auto Center layout by creating one additional dealer site in this
area. The property however, was not properly reclassified to commercial use at
the time the Auto Center was approved. Therefore, the Tustin Municipal Code and
State Law requires processing of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and
Tentative Parcel Map along with the necessary environmental documentation.
The subject project area is bounded by the I-5 freeway to the south, the
existing Auto Center boundary to the north, the Mixed Use Center of the East
Tustin Specific Plan area to the east and Tustin Ranch Road to the west. The
project area is identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
BACKGROUND:
In December of 1984 the Tusttn Planning Commission approved EIR 84-2, Zone
Change 85-1, Genera~l Plan Amendment 85-1 and Tentative Parcel Map 84-1032 for
the Tustin Auto Center. This..project created 11 dealer sites, a joint use
parking facility., public streets and a 8.27 acre freeway access reservation
area.
The previously approved Zone Change and General Plan Amendment covered the 11
developable lots created by Parcel Map 84-1032. The freeway reservation area
retained its original General Plan designation of Planned Community and Zoning
Code classification of Planned Community Residential. Therefore, the property.
must be reclassified to Planned Community Commercial and a Parcel Map must be
processed to create any new developable, lot .....
ANALYSIS'
Staff have reviewed the proposed project and have addressed each of the
requested applications to-ensure conformance with City and State requirements.
Each of the project elements is discussed separately below'
Draft Addendum No. 88-01 to EIR 84-2: The initial Auto Center project and
related .... street ~ro~ments were-~onsidered in an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) which was prepared in 1984. This EIR includes a project
description, identification of environmental impacts and project
mitigation measures. The nature of the proposed expansion is such that
the previous program EIR can serve as the EIR for this project.
Section 15184-2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
authorizes preparation of an addendum to an EIR when only minor technical
Community DeveloPment Depar~rnen~
Planning Commission Report
General Plan Amendment 88-01,
Zone Change 88-01 and TPM 87-201
July 11, 1988
Page three
®
e
changes or additions are necessary to make the EIR under consideration
adequate under CEQA. An addendum pursuant to this requirement has been
prepared and is attached to this report for review {Attachment I). Prior
to approval of this project, the Planning Commission must recertify the
original EIR with the addendum. This addendum makes minor technical
changes to the original EIR.
General Plan Amendment 88-01:
....
As previously mentioned, the freeway reservation area was not reclassified
to a commercial designation when the Auto Center project was approved.
The current zoning is Planned Community which is considered a residential
classification.
Prior to approval of a General Plan LanU Use reclassification, the
implications of the proposed use must be considered. The existing and
proposed project area is surrounded by commercial uses to the north and
east. Major roadway improvements are located to the south and west. By
nature of the properties location, it would only be accessible through one
of the existing commercial uses and is subject to a high ambient noise
level (traffic from 1-5 freeway and Tustin Ranch Road) which makes
residential development both unlikely and undesireable from . an
environmental perspective.
Exhibit "B" shows the proposed lot layout which would facilitate one
additional dealership site. Any proposed development would be subject to
the same Zoning Regulations and development criteria required of all
projects in the Tustin Auto Center.
Considering the project location, accessibility and proposed zoning
restrictions (discussed in more detail in Section 3 of this report) staff
considers the General Plan reclassification appropriate for this area.
The necessary findings for this amendment are identified in Resolution
2511 attached to this report.
Zone Change 88-01:
The freeway access reservation site is currently classified as Planned
Community Residential on the Zoning Map. The existing Auto Center parcels
are zoned Planned Community Commercial which requires approval of a
development plan prior to construction.
The Planning Commission approved the Tustin Auto Center Planned Community
Corn rnunity DeveloPment Depar~rnent
Planning Commt ssion Report
General Plan Amendment 88-01,
Zone Change 88-01 and TPM 87-201
July 11, 1988
Page four
.
Zoning Regulations and development plan for the Auto Center in 1984. To
ensure uniformity in site development and land use consistency, staff
suggests that these regulations also be adopted for the expansion area.
These Zoning Regulations are included in Resolution 2512 attached hereto.
The Auto Center Zoning Regulations establish development and use
criteria. The uses include new auto dealerships with accessory sales of
parts, used cars, recreation vehicles, service and related uses. The
regulations also require that all development conform with the Auto Center
Development Gui deli nes.
The Auto Center Development Guidelines establish criteria for
architectural style, landscaping, lighting, signs, and loudspeakers. All
parcels are also subject to participation in a Dealer Association. These
development guidelines and the membership requirements are described in
the Covenants, Codes and Restrictions (CC & R's) which are recorded on the
deed to all parcels in the Auto Center. Staff suggests that the CC & R's
be updated to include the new expansion area and that they also be
recorded on the deed to the new parcel created by Parcel Map 87-201
discussed be1 ow.'
Tentative Parcel Map 87-201'
Exhibit "B" shows the proposed lot layout for the project area.
Essentially, this new configuration creates one additional dealer site for
a total of eleven dealer sites in the Auto Center (three lots were
consolidated into two sites for the middle island of the Auto Center).
The proposed map includes:
Parcel 1: 4.843
Parcel 2: 4.689
Parcel A,B,C: 1.250
Total Area: 10.782
Parcels i and 2 are proposed dealership sites. Parcels A,B,C are located
along the perimeter of Parcels 1 and 2 for landscaping and maintenance
access purposes. These lots ensure that the landscaped perimeter facing
the 1-5 freeway and Tustin Ranch Road is maintained.
Both proposed dealer sites can be accessed by Auto Center Drive. The
actual site design for Parcels 1 and 2 is subject to the Auto Center
Development Guidelines. The site design and architecture would be
reviewed by the Community Development as part of the Design Review
process.
Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
General Plan Amen'dmen: 88-01,
Zone Change 88-0[ and TPM 87-201
July.ll, 1988
Page five
CONCLUSION:
Draft Addendum 88-01 to EIR 84-2 includes minor technical changes to the
original EIR 84-2 for the Auto Center. The recertification of EIR 84-2 with
Addendum 88-01 is considered adequate under CEQA. The proposed General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change and Tentative Parcel Map have been reviewed for
conformance wi th the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State
Subdivision and Planning Law and the Tustin Municipal Code. Staff considers
this project compatible with the area and suggests that the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the Draft Addendum 88-01 to EIR 84-2, General Plan
Amendment 88-01, Zone Change 88-01 and Tentative Parcel Map 87-201 to the City
Council.
LaUra Cay Pi cku~
Senior Planner
LCP:CAS :ts
Christine A. Shi6gleton ~/
Director of Community Development
Attachments: Exhibits A and B
Attachment I: Addendum No. 88-01 to EIR 84-2
Resolutions 2510, 2511, 2512 and 2513
~ Corn munity DeveloPmen~ Depar~men~ ~
TUSTIN A,. rO CENTER E'.PANSION
·
EXHIBIT A
Z
z
8'
./
~z
EXHIBIT B
DRAFT ADDENDUM TO
TUSTIN AUTO CENTER EIR NO. 84-02
TUSTIN
AUTO CENTER
EXPANSION
PREPARED BY:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, CITY OF TUSTIN
JULY 1988
ATTACHMENT I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
,,
·
I. Introduction
II. Project Description
2.1 Location
2.2 Project Characteristics
2.3 Discretionary Actions
III. Impacts Associated with Auto Center Expansion
3.1 Cumulative Impacts
IV. Appendices
A. Initial Study
B. Resolution 85-i0 Certifying EIR 84-2
PAGE NO.
2
2
A-1
B-1
- i -
LIST OF EXHIBITS
®
2.
3.
4.
®
NUMBER
Regional Location
Project Vicinity
Project Site
Original Freeway Interchange Design
(full cloverleaf)
Approved Freeway Interchange Design
(partial cloverleaf)
Proposed Lot Configuration
for Auto Center Expansion
-ii-
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
!
On January 21, 1985-the Tustin City Counc(1 certified as 6omplete the
Tustin Auto Center Final Environmental Impact Report 84-2 (EIR 84-2). EIR
84-2 addressed the potential environmental impacts associated with the
development of a 59.81 acre auto center in the City of Tustin. On page 10
of EIR 84-2, a 8.27 freeway access reservation area is identified as part
of the Auto Center project. This reservation area is the subject of this
addendum.
EIR 84-2 was adopted as a program EIR in accordance with the CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15168. Pursuant to Section 15168 (c) of these
guidelines, all "subsequent activities in the program must be examined in
light of the program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental
document must be prepared". An Initial Study (Appendix A) was prepared
for consideration of any new or increased impacts from this project.
On Page 10 of EIR 84-2, the components of the Auto Center land uses are
discussed. The project included a 8.27 acre freeway access reservation
site for the purposes of constructing a freeway interchange with a full
cloverleaf design. ·
Caltrans has worked with the City on this interchange design and the
approved plan eliminates the need for a 5.05 acre portion of the
reservation site. The. property location and accessibility have
established the need to re-design the existing lot configuration of the
southwest side of the Auto Center. This addition of land area and the
project components are discussed in Section 2 'of this document. The
inclusion of this reservation area as a potential dealership site is not a
substantial change in the project description as contained in EIR 84-2.
In conformance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, this document is
an addendum to EIR 84-2. An addendum can be prepared when changes are
made to a proposed project and such changes do not create any new
significant impacts, substantially worsen any significant impacts, or
substantially lessen any significant impacts already addressed in the EIR
prepared for the project. This is the case with the addition to the.
.Auto Center, as described in Section 3 of this document. Per Section
15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, this addendum will be attached to the
certified final EIR 84-2 for consideration by the decision-making body in
its review of the proposed Auto Center expansion which requires a General
Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Parcel Map.
- 1-
SECTION 2
PROOECT DESCRIPTION'
2.1 Project Location
The project site is located in the City of Tustin, California, just south
of the East Tusttn Specific Plan area, as shown in Exhibits I and 2.
As described on Page 7 of EIR 84-2 the project site is located in an area
bounded by E1 Camino Real to the north, Tustin Ranch Road to the west, the
1-5 freeway to the south-and the E1 Modena:Flood Control Channel to the
east. The freeway reservation site lies to the southeast, south of the
existing Auto Center parcels and just east of Tustin Ranch Road as shown
on Exhibit 3.
2.2 Project Characteri sti cs
As described in Section 2.2 of EIR 84-2, the planned land uses for the
area are described in the Tustin Auto Center Planned Community
Regulations. These regulations are incorporated into Resolution 2512 for
Zone Change 88-01 and will be applied uniformly on the expansion area.
Therefore, the land use and on-site improvements will be substantially the
same as the project considered in EIR 84-2.
A freeway access reservation area of 8.27 acres was proposed with the plan
for construction of I-5/Tustin Ranch Road interchange. The design* of this
interchange included a full cloverleaf design, a part of which was to be
located on the reservation area. Since the time of approval of EIR 84-2,
the City has prepared an environmental assessment and design of the
interchange.
The original full cloverleaf design has been revised to a partial
cloverleaf design, thereby, eliminating the need for the. freeway
reservation area (see Exhibits 4 and 5). City staff has reviewed the
potential land uses for the area in view of the current residential
designation on the property on the General Plan and Zoning Maps. The site
size, location and accessibility make residential development
_ .
environmentally as well as economically infeasible.
Exhibit 4 identifies the existing Auto Center lot configuration. As
discussed in EIR 84-2 all parcels are accessed by an internal looped
system called Auto Center Drive. The proposed lot configuration
facilitates the existing access design (Exhibit 6). The expansion project
therefore, will not change the access and circulation pattern.
2.3 Di screti onary Actions
This addendum addresses the discretionary actions proposed with the Auto
Center expansion. As discussed in EIR 84-2 on pages 8-10, certain formal
actions to reclassify the zoning and general plan designations on the
-2-
LOS
ANGELES COUNTY
-
FUI. L.E RTON
ANA
_
QE
HUNTINQTON'~
BEACH
SANTA
ANA
Airport
COSTA
MESA
NEWPORT:-
BEACH
PACIFIC OCEAN
BEACH
SAN NARDINO
.
J '
TU8TIN
Site
Irvine
Lake
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
IRVINI
Lake
I~ Mission
Vie jo
MI8810N
VlEJO
N JUAN
CAPISTRANO
CLEMENTE
mmm
.J
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
REGIONAL LOCATION
CITY OF TUSTIN
/\
EXHIBIT 1
il
0 3 6 MILE8
CITY
· V£
,.%
· i ,
BRYAN AVE
i-'--"'1---i~' ~ "x I ......... '
iSit ~ ~"'"'
I · ~, "'"'..,.
'\1 ..".'
-- ~."'CITY ',
-..
IR,iNE~
'1 _,
I
,. .
VICINITY MAP
CITY OF TUSTIN
M~kIiI B~iI~mm m ~
EXHIBIT 2
il
0 '1300 2600FEET
TUSTIN AUTO CENTER EXPANSION
""-SANTA ANA
FREEWAY
-~~~-- PROPOSED EXPANSION AREA
EXHIBIT 3
0
m
i
>
0
ITl
..~o -.~' .~ -
EXHIBIT 4
I11
RANCH
Z
ITl
m
.!
m
,mm
ROAD
EXHIBIT 5
0
Cl.
Z
X
w
W
Z
W
0
Z
w
~z zo?
EXHIBIT 6
property were processed with the initial Auto Center project. .Additionally
a Parcel Map (No. 84-1032) for the proposed lot configuration was
required. The expansion project also requires certain discretionary
actions such as:
1. Amendment of the Tustin General Plan Land Use Map designation.
2. A zone change in conformance wi th the proposed general plan
re-classi fi ca ti on.
3. Approval of the tentative parcel map.
Each of the proposed actions is discussed in greater detail below.
The Tustin General Plan Land Use Map designates the site as Planned
Community. As defined in the Tustin General Plan Land Use Element, the
Planned Community designation is both a land use and a zoning
classification. This designation assures compatible land uses by requiring
precise development plans and regulations for any area designated planned
community by the general plan.
The project site is part of a 1,988-acre parcel which was annexed to the
City of Tustin in 1977. At that time, the annexation area was pre-zoned
Planned Community-Residential in conformance with the general plan
designation for the area. The Planned Community pre-zone ordinance
requires the adoption of a specific plan prior to the issuance of any
bui 1 ding permi ts.
The proposed General Plan re-classification and Zone Change would change
the General Plan and Zoning designation from Planned Community to Planned
Community-Commercial; planned community regulations as adopted for the Auto
Center with the initial Auto Center project would be applied to the
expansion area as a part of the Zone Change. The planned community.
regulations .include site development and performance standards for the
Tusttn Auto Center. As such, the planned community regulations reflect the
requirements of a specific plan in accordance with Section 65450 of the
Government Code and meet the requirements of the city's pre-zone ordinance.
The Planned Community (PC) Regulations list the permitted and conditionally
allowed uses for the Auto Center and sets forth the applicable .development
standards {i.e., building heights, setbacks, required landscaping and
parking). The PC regulations also contain performance standards for
lighting, sign. s, landscaping and sound attenuation.
The proposed parcel, map reconfigures lot 9 of the original Auto Center plan
and the freeway reservation area for a total area of 10.782 acres'~ This
area is proposed for two numbered dealer lots, one 4.843 acres and the
other 4.689 acres and three lettered lots for landscaping and maintenance
access purposes.
- 3-
SECTION 3
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH AUTO CENTER EXPANSION
3.1 Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in Appendix A - Auto Center Expansion Initial Study, all
development related impacts such as drainage, surface runoff, noise, light
and glare, transportation and circulation have been mitigated to a level of
insignificance. The remaining issues related to the Auto Center expansion
are cumulative in nature. Section 4.0 of EIR 84-2 identifies the
cumulative impacts associated with the Auto Center project. All findings
of significance and conditions are made in Appendix B which contains the
Resolution approving EIR 84-2.
Of specific importance to the proposed expansion project is to determine
adequacy of the previous EIR and amend any technical data specific to the
new project area. In this regard, the expansion area will not, as
identified in Appendix A create any non-mitigated environmental impacts in
itself. However, the cumulative impact of the Auto Center as a whole may
have impacts. This discussion of cumulative impacts in EIR 84-2 identifies
the mitigation measures and findings necessary to ensure that. no
significant, unmitigated impacts associated with the project will occur
wi thout proper' consi derati on.
Specific impacts associated with the initial Auto Center project are
discussed in EIR 84-2. The mitigated impacts as discussed in Appendix A
are also properly addressed in EIR 84-2. The discussion in EIR 84-2 is
adequate under CEQA for the expansion area.
As a reference to this document, EIR 84-2, as on file with the Department
of Community Development serves as the base document for detailed
information and technical data. All related technical reports, conditions
of approval and responses to comments on EIR 84-2 are also on file with the
City of Tustin, Community Development Department.
-4-
APPENDIX A
ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY FOR AUTO CENTER EXPANSION
APPENDIX A
CITY OF TUSTIN
Community Development Department-
ENVIRONHENTAL INITIAL STUDY FOPJ4
I. Name of I=r~p~nent ~ne !trine Comp,an}, ,,
Addre= mci Phone Number of P~menf
550 Ne%Tport Center Drive
,New~o, rt Beach; CA, 92660
3. Dam'of Che~li~ Submitted 6-22-88
~. Agenc~ Requiring Checklist ,cit7 of Tusttn
$. Name of Proposal, if cq=pl~le Tustin Auto Center Expansion
II.
II Idll I III I1%11
(Explmatlam of all "yes" .and "tnaybe" answers am required on attached sheets.)
~ Will th~ prapoml result im
a. ' 'mtd)le earth c~nditions ar in .chcmgm
b. Dl.ruptl.., disl~l=:em~nt., cormcgtion
ar ~v~overing of lhe soil?
Chc.xje in topography ar grauncl surface
relief femums?
The clnstruction, cavering ar modification
of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind ar water erosion of
soils, either on or off the.site?
f. Chmges in deposition ar erosion of beach
sands, ar-~es in siitatian, deposition or
erosian which may modify the channel of a
river ar stream ar the bed of the ocean or
my bay, inlet ar lake?
A-1
~gcsure of geogle ar I:)ragerl¥ to gm)lo-
gk: hazcu~ 'such as earthqudc~ lar~licim,
mudslidm, ~ failure, ar similar hczz~:b?
Air. Will the pragmal reult ir.
a. Sd)stantlal air emissions ar deterleration
of ambient air quality?
b. The c~'eaticn of obi.rutland)lc odors?
Alteration of air rnoveTmnt, moLltum, or
tenl)erature, or any ~ In climate,
either locally ar regionally? ........
WalJr. Wlll the pragaml result im
fo
go
C:hmvjes in curren~ ar the caurse of all..
rertim of water mmmmentz, in either
rnm'irm ar fresh waters?
~ In abmrl)tim mt~ drainage Ixrt-
term, ar the rate and amaunt of surface
runoff?
Alteratlam to the ~aurie ar fl~ ef ~
watem?
.Cltmge In the anNxmt of surface water in.
my water bqdy?
O~ Into iurfa, watm, ar ~n my
alteratlan of mJrfCx~ water quality, in-
¢ludlng ~ r~ limited to-terrq)em~re,
dlJmlvecl ax'ygm or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground wamr.?
~ in the ClUC~tit~ of gr~ ~rters,
either through direct addJtJam or with-
drawab, ar through interceptim of cm
mluifer by cuts or excavatiam?
Sut~antlai recluctim in the amaunt of
water oltmrwise available far public water
sugglies?
~paeure of peogle ar prog~ to water r~.'
lated hazcrd, such as flooding ar tidal wave~?
7~
PIc~ life. Wlll the pragoml rmutt im
number of my spegie~ of plant~ (including
trees, skm~s, gras~ cmp~ ~ acluati¢ .
plmts)?
b. IRedugtlan of the nund:mm of cmy unique,
rare ar endangered spegie~ of plants?
Introckgtim of new al)re:ica of plants Into
mareG, or in a barrier to the nomml
mplen~ of ecisting ,t)e=iea?
d. Reducticn In ex:tm:ge of c~ agricultural
crap?. ·
~attmel I=Jf~ Will-the proOeeol result
Ox.xje in the dlvemity of ~l)egles, or
nurnbe~ of cmy ~:mgt. of animals (bird~,
land animals including reptiles, fish ~
Redugtlan of the mn-Lmm of my uniclu~,
rare or enda~erecl spagie~ of mirnals?
IntTQckgticn of new .pegias of m ira als into
m ale, ar rmult in a barrier to the
mlgratlcn ar mo~m~t of mira als?
cl. Detarioratlan to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
Will the p~l r~ult im
o. In~z~aa~ in e~L~tlng nod leveL~?
b. E.xpaeure of people to stature notae levels?
Light mml C. dar& Will the pragom~l produce
new light ar glare?
I. md Uae. Will the proposal result in a sub-
stmrtlal alteration of the prese.:t or planned
land use of an area?
blafurcd Resour~m. Will the pragosal re~lt in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural
remurces?
Ym
-x
A-3
I0. I~I~ ~ Ulxl~. Will the ~ 11~~
·
II.
12.
13.
A risk of cm Jl)~ ar the rellm
of haz~daus ~ (lrctucIing, ~ not
radlatia~ in the e.nt of m accidatt ar
u~llt CalCUtk.l.?
Pcq~laflm. Wlll the I:)~1 altar the location,
dbtrl)utian, damity, ar gnowth rate of the
hJmm Ix~latian of m area?
~ Will the p~l affe~-*t existing h~us-
lng, ar ¢.~zte a clmmmd far additio~zl hausing?
TralSlXr~t~Clla~tetle., Will the prel:e~l
result ins
C~neratic~ of .ubstmtlal additional
v~icular, mavm'rJi~
·
Eff~lz on existing I~zrking f~:tliti., ar
clmnmxl far n~w parking?
d. AIt~citiom to pre~ Ixrtterm of
tim or mo~l~flt of IXolit~ ondJor good~?
e. Alteratlam to waterbarne, rail ar air
traffic?
f. Imreal in traffic hazardz to rr~tar
~.hicles, bicyclists ar pedesfriam?
Public Servicm. Will the pragaml have an
effect u~m, ~r fault in a need far new ar
altered governmental services in cmy of the
following area~
b. Police prote:tion?
· ~. Schaols?
Y~
,X
A-4
d, Perks a' other recre~ior~l facilities?
Malnt~ of public fa:ilitles, Including
roads?
f. Other go~emmefltal servmes.
I~. ~m~j~. Will the propoml r~lt im
I&
17.
I&
19.
,. I.I, of ,utwtmtlal am~un~ of fuel or en~rcjy?
Sub~mtial Increa,. in demand upen exist-
lng murc~ of energy, or require the
cl~elepment of new source, of enm~jy?
Ufllitlm,. Will ttm p~i mit In a need
for nmw .ystmm, or aub~ntiai altermion, to
the f~llg~ing utllitlu
~. Pm,~ or natural gm? ·
b. Commmicat~ system?
cl. Sw~r er septic, tcnl.?
e. Sta'm ~ clmiruge?
fo So lLd waste and dhoami?
I-Immm Health. Will the pralMml mit ir.
~. Creet~ of my 'l~dth hezmd or potential
henlth hozc.~l (mo:luding rrmnml health)?
b.. Expofure of Ix~pl~ to potential h~lth
A~mh~lc.. Will the pre~ r, ult in the
obstnagtian of c.~y scenic vista or view open to
tt~ public, or will the prepcml result in the
cm~ian of an a~sthetically offemive site opon
to public view?
IRm:rmmtien. Will the prepeml'result in an
irnpau-t upon the quality ar quantity of existing
rmcreotic~ml opportunities?
Will the IWq)omt ruult in the altemticm
.of ar the dmmJctian of a prehistaric or
histmic ~.~.~l~~ site?
Xl
III.
or*am thOle effegts to*a ix*Ehtm'~nric ar
himoric: building, sn~-*mre, ar abjEc~
21.
Mmdmmy Fb~ngl of Skjnt~
Does the project have the potential to
ckgrade the quality of the erwiranment,
substantially reducm the habitat of e fish
ar wildlife apecies, eaJse ~ fish ar wild-
life papulatlan to drop below aelf raja-
toiling IMis, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal ~rr. Twnity, reduce the
rutH)Er er rmtrJ~ the raxje of e rare or
mdmg~ plc~f or animal er elimincrfe
irmortant ecanq)les of the major pericxLs
of California histor/ er prehistory?
bo
Does the projecf have the potential to
aghleve short-term, to the dbadv~tage of
lang-term, enviranmental goals? (A
which eggur, in a relatively brief, definitive
period of time while leng-term
·
Oaes the projeat hav~ i~ which are
individucdly limited, but cumulatively can,.
ziderable? (A project may impact on t~m
er more ~e remume~ where the irma=t
where the effect of the total of 1hose
iml)cx:t~ on the enviranment is significcytt.)
Dcm the pmjeat have enviranmental effects
which will cause substantial adveme effects
an humm beings, either directly er indirectly?
Dim:union of Envi~tat E~mluetien
See attached Exhibit A for clarification of all answers.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
X.
X
A-6
·
On the basis of this initio, ~aluatiom
-
I'flnd that the Pragosed ;)rojec'r COUCD NOT ha~ a significant effect
an the. environment, and a NEGATIVE DEC]=A~ATION will be prepared. ----
I find-that althoucjh the pral~ Ix~ject could ha~ a significant effect
an the envln~, there will not be a ,kjnificant effect in this 'case 'I--I_
becmse the rnitigatlan measures dmcribed an an attached sheet have
been added to the project.. A NEGATIVE DECLA~ATION WILJ. BE PREPARED. ..'
I find the p~ project MAY ha~ a signiflcc~ effect an the enviran-
merit, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I--I
· Laura Cay Pickup
Senior Planner
pursuant to Section 15153 of the California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines, an environmental document has already been prepared and
an addendum to describe minor techni'cial changes has been prepared,
however, no further environmental documentat.ion is.required.
A-7
EXHIBIT A
Initial Study
Auto Center .Expansion
EIR 84-2 - Addendum
I ·
Earth
a-g: The proposed expansion area is in a reserve area originally intended
for an 1-5 freeway off-ramp· The site was rough graded and a portion
bermed and landscaped with the initial Auto Center development project.
All compaction, soil and grading issues are adequately addressed in
84-2. No new impacts are anticipated since the expansion is intended for
the same types of land uses and development as discussed in the previous
EIR.
II. Air
a-c: The expansion area would accommodate one additional dealer site.
This addition in itself would not substancially increase emissions or
degrade air quality. The project EIR however, discusses the air impacts of
the project as a whole. This discussion identifies impacts and mitigation
measures considered adequate under C£QA.
III. Water
a, c-i: No impacts are anticipated on water resources or issues as a
result of one additional dealership in 'the'Auto Center. All conditions,
impacts 'and mitigation of these issues are adequately discusro' in EIR
..
84-2.
b: The development of the proposed expansion of the Auto Center will alter
drainage patterns and surface run-off. However, modern grading and site
design techniques will be implemented to properly drain all surface run-off
into the nearby E1 Modena Flood Control Channel. This impact, with the
aforementioned conditions on development, has been mitigated to a level of
insignificance.
IV. Plant Life
a-d: The expansion area has been rough graded and a 10' foot wide berm With
landscaping has been installed in the area. Study of the site and
landscape plan shows that there are no rare, endangered or mature plant
species located in the project area. The existing landscape pattern will
be moved further south towards the I-5 freeway in order to maintain the
landscape buffer along the southerly line of the Au to Center. No
significant impacts are anticipated.
V. Animal Life
a-d: The project area was thoroughly inspected by a professional
environmental planning firm at the time EIR 84-2 was prepared. This
inspection, and review of all updated records and information on file at
the City of Tustin, has determined that no rare or endangered species have
been si ted on the property. No significant impact on animal .life is
anticipated with the proposed expansion.
Addendum
EIR 84-2
Page' two
VI. Notse
a-b: E[R 84-2 identifies specific noise related impacts of the Auto Center
development. The E[R incorporated mitigation measures for potential long
term impacts from the 'use of loud speakers. Specific regulations imposed
on all Auto Center dealers have been adopted to mitlgate noise impacts to a
level of Insignificance. These regulations will be required for
development proposed tn the expansion area, thereby mitigating any long
term impacts to a level of insignificance.
Short term notse tmpacts as a result of construction activities may occur
If unchecked. However, as a condition of approval, all construction
activities wtll be regulated to conform.to the requirements of the Tustin
Noise Ordinance. These requirements regulate construction activities
during specified time limits and days of operation. Also, overall noise
levels are limited to a level considered acceptable to the Orange County
Health Department. All noise related impacts have been mitigated to a
level of Insignificance.
VII. Lig.h~ a~,d Glare
The proposed expansion area will accommodate an additibnal dealer site
which will eventually be developed and outdoor lighting installed. The
light inl~act was addressed and mitigated through EIR 84-2. These same
conditions apply to the expansion area, therefore, the adopted lighting
regulations for the Auto Center will be applied on all development in the
expansion area. This lighting program reduces' any light and glare impacts
to a level of insignificance.
VIII. Land Use
The project area is currently designated Planned Community Residential in
the General Plan and on the Zoning Map.. However, the proposed use of the
property was for a freeway off-ramp from the I-5 freeway from Tustin Ranch
Road. The off-ramp 'has been redesigned to eliminate the need for this
reserve area. The accessibility to the property, its size, shape and
location made it infeasible to develop the property for residential use.
The propqsed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for the project area
would redesignate -the property from Planned Community Residential to
Planned Community Commercial. This redesignation is for a land area 5.05
acres in size. When compared to the Auto Center .as a whole {60 acres) the
land use change proposed is considered insignificant.
A-9
,Addendum
"EIR 84-2
Page three
IX. Natural Resources
a-b: The proposed development in the expansion area will accommodate one
additional auto dealership. This development will involve typical
construction materials and landscaping which will not significantly impact
any natural resource.
X. Risk of Upset
a-b: The proposed land uses do not involve storage or use of large
quantities of any hazardous or flammable chemicals. Also the project
location is off local streets as opposed to a major throughfare, therefore,
no significant risk of upset is anticipated with this project.
XI. Population
The proposed project is on vacant land and will not displace any existing
residents.· However, employees working at any new facility may come to the
area. The one additional site, however, is insignificant in terms of its
population impact in that one new facility would en~loy less than 75
persons. Therefore no significant impacts on population are anticipated.
· -
XII. Housing
The anticipated 'development in the expansion area wi-ll accommodate one
additional dealership. As discussed in Section XI above no significant
increase in population is anticipated with this project. However, the City
is currently processing numerous subdivision maps in the surrounding area
for new housing, therefore, additional housing is being provided in the
area.
XIII. Transportation/Circulation
a, c-f: The additional site created by the expansion project, in itself,
will not create a significant impact on the transportation and circulation
facilities in the area. However, impacts resulting from the Auto Center as
a whole have been addressed in EIR 84-2. The discussion and mitigation of
these impacts are considered adequate to cover this project.
b: Any new development of an auto dealership will create a demand for
parking.. However, the Auto Center Development Regulations require adequate
on-site parking facilities in conjunction with a centrally located joint
use parking facility. The expansion area will become a party to the
Development Regulations and will also enjoy its pro rata share of use of
the joint parking facility. With these elements, the parking demand
impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance.
A-10
Addendum
£IR 84-2
Page four
XIV. Public Servlces
X¥.
a-f: All public servtce needs have been discussed in the previous EIR
84-2. These services have been installed and are operatlonal for the
existing dealers in the Auto Center. The addition of the project area,
therefore, does not significantly impact the servtces in the area.
Energy
a-g' The project area is currently served by gas 'and electric utilities,
the addition of one dealer site will not create a significant impact on the
use of substanctal amounts of fuel or energy or creation of new energy
sources.
XVI. Utilities
a-f: The Auto Center EIR 84-2 sets forth conditions and mitigation
measures for providing proper access to utilities. All utilities have been
installed and the proposed, area has access to stub into these facilities.
Therefore, no significant impact on utilities is anticipated.
XVII. Human Health
a-b: The development of the Auto Center, as well as the expansion area has
been reviewed for potential impacts on human health. All. construction 'and
operation of facilities in the Auto Center will be inl accordance with
modern safety guidelines as required by the State of.' California. No
signi ftcant impact on human heal th i s anti cipated.
XVIII.Aesthetlcs
The Auto Center Development Regulations set forth an architectural and
landscape program for consistency and quality of' projects in the Auto
Center. These regulations will be applied uniformly to all dealers in the
Auto Center, including the proposed expansion area, therefore, no aesthetic
impacts are anticipated.
IXX. Recreation
The Auto Center project does not incorporate residential uses, therefore,
the project does not require recreation facilities.
XX.
Cultural Resources
a-d: EIR 84-2 reviewed the project area and the proposed land uses for the
projects impact on cultural resources. This analysis covers the same
conditions as the expansion and is adequate discussion for this project.
This analysis identified no significant impacts on cultural resources.
A-il
~ddendum
EIR 84-2
Page five
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a, b, d: EIR 84-2 addresses the mandatory findings of significance of the
Tustin Auto Center. The proposed expansion is similar and the discussion
in the previous £IR is considered adequate for this project.
c: With the expansion area and the existing Auto Center Development, some
cumulative impacts are imminent. These impacts are identified, discussed
and mitigated in £IR 84-2. This discussion is adequate to cover the
expansion project. All mitigation measures and conditions of approval for
[IR 84-2 will be applied to this addendum and are incorporated into the
resolutions of approval by reference.
LP:pef
A-'12
APPENDIX B
RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL FOR EIR 84-2
APPENDIX B
1
6
?
$
9,
10
11
12
15
16
17
18
19
:~0
RESOLUTION NO. 85-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT {EIR) 84~2 FOR THE TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
The City Council of the City of Tustin, California does hereby resolve as
fol lows:
I®
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
Ae
A. Draft EIR 84-2 and amendments were noticed, prepared, and
processed in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, State Guidelines, and the policies of t.he City of
Tustin for the proposed Tustin Auto Center to be located
northerly of the Santa Aha Freeway and easterly of Jamboree
Road.
The Planning Commission, by adoption of Resolution No. 2204 on
January 14, 1985, recommends that the City Council certify EIR
84-2, as amended.
Ce
Exhibit A, attached and a part hereof, and EIR Text identifys
mitigation measures that avoid or substantially mitigate adverse
impacts of the project; adverse impacts which-cannot be feasibly
mitigated; and overriding considerations justifying the proposed
project.
II.
The City Council-of'the City of Tusttn does hereby certify the final
EIR 84-2 for the proposed Tustin Auto Center to consist of the Draft
EIR 84-2, amendments, thereto,- staff's technical report, written
comments and responses, testimony received at public hearings before
the Planning Commission and City Council and responses as contained
within the minutes, and the mitigating measures and overriding
considerations as contained herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on
the .215t day of January . 1985.
URSULA E. KE'IINNED¥, /~)
Mayor (Y
City Clerk
B-1
Aa ~ by ¢~QA and the City of ~
2anualT 21, 1985
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Art of 1970, as amended, and in
accordance with the City of Tustin guidelines, as amended, this document presents
the findings and a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding required for
approval of the proposed project.
.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does'hereby find that eh~n~es or
alterations have been required in~ or fneor~)orated into~ the Drojee-~'whieh
avoid or substantially mitigate' the significant adverse imDaets identified
in the final Eiit as' sL~eeffieally itemized below. '
A. Water Resources
Imparts:
The site is currently subject to flooding ranging in depth from
one to three feet resulting from the'~ inability of regional
drainage facilities to oonvey 100-year flood flows.
Findings:
Imparts:
The project includes the construction of an earthen berm
extending from an existing berm to the west of the project
site and wrapping around the project site to protect the
project from flooding. This berm will protect the site without
significantly altering existing drainage and flooding .pa~terns
in the vicinity of the project. No increased flooding imparts
will result to adjacent properties.
Short-term degradation of surface water quality will occur
during grading and initial construction activities.
Findings:
Imparts:
A plan for control of onsite storm runoff from the property
during construction will be prepared and submitted to the City
of Tustin prior to the issuance of any grading permits.
On-site runoff volumes and velocities will increase and the
on-site drainage pattern will be altered.
Findings:
An on-site drainage plan will be submitted to the City of
Tustin for approval prior to the recordation of the final parcel
map. Methods for controlling the velocity and direction of
runoff will be incorporated into the prejeet design.
Imparts:
Development of the site will effect a long-term change in
runoff quality from agricultural pollutants to urban pollutants.
Findings:
This impart will be partially reduced by the implementation
of appropriate stormwater pollution control plans and periodic
cleaning of storm drains.
B-2
Resolution No. ff;-.___~.
Page 2
B. _Land Use and Aesthetics
Imparts;
Findin~
Imparts:
The project is not consistent with the existinK general plan
and zoning designations for the site and surroundin~ areas.
A general plan amendment and zone change 'are proposed as
part of the project. The project design and performanee
standards included in the Tustin Auto Center Planned
?ommunity Regulations will ensure that the proposed project
m compatible with land uses planned for areas adjacent to and
near the project site.
Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in the
introduction of high intensity night Hghting in the East Tustin
area.
Findings..
The Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Regulations
contain llghtinK Peeformanee standards stipulating the type of
lighting which may be used, the maximum height of eaeh
fixture, and the allowable wattage per square foot. Only
sharp cut-off fixtures at a maximum height of 20 feet are
allowed, thereby localizing light and glare impacts.
C. .Teansluortation/Cire,Jation
Findings:
The Proposed projeet will contribute a small increment to an
existing and Projected eumulative traffic impart at several
intersections in the area. The project will generate 8,205
ADT and 845 p.m. peak hour trips. Traffic from the project
will incrementally worsen traffic conditions at the Red Hill
Avenue/I-$ ramps and the intersections of Red Hill Avenue
and h'vine Boulevard and Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
Construction of the Jamboree Road/l-$ interchange will
provide substantial mitigation of Project related traffic
imparts by directing project related and other traffic from
Red Hill Avenue. The Jamboree Road/I-5 interehange has
been committed fo~ construction by the City of Tustin as a
locally funded project (Tustin City Council Resolution No. 86
65).
D. Noise
Imparts:
Activities at the auto renter facilities will increase overall
ambient noise levels in the area by a few decibels. The
number of individually audible and potentially intrusive traffic
noise events will increase as a result of the auto renter
development.
B-3
Resolution No. f~r o
Page 3
Finding:
Impacts:
Findings:
Impacts:
Findings:
_Air Quality
_
Findings:
Impacts:
Findings:
The Tustin Center Planned Community Regulations contain
operational performance standards which will mitigate noise
imparts to an insignificant level. Other recommended
operational and site planning measures will also reduce
project imparts.
Short-term noise imparts will occur during project
construction.
Compliance with city noise standards regarding hours of
operation and the use of muffled construction equipment will
minimize construction noise imparts.
The project site is exposed to noise impa~ts from the Santa
Arm Freeway. Over one-half of the p~ojeet site is exposed to
freeway noise levels in excess of the City of Tustin~ noise
objective of $$ CNEL for commexeial land uses.
The project design incorporates a wall of at least eight feet in
height along this edge. This wall will serve to attenuate noise
from the freeway and will reduce on-site noise levels to
acceptable levels.
Short-term increases in dust and exhaust emission will occur
in the vicinity of the project during construction.
Compliance with Rule 403 of the SCAQMD Rules and
Regulations and wetting of geaded areas will mitigate fugitive
dust emissions cluring'eonstruetion.
Long-term regional increases in mobile and stationary-source
emissions will result due to the increase in motor vehicle and
energy usage.
The proposed project includes bicycle and pedestrian facilities
provided to reduce motor vehicle usage. Sidewalks will be
provided along Jamboree and Laguna Road and on aU internal
roads. All roadways being constructed as a part of the project
have sufficient width to allow for bicycle lanes. No further
mitigation measures are feasible to reduce motor vehicle air
quality emissions.
B_4
Resolution No. ?~'-/o
Page 4
_The City Council of the City of ~tin. further finds that a!_thoug~
_alteuations~ or conditions have been ineorDorated into the puo~c-ot whioh will
s,,hstantially mitigate' or avoid .significant effects identified in the fi'hR! E!R;
~eutain of the si~ifioant effects eaunot be mitigated to f-Uy aeoeptsble
levels. The uemaining impacts identified below may continue to be of
si~_{Xioant 'adverse impact even when mil known f~asible and identified
mitigation meastw~s ave applied.
A. Project implementation will result in the termination of on-site
a~ieultural produeti, on and the loss of 80 acres of nFarmland of Statewide
Importance" as identified by the California State Department of
Conservation.
Findings:
The project is eurrenUy committed to non-agvieulttwal use.
The Tustin General Plan Land Use Element eurrenUy
designates the site for urban (residential) ]and use. The
existence of an Irvine P, aneh Water District improvement
finance district and the issuance of bonds to finance urban
level wate~ and sewer improvements for the project site and
surrounding areas further indicates the existing commitment
to urban development of this area. There are no economically
or physically feasible measures available to mitigate this
impart.
B. The proposed project will generate approximately 8,205 ADT and 845 P.M.
peak hour trips. Traffic from the project will incrementally women traffic
conditions at the Red Hill Avenue fl-5 ramps and the intersections of Red
Hill Avenue and Ivvine Boulevard, and Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
Findings:
Construction of the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange wiU
provide substantial mitigation of project related traffic
impacts by diverting project related and other traffic from
Red Hill Avenue. The Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange has
been committed by the City of Tustin as a locally funded
project (Tustin City C0uneil Resolution No. 84-85). Prior to
construction of the interchange, the State Department of
Transportation must approve connection of the interchange to
the state freeway system and the City of Tustin must select
and institute a mechanism to finance construction of the
interchange. Until such time as these approvals and actions
are taken and the interchange is constructed, traffic
generated by the pro~eet will adversely impart operating
conditions at the Red Hill Avenue/I-$ ramps and the
intersections of Red Hill Avenue and Irvine Boulevard, and
Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
B-5
Resolution No..~;-'l~
Page $
3~
C,
The project site is located within the Eastern Corridor study area-and
approval and construction of the auto renter project prior to completion of
the route location study could influence the study by eliminating some
potential alternative alignments of the corridor.
Findings:
The City of Tustin will participate in the Eastern
Tt~rtation Corridor Study and cooperate with the County
of Orange and the other local agencies involved and affected
by the study. It is not considered economically feasible-to
delay approval and implementation of the project until the
corridor study is completed.
Do
Short-term construction equipment emissions and long-term mobile and
stationary emissions will occur with project implementation ereatin& an
adverse impart on the att quality of the South Coast Air Basin.
Findings:
As with any urban development project, air quality imparts
cannot be completely mitigated. In approving the project,
subject to the conditions and mitigation measures set forth,
the city has done all that is technically and reasonably
possible at the municipal level
F,. Increased demand for limited regional water resources.
Findings:
The project necessitates increased water use and, therefore,
increased demand for regional imported water. This impart
cannot be mitigated on an individual project basis although
the city will require implementation of all feasible
conservation measures.
F. Increased long~term demand for finite fossil fuel resources resulting from
pr.jeer electrical and natural gas requirements.
Findings:
The project necessitates an increased cumulative demand for
finite fuel resources. Althoug~ serviein~ agencies anticipate
adequate fuel supplies for the pr.jeer, the long-term demand
for fossil fuel res. ureas will be unavoidably increased.
The City Counefl of the City of Tustin does hereby find that certain changes or
alterations (e.g.~ mitigation measures) required in or incorporated into the
p~ojeet are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of a public affeney other
than tl~& City of .Tustin and ran or should be adopted' by the respective affeney
,as itemized below. '
A. California Department' of Transportation; Approval of the connection of
the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange to the state freeway system.
B -6
Resolution N6. ?~'-/o
Pale 6
The City Council of the City of Tustin has weighed the benefits of the proposed
project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to
approve said L~ro~ect. The City .Council does hereby further find, determine,
and state, pursuant to the prowsions of Section 15093:of the state CE~A
Guidelines, that the occurrence of the certain si~:nificant environmental
effects identified in the final EIR and set forth in paragraph .2 above, have been
evaluated against t. he following overricltn~ considerations:
A. The project will result tn the following substantial economic, social, and
environmental benefits to the City of Tustin and suzTounding areas:
At build-out, the project is anticipated to yield a positive annual
fiscal surplus of $1,306,200 to the city~ general fund. Total annual
revenues are projected at $1,414,?00 and total costs at $108,500.
(2)
The consolidation of auto dealerships in one location will result in less
vehicle miles traveled than would be typical of a strip pattern of auto
dealerships. This fact is reflected in the trip generation rates for the
Irvine Auto Center, a similar type of development, which are
considerably lower per acre than the observed rates for individual
auto dealers.
(3)
The proposed project will provide improvements to the local
circulation system consisting of the extension of Laguna and'
Jamboree Roads.
B. The following economic and social considerations make the project
alternatives identified in the final EIR infeasible.
The "No Project" alternative is rejected because it fails to meet the
objectives set forth for the project, particularly the objectives of
providing an increased revenue base to the city and creating a
development which provides for a range of auto-related uses to serve
the City of Tustin and surrounding communities.
(2)
(3)
The "Existing General Plan" alternative is rejected because it fails to
meet the objectives set forth for the project, particularly the
objectives of providing an increased revenue base to the city and
creating a development which provides for a range of auto-~elated
uses to serve the City of Tusttn and surrounding communities.
Residential use of the~ site is considered less desirable than the
proposed commercial use given the site's proximity to the I-5 freeway.
The "Residential Development at Ten Dwelling Units to the Acre"
alternative is rejected because it fails to meet the objectives set
forth for the project, particularly the objectives of providing an
increased revenue base to the city and creating a development which
provides for a range of auto-related.uses to serve the City of Tustin
and surrounding communities. Residential use of the site is
B-7
Resolution No. ~-~'~ ~
Pal~e ?
(4)
considered less desirable than the proposed commercial use ~iven the
site~ proximity to the I-5 freeway.
The "Alternative Leeations' alternative is rejected because
development of the proposed project on the other available sites in
the city would result in 8eeater environmental impacts than would
development of the project on the proposed site. The potential
alternative sites would result in/eeater impacts to existin~ residents
oe would require substantially increased site improvement costs than
would the currently proposed site. The proposed site offers the best
combination of distanee of existin~ residents, freeway visibility, and
freeway access.
B-?
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) §
CITY OF TUSTIN )
MARY E. WYNN, City Cl'erk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of
Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the nembers of
the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing
Resolution No, 85-10 was duly and regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a
regular neeting of t'he City. Council held on the
2115m~m day Of January, 1985, by the
fol lowing vote:
AYES :
NOES :
- ABSENT:
COUNCILPERSONS: Edgar,. Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli
COUNCILPERSONS: None
COUNCILPERSONS: None
MARY E. WYNN~'~Ctt~ Clerk
City of Tustl~, Californl
t)-8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
RESOLUTION NO. 2510
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFY FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR 84-2 AND
ADDENDUM NO. 88-01 AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustln does hereby resolve as
follows: '-
I ·
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows-
A. That an initial study questionnaire was prepared for General
Plan Amendment 88-01 and Zone Change 88-01 (the "Project"), and
it was determined that Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No.
84-2 (Tustin Auto Center), with an Addendum (No. 88-01), could
be employed to describe this project, in accordance with Section
15153 of the CEQA Guidelines.-
B. That the environmental documentation was prepared by City of
Tustin and Michael Brandman Associates.
C. That the subject EIR and Addendum No. 88-01, including comments,
have been reviewed and considered by the City of Tustin.
D. That the EIR (84-2) was prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act, and CEQA Guidelines, and
the policies of the City of Tustin.
E. That pursuant to Section 15153 of the CEQA Guidelines, EIR
84-2 has previously been prepared and certified and adequately
addresses the general environmental setting of the project, its
significant environmental impacts, and the alternatives and
mitigation measures related to each significant environmental
effect, and that no additional environmental documentation need
be prepared.
F®
That the addendum prepared for the project addresses only minor
technical changes or additions and none of the conditions
described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines have occurred.
G. That the findings and mitigation measures described in
Resolution No. 85-10 and 2204 are hereby incorporated into this
resolution by reference.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
~5
1(1
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 2510
page t~o
II. The Planning Commission of the City of Tusttn does hereby recommend
to the Ctty Council certification of Final £IR 84-2 with Addendum
No. 88-01, which has been completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and adequately addresses the project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tus%in Planning
Commission on the day of , 1988.
Chairman
PENNI FOLEY
Recording Secretary
2
RESOLUTION NO. 2511'
3
4
5
6
A RESOCUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
AMEND THE LAND USE MAP OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE
1-5 FREEWAY, TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY
BORDER OF THE AUTO CENTER, AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA
CHANNEL.
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
9 I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. Section 65356.1 of the Government Code of the State of
California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public
interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General
Plan.
be
That in accordance with Section 65356.1 of the Government Code
of the State of California, a public hearing was duly called,
· noticed, and held on the application of the Irvine Company to
reclassify the land use from Residential/Single Family to
Planned Community/Commercial for an area bounded by the 1-5
Freeway, Tustin Ranch Road, the existing southerly border of the
Auto Center and west of the E1 Modena Channel as shown in
Exhibit "A".
C. That Environmental Impact Report No. 84-2 (Tustin Auto Center)
as amended by Addendum No. 88-01 has been prepared for the
subject project, and has been recommended for certification to
the City Council, by the adoption of Resolution No. 2510.
D. That a change in classification would be in the public interest
and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the
surrounding property owners.
II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that
General Plan Amendment 88-01 be adopted, amending the Land Use Map of
the Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan from
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
171
19t
21
23
2~
27
28
Resolution No. 2511
Pa ge two
Residential/Single Family to Planned Community/Commercial for an area
bounded by the I-5 Freeway, Tustin Ranch Road, the existing southerly
border of the Auto Center and west of the E1 Modena Channel as shown
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission
held on the day of 1988.
Chairman
PENNI FOLEY
Recording Secretary
,<
ol,--
zn-
<I:LU
n"
Zz
:~^¥.----.-.-- IN/tAOUg --
ResolUtion No. 2511
RESOLUTION NO. 2512
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING REZONING OF A AREA BOUNDED BY THE
I-5 FREEWAY, TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY
BORDER OF THE AUTO CENTER AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA
CHANNEL, FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO PLANNED
COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL AND INCLUDING THE INCORPORATION
OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS KNOWN AS THE EAST
TUSTIN AUTO CENTER. ~
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustln does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows-
A.
That a proper application, (Zone Change No. 88-01) has been
filed by the Irvine Company, to change the zone for an area
bounded by the 1-5 Freeway, Tustin Ranch Road, the existing
southerly border of the Auto Center and west of the E1 Modena
Channel, from Planned Community to Planned Community/Commercial
as shown in Exhibit "A", and incorporating planned community
regulations known as the East Tustin Auto Center.
Be
That a pt.,bltc hearing was duly called, noticed and held on s~id
appl i cation. '
C. That a zone change should be granted for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed change would not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, 'and welfare of the surrounding
property owners.
.
That the inclusion of a Planned 'Community zone and
incorporation of development regulations will ensure that
the proposed use will be compatible wi th future and
exi sting developments.
.
The proposed zone designation is in conformance with the
Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan.
De
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR 84-2) as amended by Addendum
No. 88-01 has been prepared for this project, and has been
recommended for certification to the City Council by the
adoption of Resolution No. 25'10.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
Resolution No. 2512
page t~o
II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the Ctty Council
approval of Zone Change No. 88-01 from Planned Community to Planned
Community/Commercial for an area bounded by the I-5 Freeway, Tustin
Ranch Road, the extstlng southerly border of the Auto Center, and
west of the E1 Modena Channel, as shown in Exhtbit "A", and
Incorporates Planned Community Regulations known as the East Tustin
Auto Center (Exhibit "B" attached hereto).
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, held on
the day of , 1988.
·
Chairman
PEN~I~m' POLEY
Recording Secretary
N I
LLJO
Z
x
I,U
0
0
-- ONINt~:)UI~
EXHIBIT A
Resolution No. 2512
.
EAST TUST~N AUTO CE~NTF_~
CITY OF TUSTIN
PLANNED COMMUNITY REGU~~ON$
NOVEMBER, 1984
THE IRVINE COMPANY
Amended by the Planning Commission
January 14, 1985
EXHIBIT B
RESOLUTION NO. 2512
.1'
TUSTIN AUTO CENTE~
PT~iN~D COMMUNIT~ HEGULATIONS
CIT~ OF TUSTIN
Novembe= 1984
.
SECTION I
SECTION II
SECTION III
SECTION IV
SECTZON V
SECTION VI
SECTION VII
INTENT AND PURPOSE
STATISTICAL ANALISIS
GENE3tAL NOTES
DEFINITIONS
PERMITTED
ZONING MAP
SITE PLAN REVIEW
SECTION VIII DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Subsection A. Building Se=backs
·
Subsec=ion B. Building Heigh=s
Subsec=ion C.. Pa=king
Subsec=ion O.
·
Subsec=ion E.
Subsec=ion F.
Subsec=ion G.
Subsec=ion H.
Subsec=ion I.
Subsec=ion J.
L&ndscaging
Walls and Fences
Sound AE=enua=ion
Signage ·
S'~o=age and Loading
Re£use COllec=ion A=ea'
Page
'1
3
8
9
11
11
ll
12
13
14
15
16
SECTION I. INTENT AND PURPOSE
T~e Planned Community Regulations are intended Co guide
-CAe pla~ing and design of ~ auto sales, leasing an4 =e-
~C~ service cancer. ~e R~laCions pro, Ce C~e ~aliCy
dlvelo~nC of ~e pco~C by establishing sCan~=ds ~or CAe
Si~e pla~inq, architectural design, and ~Cerial~ for all
sC~cCures whi~ will bec~ a pa== of CAe CanCer.
While the AuCo CanCer serves a unique ~uncCion within
the Tus=in area, the Planned Community Regulations seek to
inCeg=a=e tAis Can=er into CAe surrounding community in a
nmnner thaC is compa=ible with existing and ~uture develop-
.o
s~cTzo~ zz. S~zS~,ZCA~ ~Ar.~SZS,
The TusCin Auto Center Planned Community has been estab-
lished as one (1) basic- group: ~
Au,to Sales, Leasing & Se=vice
Net Acres
40.00
This group shall be served
..
Publ£c
Lanciscape buffer a=ea
TOTAL GROSS ACRES
1.51
55.46
B --2--
T'
T.
SECTION III . GENERAL NOTES
0
Within =he Planne~ communi=¥ asea, =he con=inue~ use of
subJec= =o ~e appli~ble zoning codes of =~e Ci=y of
~s=in.
2. Wa=er service and sewage disposal ~acili=ies wi=bin
P1Anne~ Co---,;ni=y asea shall be ~urnished by =he Irvine
HancA Wa=er Dis=ri==. However, ~empo=a=y services
,=he= agencies ny be necessa=y.
3.
Regardless of =he provisions of ~his supplemental =ex=,
no cons=ruc=ion shall 'be allowed wi=bin =he boundaries
conzPlies wi=h all provisions of.applicable building
codes and =he various mechanical codes rela=ed =here=o.
4. Any land use proposal os developmen= standard ~o= speci-
fically covered ~¥ =his plan and its supplemen=al CexC
shall'be subject =o CAe regulations of =he City of
TusCin zoning codes.
5. Whenever =he regula=ions :con=ained herein conflict wi=h
=he regula=ions of Tus=in zoning codes, =he regula=ions
con=aine~ herein shall Cake precedence·
pr.perry during =he cons=ruc=ion shall Be prepared and
=o =he issuance of a grading permi=. The plan shall
rain =he in=egri=y o~ sil= con=rol ~acili=ies during
normal o~era=ion.
·
Approval by =he Air Quali=y Managemen= Dis~ric~ of any
plans, devices, or ~acili=ies ~or =~e con=rol of any air
pollu=an=s which ~ay be genera=ed, shall ~e req~Aired.
8. Grading within =he zone shall be subjec= =o =he approval
·
Energy conserva=ion provisions shall be considered w~en
building orien=a=ion, maZe=isis and design are ~eing
developed.
r
10.
Alee= co~encemen~ of alterations o= construction of
any sCruc=ure, or imgrovemenC thereon, the owner shall
4iligen=iy prosecute the work thereon, to an end that
the structure shall no~ remain in a ~ar~ly finished
condition any longer than reasonably necessary for
-11. All mechanical a~urcenances on ~uilding roof
12.
CC&Rs for the subject project, to include provisions for the
maintenance and replacement of landscaping, shall be submitted
to and approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance
of building permits.
13.
Prior to the issuance of bu.ilding permits for subject project,
a Master Development-Plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Commission and approved by resolution. Said plan shall
incorProate by text, diagram and illustration the following
el ements:
ae
Ce
ee
building materials and colors
landscape.plan, to include theme, plant materials,
irrigation system and fixtures
wall plans to show elevations, materials, and location
signing to include locations, size,'height, materials,
and intensity of lighi~ing
performance standards for noise control
perimeter lighting fixtures, location, and intensity.
B-4-
SECTION IV. DEFINITIONS
1. Adver=isinq Surface: The total area of the face of any
signing structure.
·
2. Common'Area: Areas designated bY Parcel Map for land-
scape ~r employee par~ing purl~oSes and deeded Co a
legally ~ormed Auto Center Merchants' Association.
of--~ay witAi~""~Ais ordinance shall mean dedicated vehi-
.cular rigA=s-of-way, including any median paving or
landscaping located within =hat right-of-way.
4. Gross Acreage: The entire land area wi=bin =he boundary
abut=lng arterial highway o= the =ante=line of any
Net Acreage: The total !and area of the land described
in =he use or other permit. Net acreage shall consti-
tute. the total buildable area.
Lines:
Any parcel's frontage which ~aces onto an
property line, whether facing =he interior
loo9 road or facing .toward an entrance
Rear - The property line of any parcel which is
adjacent to =he perimeter streets of
Jamboree Road, Laguna Road, My~ord Road, or
=he I-~ ~reeway.
Side - Those property lines which separate one
subdivided parcel which has been designated
for retail use from another such subdivided
parcel or from a designated common
e~loyees' par~ing lo=.
Service & Storage ~uildings: Ail structures on any
retail pa=tel whose primary purpose is o=he: =~an =he
display, sale or lease of automobiles and related
merchandise.
SECTION V. USES 9ERMINED
A. Uses
1. Au=o, Cruc~, and recreational vehicle sales, leasi~g
and service (dealerships and/or independen=s) ·
Sarvice indus=ties, may include, bu= are no= limi=ed
Co, ~.~e following =
a. Repair, ~ain=enance and se=vicing of appliances
or componen= par=s for mo=o= vehicles.
·
b. Tooling.
c. Testing. shops '(excluding noise
noxious performance =es=lng).
d. Repair, main=chance and servicing of above-
lis=ed items provided Chat said £ndus==ies ave
hoc =he poin= of customer delivery or collec-
=ion.
·
e. Oiagnos'=ic labs.
~. ~rimen=al automobile assembly and ~abrica-
- .
g. Vehicular s=orage a=eas (exclusive of impound
yards ).
Uses Permit=ed Su~ecC co Gran=in~ of a CU~ ~? CAe
Plannin Commission £~ Not Included in AuCo Dealershi
1. Tire, battery and accessory shops and accessory
£ndoor ins=alia=ion ~acilities.
2. Au=o and vehicle glass shops.
3. Au=o and =tuck ten=als.
Pain= and restoration shops (~ndependen= o~ dealer-
ships ).
· $. 8od¥ Shops (independen= of dealerships).
C.
Service industries which provide a service Co uses
listed in Section A., above.
p!annin~ commission
1. Car wash.
Service station.
3. Motorcycle sales.
B --7--
SECTION VII.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
=o submitting plans and specifications for ptan,chec~ and
building penni= processing. This =ev~ew shall be conducted
by =~e Co---unity Development Department in accordance with
~olicies of the City of TusCin. Approvals shall remain
valid for a period of 18 months. Decisions by =he Community
Development Department shall be final unless appealed =o =he
Planning Commission wi=bin seven days of =he Community
Development Depa=%menC's decision.
The Applicant shall submit six (6) sets of site plans
and elevations =o the Community Development Department that
include the following inf0'=mation as applicable:
2. Titie Block:
a. Scale of ~ap~
b. Name and Add=ess of Applicant;,
c. DaCe. of preparation.
3. All bounda=.y lanes on the subject property fully dimen-
sioned and tied in with =he centerline of adjacent or
4. ~he name, location and width of any adjacent public or
private SC:ceOs. Widths should include any required
street widening.
The name, location and width of any water courses,
structures, irrigation ditches, and any other permanent
physical ~eatu=es o~ the land.
$. The width and location o~ all existing o= 'proposed
public o= private easements.
?. Ail proposed improvements p=ope=ly dimensioned.
8. All pa=king spaces and aisles drawn and dimensioned
the ~low o~ traffic moted by arrows and calculations
~he =ecluired nu~e= of parking s~aces.
r
1
9. The looa=ion and wid=h of all vehicular and pedes=rian
access openings in=o and o.u= o~ the proper=y.
10. All proposed walls and ~ences, including heigA= and
ma=erial, and all proposed exterior lighting;
11. Ail proposed landscaping in as much de=ail as possible.
The zoning and existing land use of the subject
property and proper=ies contiguous Co irs boundaries.
13. ~oca=ion of neares= walls and s=ructures and adjacen=
proper=les, =he use ~herein, and adjoining driveways.
14.
A brief description of the in=ended use of the
proper=y, hours of opera=ion, number of employees, and
other general cha=ac=eris=ics tha= would apply Co =he
proposal.
Indicate all existing fire hydrants and wa=er main
sizes.
16.
17.
Indicate building size,.Cypo o~ construction, and
building eleva=ion.
· ·
Indica=e all'existing stree= li.gh=s, u=ility'poles,
Crees and signs within the public right-of-way adjacen=
to =he sire.
The Director of Community Oeveiopmen= shall respond =o sub-
mir=al of =he above-lis=ed information within thir=y (30)
days. Such response .may consti=u=e approval, approval with
conditions deemed necessary to pro=eot the public health,
safety and welfare, or disapproval of Applican='s site
plan. If no action is ~aken wi=bin ~he allo==ed time, the
sire plan shall be deemed approved, unless =he time limit is
waived by the Applican=.
B -10-
SECTION VIII. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Buildin~ Se=backs
1. No s=ructure of any kind,-an~ no parc =hereof~ shall
be placed on any sire closer--co a property line than
herein provided. The ~ollow~ng structures and
~=ov~en=s are specifically excluded ~=om =hese
se=bac~ provisions:
a. Roof overhang.
b. S=eps and walks.
c. Paving and esso=ia=ed curbing in relation to the
landscape area, excep= =ha= cus=omer parking
areas shall no= be within 10 fee= of the s=ree=
proper=y lines.
d. Fences, except =ha= no fence shall be placed
wi=bin =he street setback area' for service or
· storage buildings.
·. Landscaping.
Signs and d£splays idenCf.~¥ing =he owner, lessee
or occupan=.
g. Lighting.
2. No se=back is required from in=erior property lines.
3. Se=back from street proper=y lines:
a. Sales or display buildings shall be sec back a
minimum of 10' from =he in=erior loop road and a
minimum of 60' from the entrance s=ree=s. Roof
overhangs may no= projec= nee:er =hah 5' to =he
proper=y line.
Service and storage buildings shall be set: back
a minimum of 50' from =he ~ron= proper=y lines
and a minimum of 65' from =he rear proper=y
lines. However, a service or storage building
may be built aC ~he rear proper~y line provided
B
4
=hat i= does hoc exceed the height and length
described in Section VIII.F., paragraphs 2 and 3
of this document, subject to Planning Commission
approval.
B. Buildin~ Heights
1-. Buildings shall be a ~aximum of 30' 'in height to top
of ridge line.
2. Automobile display and signage shall not be allowed
on Cop of any building.
3. Automobile storage in the second level of a building
shall be allowed only if ~.ully screened [rom view,
including =he line of sight ~rom the second story of
any structures which may be built across Jamboree
and Laguna Roads."
l. hca auto dealer shall provide a minimum of eleven
(ll) offer=eeC pa=king spaces per nec buildabl~ acre
which shall be reserved for employee pa=king only·
·
2. In the event that employee pa=king is provided in a
comnM3n pa=king loC, each dealer shall provide
separate pa=King space on his/her premises ~o= any
demonstrator automobiles which are driven by a
company employee.
o
aha=ed by several merchants, a recorded document
shall be filed with the Building and Planning
Departments and shall be signed by the Owner of the
common site, stipulating to the permanent reserva-
tion of use o~ the site ~or employee par~ing
purposes.
·
Each automobile dealer shall provide a minimum of
six onsite pa=king spaces reserved exclusively for
customers' use. Additional customer par~ing shall
be allowed at curbside where appropriately striped.
5. Onsite handicapped par~ing shall be provided as
required by CAe governing agencies·
B -12-
.
O. Landscape
-1.
Every site on which a 'building is pla=ed shall be
landscaped according =o plans approved as-specified
herein and ~aintained thereafter in a sightly and
well-kept condition pursuant =o =ha standards agreed
u~n by ~e ~=o CanCer Merc~an=s' ~socia=ion.
Su~ ~in=en~ce s~ll include r~ular irriga=ion,
~erCili~Cion, ~lCiva=ion ~d tree ~runing.
0
The pr.perCy owner, lessee or occupant shall land-
scape a 5' strip ~,~_ _~diately.behind =he pr.perry
line adjacent ~o any interior street o~ =he Auto
excepting walkways and driveway areas· The Auto
Can=er Merchants' Ass.cia=ion shall main=sin this
landscape in compliance with the Declaration of
Covenan=s, Condit£ons and Res=fictions of this Auto
Canter· ·
o
·
Tee property owner', lessee or occupant shall provide
irr£gation and .taimtenance faciliCies for the land-
scaped areas, and shall keep said ~acili=ies in good
working order at all times.
·
Landscaping shall be installed within thirty (30)
days of occupancy or completion of the building,
whichever comes first:
·
Sire landscaping shall be compatible with the land-
scape master plan which has been developed as a
guide ~o coordina=e the species o~ plant'materials,
thus providing con=inuity of landscape within the
Center.
·
The pro~ecC developer shall provide a continuous
landscape buffer between the Auto Center and
Jamboree and Laguna Roads. Additionally, land-
scaping shall be provided in ~he median of Jamboree
Road.
·
Undeveloped areas reserved for future expansion,
such as the freeway interchange or any parcel not
promptly built out, shall be maintained £n a weed-
free condition but need not be landscaped.
B -12-
T
F
· . Liqh~£nq
l. Offsite and street lighting will be provided by the
projec:'s developer.
2. All ex=erior ligh=ing shall ccmply wish the pro-
~ec='s Planned Ligh=ing Cri=e~ia, as se= forth in
the P~oje~= Design Criteria on file with the City of
Tus=in.
·
3. Lighting plans shall be submit=e~ showing the design
layout and exact fix=ute mounting and wa=rage pro-
posed by ea~ auto dealer.
Areas of display shall be lighted by sharp cutoff
fix=utes e~fual to Elsco Manufacturing Co. 's Auto
King VI to direct lighting downward only.
"Prom= row" lighting standards adjacent to the Auto
Center interior roads shall no= exceed 20' in height
and shall have no more than three fixtures per
s=an¢lard a= a minimum of '40' on center. The
in=eric= of the display area may be illuminated by
fixtures no close= than 60' to the front line of
display lights. These fix=utes shall be on
s=andar~s no higher than 20', shall be spaced no
closer =hah 60' on center, and shall have no more
than ~our ~ixtures per pole.
Average wa=rage fo= the entire display area shall
not exceed 1.5 wa=ts/square fcc=. Display areas
within 125' of Jamboree Road o= Laguna Road shall
no= exceed 1 wa== per s~uare ~oo=.
7. Se=vice and storage par~ing areas shall be lighted
by s=an¢la=ds ~o higher than 24' which shall contain
no ~ore than ~wo ~ix=ures of =he a~ove described
specification per pole. Ave=age wattage ~or the
en=i~e storage area shall not exceed 0.2 watts per
square ~oot.
8. Creative lighting design and =einfo=cement of
lighting in=ensi~y to provide varying degrees o~
light £n=ensity ~or me=chandising and highlighting
purposes are encouraged as long as =he .overall
ave=age, wa=rage is. no=. exceeded.
B -14-
· .°
T,
·
Spot fixtures s~all be direc=ed downward only,
perimeter walls.
S~rings of inca~descen= fixtures shall not be
allowed in any exterior area·
F. Walls and Fences
1. All service, storage and trash areas shall be
screened from view from any street by a wall. Land-
scape screening alone shall not be deemed suffi-
cient.
·
Walls constructed on the perimeter of the Auto
Center shall be in keeping with the projec='s Design
Cfi=erie. These walls shall be no less than 8' and
no greater than 10"' in height, with the exception
~at the wall
order
9rope=fy line· This increase
pr.perCy. The pc.perCy owner s~all provide addi-
tional landscaping
wall height on adjacent streets.
·
If a' building is constructed as permitted in the
above paragraph, no sloping roofs ~hall be used on
such a structure, and any drainage shall be away
from the wall into the site. No facies, gutters, or
other roof edge treatments shall be visible above
the 14' height of the wall.
4. Offsets in the perimeter walls are encouraged when
adjacent to a 14' high structure. Such offsets
shall be compatible with the project's design
criteria.
G. Sound Attenuation
l·
Ail body repair work and all compressor work shall
be performed in an enclosed area only. Access doors
to such enclosures shall face away from Jamboree
Road.
Auto dealers adjacent =o Jam~oree Road may not open
service bay doors toward Jam~oree Road.
,r
T~
3. AuCo dealers adjacent Co ~aguna Road may hoc open
doors ace no higher than CAe perimeter wall which
screens CAem from ~aguna Road.
4. Air comp=esso= exhaust stacks ~hall contain a
the perimeter streets which surround CAe AuCo
an~ s~ll be moun=e~ no higher Chart 12' above
~e~iaCe ~inished grade.
Air conditioning units may not be mounted on Cop
any building which is less =Aah 65' from a rear
property line.
H. Siqnaqe
1. Signs shall, be allowed subject Co CAe-provisions of CAe Tustin Auto Center Sign Criteria, as approved by
CAe Cit]~ of Tustin Planning Commission.
Project developer shall supply signage adjacent
announcing CAe AuCo Center location. Addi'Cionally,
CAe developer shall supply ~reeway directional
travel signs at CAe nearest ~=eeway off=amps.
3. Roof-mounted signs shall hoc be allowed.
4. Billboard signag~ shall hoc be allowed.
I. Sro=age and ~oadin~. A=ea.s
1. No materials, supplies o= e~ipmenC, including
owned o= ope=aCed Cruces, shall be scored in any
area on a sire except inside a closed building
behind a =isual ha=cie= o= se=vice area which
screens =he equi~menC from =iew of all public.
streets. The singular exception shall be any
vehicles w~ich ara a ~a== o~ CAe me=chant's customer
display.
~. Neither =he loading doc~ no= CAe offloading opera-
Cions ~o= automotive ~a=Cs and ocher supplies s~all
be risible ~=om any public streets.
B -1.6-
-.
J. ~efuse Collec=ion A=,eas
0
visually screene~ ==om access s=ree=s, ~=eeway, an~
acl~acen,: proper=], b], an opaque screen.
B -L7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1(;
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2513
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP 87-201 LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE I-5
FREEWAY, EAST OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, SOUTH OF THE
EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF THE AUTO CENTER AND WEST
OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL.
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That Tentative Parcel Map No. 87-201 was submitted to the
Planntng Commission pursuant to Ordinance No. 847 by the Irvine
Company requesting authorization to reconflgure two (2) existing
lots into two (2) parcels and three (3) lettered lots for
Parcels 9, C and D of Parcel Map 84-1022 as shown on a map filed
in Book 200, pages 19-24 of Parcel Maps and a portion of lots 26
and 27 of Book 44 of Irvine's subdivision per a map filed in
Book 1, page 88 of 'miscellaneous record maps, both filed in the
office of the Orange County Recorder.
B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said
map on July 11, 1988.
C. This project is Categorically Exempt, Class 15 from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for the
subject project, area.
D. That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin
Area General Plan, Tustin Zoning Code and Subdivision Map Act.
E. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
F. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of
development.
G. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements
are not likely to cause substantial-environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their
habi tat.
H. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements
proposed will not conflict with easements acquired by the
public-at-large, for access through or use of the property
within the proposed subdivision.
I. That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements
proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems.
1
2
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 2513
Page two
II.
The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council
approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 87-201 subject to the conditions
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the ...... day of .... , 1988.
Chairman
Pehn'i FOi~,
Secretary
Exhibit A
tO Resolution No. 2513
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-201
PUBLIC/PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
(1) 1.1 Any damage done to existing street improvements and utilities shall be
(6) repaired before acceptance of the tract and/or issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for development on any parcel within the subdivision.
(1) 1.2 Prior to any work in the public right-of-way, an Excavation Permit must be
{6) obtained (and applicable fees paid) from the Public Works Department.
(1) 1.3 All construction within a public right-of-way and or public easement must be
(6) shown on a separate 24" X 36" plan with all construction referenced to
applicable City and County drawing numbers.
(1) 1.4 All changes in existing curbs, gutters, sidewalks and other public
(6) improvements shall be the responsibility of subdivider.
(1) 1.5 Applicant shall post all required subdivision bonds and agreements prior to
(6) Final Map.
GRADING/DRAINAGE
(1) 2.1 Prior to issuance of grading permits:
(2)
(6)
A. A detailed soil engineering report shall-be submitted to and approved by
the Building Official conforming to the requirements of the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Requirements, and all other applicable state
and local laws, regulations and requirements.
(1) 2.2 B.
(2)
(3)
Preparation and submittal of a grading plan subject to approval of the
Department of Community Development delineating the following
information'
1. Methods of drainage in accordance with all applicable City
Standards.
e
A note shall be placed on the grading plan requiring Community
Development Department approval of rough grading prior to final
clearance of foundations. The Department will inspect the site for
SOURCE CODES
STANDARD CONDITION
~,..) EIR MITIGATION
(3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODES
(4) DESIGN REVIEW
*** EXCEPTION
(5) SPECIFIC PLAN
(6) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT
(7) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES
(8) PC/CC POLICY
(9) OTHER MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENT
.olutton No. 2513
Exhtbi t A
Page two
(1)
(6)
(1)
(2)
accuracy of elevations, slope gradients, etc. and may requtre
certification of any grading related matter.
3. Final street elevations at key locations.
4. Final pad/finished floor elevations and key elevations for all site
grading.
5. All flood hazaPds of record.
Ce
Preparation of a sedimentation and erosion control plan for all
construction work related to the subject Tract including a method of
control to prevent dust and windblown earth problems.
De
Submittal of a construction traffic routing plan to be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Public Works.
E.
Written approval must be obtained from adjacent property owners for
rights-of-entry for construction activity across lot lines.
Preparation of a sedimentation and erosion control plan for al.1 construction
wok-k related to the subject Tract including a method of control to prevent
dust and windblown earth problems.
(1) 2.3 A precise grading permit shall be issued prior to issuance of any building'
permits within the subject Tract.
(1) 2.4 All earthwork shall be performed in accordance with the City of Tustin
Municipal Codes and grading requirements.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
(1) 3.1 The subdivider shall comply with all requirements of the Orange County Fire
(6) Marshal, including required fire flow, installation where required of fire
{2) hydrants subject to approval as to location by the Fire Department,-City of
Tustin Public Works Department and Irvine Ranch Water District, and compliance
with all requirements pertaining to construction.
(1) 3,2 Prior to issuance of Uuilding permits for combustible construction, evidence
(6) that adequate water supply and operational fire hydrants are available for
(2) fire protection shall be submitted and approved by the Orange County Fire
-~- Marshal. The subdivider shall also submit water improvement plans for
approval of Fire Marshal.
:solution No. 2513
Exhtbtt A
Page three
NOISE
(1) 4.1 All construction operations including engine warm up shall be subject to the
(2) provisions of the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance and shall take place only
(6) 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.
FEES
(1) 5.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all
required fees including:
A. Major thoroughfare and bridge fees to Tustin Public Works Department.
B. Sanitary sewer connection fee to Orange County Sanitation District.
Ce
Grading planchecks and permit fees to the Community Development
Department.
De
All applicable Building plancheck and permit fees to the Community
Development Department.
E. New development fees to the Community Development Department.
F. School facilities fee to the Tustin Unified School District subject to
any agreement reached and executed between the District and the Irvine
Company.
GENERAL
(1) 6.1 Within twenty four months from Tentative Parcel Map approval, the Subdivider
shall file with appropriate agencies, a Final Map prepared in accordance with
subdivision requirements of the Tustin Municipal Code, the State Subdivision
Map Act, and applicable conditions contained herein.
(2) 6.2 Prior to Final Map approval:
A.' Subdivider shall submit a current title report.
Be
Subdivider shall conform to all applicable provisions of the City Code.
All requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act, the City's Subdivision
Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance shall be satisfied.
so~utton No. 2513
_xhtbtt A
Page four
Ce
Subdivider shall submit a duplicate mylar of the Final Map, or 8 1/2 inch
by 11 inch transparency of each map sheet prior to final map approval and
"as built" grading, landscape and improvement plans prior to certificate
of acceptance.
Show on the Final Map all easements of record.
E. The CC & R's for the Tusttn Auto Center parcels shall be amended to
include the expansion area and filed on all parcels created in this
subdi vlsi on.
F. The amended CC & R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney
and Community Development Director prior to recordation.
*** 6.3 All development on Parcels 1 and 2 shall be in accordance with the Tustin Auto
Center Development Guidelines.
*** 6.4 Parcels A, B, and C are for landscape and maintenance access. These lots
shall be landscaped and maintained as specified for all perimeter landscaped
lots in the existing Auto Center area. This landscaping shall be per the
adopted landscape guidelines and Auto Center Guidelines for the City of
Tustin.
*** 6.5 A block wall .shall be installed along .Lots A, B and C per the Auto Cente~'
Development Guidelines. The location, design and construction shall be
:consistent with existing walls and shall meet all required design criteria.
Report to the
Planning Commission
Item No. 5
DATE: dULY 11, 1988
SUBdECT:
CONDITIOHAL USE PERMIT 88-15 FOR A MASTER SIGH PROGRAM FOR THE
TUSTIH MARKET PLACE; AHO AN AMENOMENT TO OESIGH REVIEW 87-37, FOR
THE LAHDSCAPE DESIGH COHCEPT FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT VILLAGE AND
THE STOREFRONT GLAZIHG.
APPLICAHT:
DOHAHUE SCHRIBER~ON BEHALF OF THE IRVIHE COMPANY
3200 BRISTOL, SUITE 660
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
SUSSMAH/PREJZA & COMPANY, IHC.
1651 18TH STREET
SANTA ROIIICA, CA 90404
LOCATION:
SOUTHgEST CORNER OF BRYAH AVENUE & JAMBOREE ROAD
REQUEST:
APPROVAL OF A MASTER SIGH PROGRAM FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE AND
A REVISION TO THE LANOSCAPE CONCEPT FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT VILLAGE
(FROM CAHOPY TO PALM TREES) A.NO ALSO A MOOIFICATION TO THE
STOREFRONT GLAZING STAHOARO (FROM GREY TO CLEAR GLASS).
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, PURSUANT TO SECTIOH 15303 OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CLASS 3) ,
REC~ENDATION:
It ts recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2516,
approving a master sign program for the Tustin Market P]ace*and amendments
Design Review 87-37 for the landscape concept for the Entertainment Village and
the storefront glazing standard.
BACKGROUHD:
Condition No. 3.3 of Resolution No. 2464, approving Design Review 87-37,
requires the submittal of a master sign program to the P]anning Commission for
review and approval prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for Phase I
of the Tustin Market Place. Additiona]]y, section 3.11.7 of the East Tustin
Specific Plan (signage) al]ows the applicants to request approva] of a master
sign program that deviates from the specific standards for shopping centers upon
the submittal of a use permit. Due to the sca]e of the Tustin ~larket Place,
certain sign elements exceed the normal standards; therefore, the app]icants
have submitted CUP 88-15 for the Commission's consideration.
, Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Conditional Use Permit 8~-I5
July II, lg88
Page two
A second part of this applicarlon is a request for Commission approval of a
revision to Design Review 87-37, to allow a change in the landscape concept for
the Entertainment Village, substituting palm trees for the "canopy" trees that
were to be used in the "grove" of the village and also a change from grey tinted
to clear glass at the storefront windows.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed sign program consists of two parts, tenant signage and project
signage. Each of these parts is discussed below:
Tenant lSignage: This portion of the sign program consists of written graphics
and signage criteria accompanied by illustrations. The criteria identify
information to be provided on plans, submittal and processing requirements,
construction detail requirements, a list of prohibited types of 'signs, and a
description of the seven types of signs that are to be permitted based upon the
type of tenants (see Attachment I). Proposed sign types are evaluated
individually as follows:
A. Tower Si gns
Located on major tenant's towers (Stor, Home Express & Home Depot in
Phase I ).
Constructed of fabricated aluminum channel letters with spray applied
1 i near polyurethane pal nt fi ni sh.
Illuminated by either exposed neon on sign face and/or concealed
within sign for a "halo" effect to delineate graphics.
Maximum area - 260 square feet per tower face, maximum-two signs-per
tower.
° Color shall be tenant's color and/or compatible with building color.
° Neon colors to reflect paint palette with the addition of white.
Proposed tower signs placed to face the interior of the center, will provide
major tenants with their primary source of identification. The allowed area of
260 square feet is less than the 25~ of wall area allowed by the Municipal
Code. The signs will be centered vertically with the top of the building
parapet (35', see illustration in Attachment I).
Freeway Si gns
7' wide x 24' high x 18" thick fabricated aluminum cabinets with spray
applied textured/finish and color for major tenants only.
Corn rnunity Developrnen~ Depar~rnen~
Planning Commission Repof't
Conditional Use Permit 88-~5
July 11, 1988
Page three
° Color unt form for all cabinets.
Tenant names placed diagonally on cabinet in 21" high fabricated,
white acrylic letters.
White interior illumination.
Maximum of 10 signs placed along I-5 frontage, spaced 35' or more
apart.
These signs will provide freeway identification for the major tenants within the
center without cluttering up the buildings themselves, a major concern of the
Commission and staff (the Municipal Code would allow such signs). It is a
unique approach to the problem of freeway visibility, one which is also being
strongly considered for the Tustin Auto Center which experiences problems with
its existing freeway sign (Sussman/Prejza has been retained by the Irvine
Con, any to deal with the Auto Center's freeway signs). The 21" letter height
will allow visibility to freeway traffic at distances of several hundred feet.
.This exposure, is critical for those major tenants to be located in Phase II
along Bryan Avenue, as they will be almost half a mile away from the freeway.
While the major tenants in Phase I are much closer to the freeway, it is
i~ortant to treat all major tenants equitably.
C. Building Fascta Signs
For "mini major" tenants, typical of Phase I, and possibly some
tenants within the Entertainment Village.
Display tenant name and/or logo type only, 90 square foot maximum
area.
Constructed of .fabricated aluminum wi th spray applied linear
polyurethane paint finish.
Illuminated with either exposed neon on sign face and/or concealed
neon for "halo" effect to delineate graphics.
Color shall be tenant's color and/or be compatible with building
color.
° Neon colors to reflect paint palette with the addition of white.
The maximum sign area of 90 square feet is l'arger than the maximum 75 square
feet the Municipal Code allows for tenants in a shopping center elsewhere in the
City, however, staff believes that this size is consistent with the scale {both
verticle and horizontal) of the Market Place.
Corn rnunity DeveloPmen: Depar~rnen~
Planntng Commi ssion Report
Conditional Use Permit 88-15
July 11, 1988
Page four
D. Sign Bands
1. Tenants not I n the Entertatnment Vlllage
° Located on white, 3' high aluminum sign band.
Constructed of fabricated aluminum channel letters wi th spray
a'pplied linear polyurethane paint finish.
Illuminated by white (only) neon contained within the channel
letters for "halo" effect, or exposed on face of letters.
18" maximum letter height and maximum 66~ of storefront length,
centered wi thin sign band.
° One sign provided for each storefront occupied.
Colors shall be tenant's colors and/or be compatible with
building color.
.
Tenants in the Entertainment Vi 1 lage
° Same as above except no restriction on neon colors.
The area of these signs is essentially in keeping with what would be allowed in
a shopping center elsewhere in the City. The village signs are not restricted
to specific colors for the neon, as this is'a high activity, night time area,
and the goal is to create a "festive" atmosphere, which staff believes is in
keeping with the Village's purposes. The restriction to white neon in the
perimeter building signage will enframe the Entertainment Village without
detracting from it.
E. Arcade Signs
Hung perpendicular in front of tenant's entry, suspended from arcade
ceiling.
Constructed of fabricated aluminum with spray applied polyurethane
paint finish. ~
° Contains tenant's name/logotype.
° Variable shape, 10 square foot maximum area.
° 9' verttcle clearance, hung centered in arcade.
Corn rnunity DeveloPment Depar~rnen~
Planntng Commission Report
Condtti onal Use Permit 88-15
July 11, 1988
Page fi ve
These signs are typical of many shopping centers having arcades (e.g., Larwi-n
Square). Such signs provide visibility/identity to customers walking under the
arcade. They would be most prevalent in the storefronts adjacent to Bryan
Avenue which have a 10' arcade all along their frontage.
F. Anci 1 lary Arcade Si gns
° Same as above.
Occur only at major tenants for identifying entrances, exits, customer
pi ck-up, etc.
£ssentially, these are "building operation" or directory signs.
G. Stand-Alone Building Pads
° South part of Entertainment Village at E1 Camino Real,
Shall be subject to the provision of Section 9493 (Single tenant-not
part of a shopping center) of the Tustin Municipal Code.
Signs for each pad to be reviewed on case by case basis with submittal
package for each bull ding.
A1 though these pads are part of a shopping center, their location and
arrangement make them unique. For this reason, the standards .for single tenant
buildings - not part of a shopping center are the most appropriate for this
si tuati on.
Project Signage - This portion of the sign program includes identification of
the "Tustin Market Place" as' well as interior directional signage {see
Attachment II). Project identification signs include:
A. Freeway Identification
8' high, 1'-0" thick letters against a 10' high, 240' long background
wal 1.
Background wall to be a purple-grey color, pursuant to the approved
color chips.
° Ground i 11 umi nated.
Along with the major tenant freeway I.D. signs, this sign provides the primary
freeway exposure to vehicles passing in both directions on the I-5 freeway and
takes advantage of the long freeway frontage/exposure that the Market Place has.
Corn munity DeveloPment Depar~mem
Planning Commission Report
Conditional, Use Permit 88-15
July 11, 1988
Page stx
B. Major Entry Identificatton
° 50' high x 35' wide x 5' thick monolithes at Jamboree Road entrances.
Constructed of fabricated aluminum cabinets with spray texture. Color
is to be purple-grey, pursuant to the approved color palette.
° 2'-3" high, white letters, internally illuminated.
These signs provide a dramatic entry statement to the project commensurate with
the projects overall size and scale. They are one of the four (4) vertical
elements of the project, the other three (3) being the 50' major tenant towers
(which they match in height), the 90' light towers and the 70' Entertainment
Village towers.
C. Secondary Entry Identification
25' high x 17'-6" wide x 2'-6" thick monolithes at the New Myford Road
entrance.
Constructed of fabricated aluminum cabinets with' spray applied
texture, color is purple-grey pursuant to the approved color palette.
-.
12" high letters, ground illuminated.
All dimensions of these signs are one-half those of the Major Entry monoltthes.
D. Auto.Directional Signs
° 14' high x 6' wide x 1' thick pylons, ground illuminated.
Located along E1 Camino Real, before the rock sculpture, spaced 40' to
50' apart.
It indicates direction to various major and minor tenants (by type)
wi th arrows.
Constructed of fabricated aluminum with sprayed on texture coating,
col or i s purple-grey.
° Changeable 'name strips.
These signs provide direction to arriving motorists to the different major
tenants and/or types of minor tenants once they are in the project. Their size
and spacing makes them clearly visible to the motorists and allows for simple,
legible directions.
Corn munity DeveloPment Department
Planning Commission Report
Conditional Use P.ermit 88-15
July 11, 1988
Page seven
E.
Miscellaneous Auto Regulatory Signs
Standard Department of Transportation signs (i.e., stop, yield, turns,
etc., see sheet GD-4 on plans).
Back of sign panels to be purple-grey color pursuant to approved color
pal ette.
° Sign post is 2" x 10" white metal.
The message faces of these signs are industry standards for regulating vehicle
movement; however, the purple-grey back combined with the more substantial
(thicker) pole reflects back to the overall project theme.
In addition to the sign program, the applicant is requesting approval to modify
the landscape design of the Entertainment Village. Specifically, they propose
to replace the canopy trees originally proposed for this area with date palms.
The palms would still be planted in a "grove", as the canopy trees were to be
planted. Palms have been proposed for the following reasons:
They wi 11 provide a uniform height.
Mature trees of equal size can be planted in large numbers, which would be
much more difficult to do with any other variety of trees.
They will be different, yet compatible with other taller palms to be used
elsewhere on the perimeter drive of the site, thereby maintaining the
height hierarchy that was introduced with the original concept.
The applicant proposes to landscape the portion of the Entertainment Village
south of E1 Camino Real along wi th Phase I, including improving the parking
areas so as to eliminate the eye-sore of graded, undeveloped parcels to vehicles
entering Phase I. The use of palm trees in this part of the "grove" will allow
them to match their height later on when they landscape the portion of the
Village north of E1 Camino Real. This would be very difficult to do with any
other variety of trees. Staff does not have any objections to this proposal, as
we believe it is in 'keeping with the original "hierarchy" and "grove" concept,
and will allow for a more finished look at the completion of Phase I.
The last item that the applicant is requesting approval for is a change in the
storefront glass from a grey tint to clear glass. Grey tinted glass is
specified in the approved architectural guidelines, and therefore a change from
those guidelines requires Commission approval.
This request is the result of a recent finding by the project arc'hitects, Leason
Pomeroy & Associates. In 1/4 inch sampler, the approved Greylite-14 tint is a
light grey color; however, when it is made at a 1/2 inch thickness, as it has
Corn munity DeveloPment Depariment
Planning Commission Report
Conditional Use Permtt 88-15
July il, 1988
Page etght
been recently determined ts requlred for this project due to the hidden sills
betng used, the ttnt mix In the glass becomes so dark that it ts almost opaque.
As this ts not desirable for retail activity, the applicant has requested
approval to use clear class (except for the mezzanine windows on Stor which will
stay grey). Staff supports thts request as a dark grey ~ould not be desirable
for retatl users. Also, staff does not believe that the change In glass color
has a significant Impact on the project design as a whole.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed sign program ts both bold and simple. The design, size and scale
of the signs matches the boldness, size and scale of the project ttself, without
drawtng undue attention away from the project. The use of alumintum channel
letters wtth the spray on polyurethane paint finish and Internal & external neon
Illumination for the tenant stgnlng provtdes an excttlng combination of qualtty,
-color, form and texture, ~tthout resorting to plasttc or cheap~flashing lights.
The project signing draws on the shape and stze of the buildings themselves,
thereby, creating a hierarchy of Identification/directional signs that blend
~tth the architecture of the project. In essence, the proposed sign programs
for both tenant & project Identification work' ~tth the archi l[ecture of the
Tustin ~larket Place rather than detracting frGm ~t.
The same can also b'e satd of the proposed modifications to Design Review 87-37,
the "grove" trees and the sto~efront glass; each modification, while different
from what was approved, does not significantly alter the original concept of the
project.
Steve Rubi n
Sentor Planner
SR: CAS: ts
Attachments:
Resolution No. 2516
Attachments ! and I!
Blue Ltne Plans of
Project Slgnage
'Christine . ing e/~f
Director of Communit~ Development
Corn munity DeveloPment Depar~mem
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2516
A RESOLUTION OV THE PLANNING COMMISSION OV THE CITY OV
TUSTI~, CALIVORNIA, ARPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
88-15 FOR A MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET
PLACE AND AMENDING DESIGN REVIEW 87-37, REVISING THE
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT VOR TNE ENTERTAINMENT VILLAGE AND
THE STOREFRONT GLAZING STANDARDS.
The Planntng Commission of the City of Tusttn does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A.
Proper applications (CUP 88-15) were filed by Donahue Schriber,
representing the Irvine Company, requesting approval of a Master
Sign Program for the Tustin Market Place. Also requested is
approval of a revision of Design Review 87-37 for the landscape
concept for the Entertainment Village, switching from canopy to
palm trees in the "grove", and a change from grey tinted to
clear glass for the storefront windows.
B. A public hearing was duly called, noticed and held-on said
application on July 11j 1988.
C. Pursuant to Section 9291 of the Tusttn Municipal Code, the
Commission finds that the Master Sign Program will not be
detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, general
welfare of the persons working or residing in the neighborhood
nor will it be injurious or detrimental to property and
improvements tn the area. The Commission further finds that the
Master Sign Program will provide for signs that are compatible
wi th, and complimentary to the architectural design and
treatments of the Tustin Market Place.
D. Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the
Commission finds that the change from canopy to palm trees in
the Entertainment Village is in keeping with -the original
concept of a "grove" as well as maintaining the "hierarchy" of
trees established in the original design of the project.
E ·
Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the
Commission finds that the change from grey tinted to clear glass
for the storefront windows will not be detrimental to the design
concept of the project and will allow for proper vi si bility of
retai 1 space.
II. The Planning Commission conditionally approves:
A. Conditional Use Permit 88-15, establishing a Master Sign Program
Resolution No. 2516
Page two
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1(;
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Be
for the Tustin Market Place, subject to the following conditions'
.
All stgns shall comply wtth the provisions of the approved
Master Sign Program on file wtth the Community Development
Department, as heret n modtfied or as modtfied by the Director of
Community Development tn accordance with these conditions.
Pursuant to Section 3.12.2.F of the East Tusttn Specific Plan
minor deviations from the Master Sign Program (a 10~ increas'e in
height or area), shall require the prior approval of the
Director of Community Development; all other deviations shall
require the prior approval of the Planning Commission.
3. All signs shall be subject to review and approval of the
Director of Community Development for compliance with the Master
Sign Program, including design, colors, illumination type,
materials, etc., prior to issuance of permits for a sign.
.
All signs shall comply with the applicable provisions of the
Uniform Building Code and the National Electrical Code as
adopted by the City (including UL approvals).
5. Permits shall be required for all signs as necessary.
.
Project Signing shall utilize a purple-grey background base
color pursuant to the approved color palette. Also, the low
screen wall along Jamboree Road shall be of the same purple-grey
color.
.
7. Construction level plans including structural calculations, for
all Project Signing shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by
the Community Development Department prior to issuance of
permits for said signing.
.
All signs for the stand alone buildings in the Entertainment
Village south of E1 Camino Real shall be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Commission at the same time that plans for the
buildings themselves are r~viewed by the Planning Commission.
9. Applicant shall provide design guidelines and criteria for
bull ding address numbering that ' i s consistent with the approved
Master Sign Plan, subject to approval of the Director of
Community Development.
An amendment to Design Review 87-37, permitting a change from canopy
to palm trees in the "grove" of the Entertainment Village, subject to
the following conditions'
.
Palm trees planted in the E1 Camino Real median shall be a
sterilized, non-fruit bearing variety so as not to drop fruit
into the public ri ght-of-way.
ResolUtion No. 2516
Page three
5
6
7
8
9
10
e
®
Detailed landscaping and irrigation plans shall be provided for
review and approval by the Community Development Department at
whatever scale necessary to depict construction level detail
reflecting the proposed change prior to installation of said
trees.
The actual sizing, quantity and location of the palms to be
planted shall be subject to review and approval of the Director
of Community Development. Please note that all planting shall
comply with current City landscaping standards for the entire
site of one tree for each five parking stalls within a parking
lot.
11 C.
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
An amendment to Destgn Revtew 87-37, permitting a change from grey
tinted to clear glass at storefront windows, subject to the following
condition:
1. The second floor mezzanine wi ndows for Stor~ shal 1 remain as grey
ti nted glass.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular .meeting of the Tustin Planning Conm~ts~lon,
held on the day of , 1988.
Chairman
Penni Foley,
Secretary
Sussman/Prejza & Company, Inc.
TUSTIN MARKET PLACE
TENANT SIGNING CRITERIA
Sussman rejza &Company, Inc.
Tustin Market Place
Graphics and Signing Criteria
June 10, 1988
Page 1
TUSTIN MARKET PLACE
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
GRAPHICS & SIGNING ,CRITERIA
The following criteria have been established for the purpose
of assuring an outstanding and consistent tenant signing
program. Conformance will be strictly enforced and any non-
conforming signs will be disapproved.
1.1 SUBMISSION:
Tenant shall submit for approval one (1) complete set of sign
drawings to Landlord and three (3) sets to Landlord's
Architect prior to sign fabrication. All signs submitted for
Landlord approva~ must conform to review and approval by the
Planning and Buildings Divisions of the City of Tustin. In
addition to detailed drawings such submissions shall include:
ae
Elevation of storefront showing design, location, size and
layout of sign drawn to scale indicating dimensions,
attachment devices and construction detail.
Be
Sample board showing colors and materials including
fascia, letter faces, returns, caps, etc.
Ce
Section through letter and/or sign. panel showing the
dimensioned projection of-the~ face of~-the tet-ter and/or
sign panel and the illumination.
1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A®
Tenant signs shall be designed in a manner that is not
only imaginative but also of high graphic quality. In
addition, tenant signs should be compatible with and
complimentary to adjacent and facing facades.
Be
Brightness of signs is subject to approval by Landlord and
shall comply with all applicable building and electrical
codes and shall bear the U.L. label. Surface brightness
of all illuminated materials shall be consistent in all
Sussman/Prejza & Company, In .
Tustin Market-Place
Graphics and Signing. Criteria
June 10, 1988
Page 2
Ce
De
letters and components of the sign. Light leaks will not
be permitted.
Advertising or informative content of Tenant's signs shall.
be limited to letters designating Tenant's trade name.
Crests, corporate shields or logos may be permitted at the
discretion of the Landlord. Such designation of*store .....
shall not include any specification of the merchandise
offered for sale or the services rendered and shall
contain no advertising devices, slogans, symbols or marks.
Tenant will be permitted to place upon main entrance to
its premises not more than a 144 square inch of white
vinyl lettering not to exceed 1-1/2" in height, indicating
hours of business and emergency phone numbers.
1.3 SIGN CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS:
ae
Tenant's sign contractor shall submit drawings and obtain
all required permits from the Planning and Building Divisions
of the City of Tustin. All drawings submitted to the City
shall bear the approval of the-Landlord or his Agent.
B. Ail letters shall be fabricated using full-welded
construction.
Ce
Location of all openings for conduit sleeves and supports
in sign panels of building walls shall-be indicated by the
sign contractor on drawings submitted to the Landlord.
Sign contractor shall install same in accordance with the
approved drawings.
D. Sign contractor shall repair-any damage caused by his - -
work.
Ee
Sign installation shall be coordinated with the Landlord
prior to commencement of any work by the tenant's sign
contractor.
F®
Ail electrical signs shall bear-,the U.L. label; their
fabrication and installation shall comply with all
national and local building and electrical codes.
Ge
Ail ~onduit, raceways, crossovers, wiring, ballast boxes,
transformers, and other-equipment necessary for sign
connection shall' be concealed. All bolts, fastenings and
clips shall consist of enameling iron' with porcelain
Sussman/l)rejza & Company, Inc.
Tustin Market Place
Graphics and Signing Criteria
June 10, 1988
Page 3
He
I ·
J·
K·
L·
enamel finish; stainless steel, anodized aluminum, brass
or bronzed; or carbon-bearing steel with painted finish.
No black iron materials will be allowed.
Separate all ferrous and non-ferrous metals with
non-conductive gaskets to prevent electrolysis. In
addition to gaskets, provide stainless steel fasteners to
secure ferrous to non-ferrous metals.
No sign maker's labels or other identification will be
permitted on the exposed surface of signs, except those
required by local ordinance which shall be in an
inconspicuous location.
Threaded rods or anchor bolts shall be used to mount sign
letters which are spaced out from background panel. Angle
clips attached to letter sides will not be permitted.
Simplicity and restraint in materials selection is
important;' however, the material selection, its method of
application, or its detail construction should be
consistent with the other storefront design Criteria.
Landlord shall not be responsible for the cost of signs
fabricated or installed which do not conform to the sign
criteria.
1.4
The following are prohibited:
A. Signs of box or cabinet type construction.
B. Signs employing animated components.
C. Signs employing moving or flashing lights.
D. Signs employing exposed raceways, ballast boxes or -~
transformers.
E. Sign manufacturer's names, stamps or decals.
F. Signs employing luminous-vacuum formed type plastic
letters.
G. Signs employing unedged or uncapped plastic letters or
letters with no returns and exposed fastenings.
H. Paper, cardboard or styrofoam signs, stickers or
decals hung around, on or behind storefronts.
I. Exposed fastenings.
J. Except as provided herein, no advertising placards,
banners, pennants, names, insignia, trademarks or
other descriptive material shall be affixed or
maintained upon the glass panes and supports of the
show windows and doors.
Sussman/Prejza & Company, inc.
Tustin Market Place
Graphics and Signing Criteria
June 10, 1988 ·
Page 4
Ke
No simulated materials (i.e. wood grained plastic
laminates, etc.) or wallcovering may be used in the
sign area.
DESIGN CRITERIA:
These criteria establish general signing guidelines for
specific tenant areas within Tustin Market Place.
1.5 SIGN TYPES:
The general sign types allowed will be as follows:
A. TOWER SIGNS-.
ae
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Tower Signs
Freeway Signs
Fascia Signs
Sign Bands
Arcade Signs
Ancillary Arcade Signs
Tower signs will-display tenant name and/or logo type -~
only. Construction will be of fabricated aluminum channel
letters or symbols with spray applied polyurethane paint
finish. Sign will be stud mounted 2" off background.
Illumination may be exposed neon on face of sign and/or
neon concealed within aluminum for "halo" effect to
delineate graphics. Tenant shall be allowed a maximum of
260 square feet per tower face.
Color--Paint-.
Tenant paint colors shall be existing colors
from established logo types and/or compatible
with and complementary to adjacent and facing
facades. Final color selection approval is
subject to the discretion of the Landlord.
Neon: Neon color shall reflect colors established
in paint pallette with the addition of white.
Sussman/Drejza & Company, Inc.
Tustin Market Place
Graphics and Signing Criteria
June 10, 1988
page 5
B. FREEWAY SIGNS:
Freeway signs shall be on a 7' X 24' fabricated aluminum
cabinet with a spray applied rexcoat finish. Identification
will be 21" high fabricated white acrylic (Futura bold)
letters with white interior illumination.
Color:
Uniform color of cabinets and copy t~o be
established by Landlord, no alternates shall be
accepted.
C. BUILDING FASCIA SIGNS:
Fascia signs shall display Tenant name and/or logotype only
in architecturally designated areas. Construction will be
of fabricated aluminum with a spray applied linear
polyurethane paint finish. Sign will be Stud mounted 2" off
background surface. Illumination may be exposed neon on
face of sign and/or neon concealed within aluminum for
"halo" effect to delineate graphics. Tenant shall be allowed
a maximum of 90 square feet.
Color--Paint:Tenant paint colors shall be existing.
colors from established logo types
and/or compatible with and complementary
to adjacent and facing facades. Final
color selection approval is subject to
the discretion of the Landlord.
Neon:
Neon color shall reflect colors established
in paint pallette with the addition of
white.
D. SIGN BANDS:
Landlord will provide typical tenant bays with 3' high
fabricated aluminum sign band between columns for tenant
identification. This band will act as a uniform
background as well as house all electrical for tenant
identification.
1. TENANT SIGNS OUT OF VILLAGE
Construction will be of fabricated aluminum channel
letters with spray applied linear polyurethane paint
finish. Signs wil be stUd'mounted 2" off sign band'
Illumination to be white neon contained within channel
Sussman/Prejza & Company, Inc.
Tustin Market Place
Graphics and Signing Criteria
June 10, 1988
Page 6
letters for even halo lighting effect or exposed on
face of letters.
Sign band identification shall not exceed 18" in cap
height or 66% of bay front in length and will be
centered within sign band. Tenants shall provide
one sign for each occupied bay. (I.e., if Tenant
occupies two bays, two signs are required.)
Color--Paint:
Tenant paint colors shall be existing
colors from established logo types and/or
compatible with and complementary to adjacent
and facing facades. Final color selection
approval is subject to the discretion of the
Landlord.
Neon: Only white neon shall be allowed for
illumination.
2. TENANT SIGNS IN VILLAGE
Construction will be cut-out aluminum 'or fabricated
aluminum channel letters with .spray applied linea[~
polyurethane paint finish. Signs will be stud
mounted 2" off sign band. Illu~ination to be exposed
neon of various color ~round face of individual
letters. Tenants shall provide one sign band for
each occupied bay. (I.e., if Tenant occupies two
two bays, two signs are required.)
Color--Paint:
Tenant paint colors shall be existing
from established logo types and/or compatible
with and complementary to adjacent and facing
facades. Final color selection-approval is
subject to the discretion of the Landlord.
Neon: Full spectrum of neon is allowed.
E. ARCADE SIGNS:
Arcade signs shall be perpendicular to the storefront and
suspended from ceiling in the arcade in front of the
tenant's entry. The arcade sign shall consist of graphic
elements and lettering in fabricated aluminum with spray
applied polyurethane paint finish applied to a decorative
aluminum panel. The panel should be of an interesting
shape and incorporate graphic features. The arcade sign
is limited to a maximum of 10 square feet in area.
Sussman/Prejza & Company, Inc'
Tustin Market Place
Graphics and Signing Criteria
June 10, 1988
Page 7
Arcade sign panels shall start 9' 0" above grade and shall
be centered in the arcade.
F. ANCILLARY ARCADE SIGNS:
Ancillary arcade signs (Customer Pickup, etc.) shall be
perpendicular to the storefront and suspended from ceiling
in arcade at informational area. Signs shall consist of a
fabricated aluminum panel area of interesting shape with
applied or silkscreened graphics. If more than one is
approved, they shall be of identical shape and
construction. Ancillary arcade signs shall be limited to
a maximum of 10 square feet in area. Ancillary arcade
signs shall start 9' 0" above grade and shall be
centered in the arcade. Ancillary arcade signs shall
occur at Type I buildings only. Sign message is limited
to building operation (i.e., Exit Only, Customer Pickup,
etc.) .
1.6 TENANT AREAS:
The following is a listing of tenan~t areas as determined
by their architectural profile. Along with each tenant
area will be a listing of sign types and quantities
allowed for that area.
TYPE I Tenants in buildings 35',0" in height
Two (2) tower signs conforming to attached
elevations, Area I:
(1)
(2)
(*)
One Freeway Sign
One Sign Band (for Pedestrian Identity,
locate above Tenant's Entry Bay)
Ancillary~Arcade Sign
* Quantity subject to submittal and approval.
TYPE II Tenants in buildings 30'-0" in height
(1)
(2)
One Building Fascia Sign
One Arcade Sign (if applicable)
TYPE III Tenants in buildings 24'-0" in height
(1)
(2)
One Sign Band Identification per
Occupied Bay
One Arcade Sign (if applicable)
Sussman/I)rejza & Company, Inc.
Tustin Market Place
Graphics and Signing Crit_eria
June 10, 1988
Page 8
TYPE IV Tenants in individUal freestanding buildings
Tenants that fall into this category will be
subject to normal sign controls as described
in Tustin City Code; Article 9493, "Allowed
sign~in commercial district (single tenant -
not part of shopping center)".
In addition, all signs must be designed and
included for consideration with the
architectural design package submitted for
Use Permit.
Note: Any tenant areas that do not fall within these profiles
will submit their design request under the general
guidelines of this criteria for individual review by
Landlord/Landlord's Architects, and the City of Tustin.
File:SC#9:TMPCrit.1
,o-,oG
· /
I
-ei
·
·
·
' I i
·
·
-e
·
·
·
· ·
/
LL L
e~ ·
SuHman
/Prejza & Company, Inc.
·
·
· .... J
_L'
Sussman/Prejza & Company, Inc..
~Ussman/Pr®Jza & Company, Inc.
Z
/ 4
Sussman/Prejza & Company, Inc.
I Ill I
· ·
·
i
Suwsman/PreiZa & Company' Inc.
, !
Sussman/Prejza & COmpany, Inc.
Suss~man/Prejza & Company, Inc.
Sussman-/Prelza & company,.Inc.
Sussman//Prejza & Company, Inc.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'1
I
'1
I
I
I
!
I,--
!
!
~Sussman/PreJza & Company, Inc.
lussman / Prelza & Company, Inc.'
Report to the
Planning Commission
DATE:
SUBJECT:
JULY 11, 1988
ABAIIOOIIED RIGHT-OF-NAY
RECOI~EIlDATZOII
It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue their discussion on this
matter until August 8, 1988.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission at their meeting on May 23, 1988 was approached by a
-number of residents living on Alder Lane and Apple Tree in the Peppertree
subdivision asking about any future AT&SF plans for abandoned easement areas
owned by the Irvine Company located behind their homes.
Staff have initiated a discuasion of the matter with the Irvine Company. The
Irvine Company is currently reviewing possible, alternatives for disposition of
the property and has requested additional .time to complete research and work on
the matter prior to making their recommendation' to the City.
Christine Shingleton ~/
Director of Community Development
CAS: pe f
Community Development Department
Planning Commission
DATE: dULY 11, 1988
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
OklIER-
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
DESIGN REVIEW NO. 88-13
DADDY-O' S RESTAURANT
PAUL lqANTINO
174 E. IqAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
JOHNSTOWN AMERICAN
23201 LAKE CENTER DRIVE
EL TORO, CA 92630
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
C-2 CENTRAL COI~ERCI~
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS I
..
AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL EXPOSED NEON TUBING ON AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT BUILDING LOCATED AT 174 E. MAIN STREET.
RECOI~ENDATION:
Deny the request for the use of exposed neon tubing by the adoption of
Resolution No. 2517.
SLII¥,ARY:
The applicant, Mr. Martino, recently redecorated the former La Spada Restaurant
into Daddy-O's Restaurant. The restaurant is a free-standing building wi th an
adjacent parking lot at 174 E. Main Street. The style of the*interior and
exterior modifications reflect a 1950's art deco concept.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYS.IS'
The original design review for Daddy-O's was a request for an internally
illuminated awning which included a front sign. This proposed awning encroached
into the public right-of-way which meant that the City would have had to enter
into an "Hold Harmless Agreement" with the property owner before an encroachment
permit could be issued for the awning. .Due to the complexity of the permits
involved, the. restaurant owner, decided to apply for an internally
Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Destgn Review No. '88-13
July 11, 1988
Page two
illuminated sign without the awning. At that time, staff informed the applicant
that any. form of exposed neon would require Planning Commission approval.
Because the applicant was anxious to have the sign installed for the grand
opening, staff worked with the applicant to bring the style and design of the
sign into conformance wi th both the old town area- and the 1950's art deco
concept. (Please see the attached picture of the existing sign.)
Now that the sign is installed and Daddy-O's has had their grand opening, the
applicant has reconsidered and i s requesting authorization to remove the plastic
covers in order to expose the neon of the signs. The applicant believes this
would be more in keeping with the lgSO's theme of the restaurant.
Staff is recommending that the exposed neon be denied for the following reasons:
The Planning Commission has never approved any exterior mounted, exposed
neon signs in the old town area and thus would be setting a precident.
e
The E1 Camino Real Specific Plan states that signs shall be of uniform
size, color and style while being compatible with and complimentary to the
village identification.
The existing sign, although modern in design, has a cleaner look than neon
and would not be as bright.
CONCLUSION:
Staff contends that the overall design of the building with the use of neon
would not be in keeping with the old town area and, therefore, recommends denial
of the use of the exposed neon tubing as requested.
Ma~y An~ chamberlain
Associate Planner .
MAC:CAS :pef
attachments
Christine A. Stiingle~,~fi- -
Director of CommunitIF Development
L
Corn rnunity DeveloPrnen~ Depar~rnen~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2517
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNINGCOMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, DENYING THE REQUEST FOR THE USE OF EXPOSED
NEON TUBING AT 174 E. MAIN STREET
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
fol 1 ows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows'
A.
That a proper application, Design Review 88-13, was filed on
behalf of Daddy-O's Restaurant at 174 E. Main Street requesting
approval of exposed neon tubing for (2) two exterior wall signs.
Be
Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Miunicipal Code, the
Commission finds that the location, architectural features and
general appearance of the proposed sign would impair the orderly
and harmonious development of the old town area, subject to the
following findings:
.
The Planning Commission has never approved any exterior
mounted, exposed neon signs in the old town area and thus
would be setti.ng a precident.
The E1 Camtno Real Specific Plan states that signs shall be
of uniform size, color and style while being compatible with
and complimentary to the village identification. ~.
3,
The existing sign, although modern in design, has a cleaner
look than neon and would not be as bright.
II. The Planning Commission hereby denies the use of exposed neon tubing
at 174 E. Main Street.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a reguiar meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the 11th day of July, 1988.
Chairman
Penni ~oley
Secretary
Planning Commission
DATE: dULY 11, 1988
SUBdECT:
RANCHO IqADERAS
APPLICANT:
LocATION:
WESTERN NATIONAL PROPERTIES
630 THE CITY DRIVE SOUTH
ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92668
LOT 14, TRACT 12763
REQUEST:
NODIFICATION TO DESIGN REVIEW 87-32
RECOItqENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2515
approving exterior architectural revisions to the Rancho Maderas project
originally .approved by Destgn Review 87-32 as. submitted or revised.
BACKGROUND
On September 28, 1987, the Planning Commission approved'Design Review 87-32
authorizing construction of a 266 unit residential apartment project {Rancho
Maderas) which may ultimately be converted to condominiums. One of the
conditions of approval was that the proposed project comply with submitted plans
on file with the Department of Community Development.
Western National Properties, at the request of the Irvine Company are now
proposing to make minor exterior building modifications.
Submitted development plans for the Rancho Maderas project originally proposed a
California Ranch style architecture, with predominate use of stucco and some
minor wood elements. The existing elevations also emphasized hipped roof
conditions and no pilaster/column detailing. Revised architectural elevations
requested by the applicant would add gabled roof conditions,' more prominent wood
features highlighted by more wood detailing and plaster columns and pilasters.
The revisions are still compatible with the general architectural style
originally proposed and will actually add to the appearance of the buildings.
~l~ristine Shlnglet6n- ~Y - -
Director of Community Development
CAS: pe f
Attachments: Letter from applicant
Revised Elevations
Resolution No. 2515
, Community Development DeparTment
1
2
3
4
RESOLUTION NO. 2515
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING EXTERIOR BUILDING MODIFICATIONS TO
DESIGN REVIEW 87-32 A 266 UNIT PROJECT LOCATED ON LOT
14 OF TRACT 12763
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
6 follows'
7 I.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows'
A. That Western National is requesting approval of minor exterior
design modifications to the Rancho Maderas project originally
approved by Design Review 87-32 and located on lot 14 of Tract
12763.
B. The revised project continues to comply wi th all findings
contained in Planning Commission Resolution 2433.
II. The Planning Commission approves minor exterior modifications to
Design Review 87-32 as shown on Exhibit A subject to the following
condi ti ons.
1. The applicant shall submit for building plan check and approval,
modifications to original construction plans, structural
calculations and other information as deemed necessary by the
Building Official to comply with the provisions of the Uniform
Building Codes. Actual exterior modifications p.roposed shall not
be undertaken unti 1 approved by Bull ding Official.
·
2. The applicant shall make payment of any applicable building plan
check fees to the Community Development Department for review of
plan modifications.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission
held on the 11th day of July, 1988.
C hal rman
Penni Foley
Secretary
July 5, 1988
WESTERN NATIONAL PROPERTIES
RECEI-VED
· 0 1988
CO£,;;~IUNITY D,.-,ELD,
Ms. Christine Shingleton
Director, CXammmity Develo~
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Rancho Maderas; Tract 13030
Irvine Pacific requests the City of Tustin's review and approval of the
revision to the archi~ elevations for this project.
.These revisions to the exterior elevations were generated by Irvine
Pacific's and The Irvine Company's desire to not create too homgeneous of
it was decided that this project was too similar in nam and
~tectural detailing to our adjacent Rancho Robles project.
The existin~ archi~ elevations em~-~ize hipped roof conditions,
~ ~ c~lir~ ar~ no pilaster/column c~cailir~.
pilaster. The effect of a more vibrant and richer textured building is
obtained by these revisions.
Again, our request is for your department and the Plann/ng Commission to
ap~xove these revisions, under~ that upon receipt of apptDual, w~
official for his review and approval.
Please co~tact me if you should require further information. Thank you.
Kevin Pohlson
Senior Project MaD~ger
KP/js
cc: Lloyd Dick - City of Tustin '
630 The City Drive South · Orange, CA 92668 · (714) 971-4747
Illlll* .
!
$~D
SFD
LOT 2
SFD
LOT 4
CPI
LOT ? t
·
SFA
LOT 5
HS
LOT 8
APTS
I NC ['
LOT 12 i LOT 13 I
; ·
. SFA ~ APTS
SFA ' ES LOT 1 1 c° o LOT
LOT 6 ' LOT 10 ~, ~ o o
............ ~ ............ :. '. °~
_EGEND
THE.. IRVIN(~ COMPAN~
PLAN
Ill ,o lC6~·
SECTORS 10 &11
TENT. TRACT 12763
Planning Commission
DATE: dULY 11, 1988
SUBJECT: REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - JULY 5, 1988
Oral presentation.
per
Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - July 5, 1988
Community Development Department
ACTION AGENDA OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
,)ULY 5, 1988
7:00 P.M.
7:01 P.M.
HOESTEREY
ABSENT
PRESENTEO
NONE
NONE
APPROVEO Will(
CORRECTIONS
APPROVED
A~PROVED
APPROVED
CONTINUANCE
TO 7/18/88
APPROVEO
REJECTED
REJECTED
REJ~ECTED
I ·
II.
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL
III. PROCLAMATION - Parks and Recreation Month
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
V. PUBLIC INPUT
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 20, 1988, REGULAR MEETING
2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,300,889.65
RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $178,622..01
3. MEMBERSHIP OF THE CITY OF MISSION VIEJO IN THE FOOTHILL/EASTERN
TRANSPORTAT ION CORRIDOR
Approve Addendum No. i to the Corridor Agency. Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement as recomm¢ ~ded by the City Manager·
¢. TAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Approve continuance of this item to the July 18, 1988, Council
Meeting as recommended by the City Clerk.
5. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTINUE OPERATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988-89
Authorize the City Manager, through Minute Action, to continue
fiscal operations for 1988-89 at an appropriation level to
exceed that of 1987-88, until such time as the budget process
can be completed as recommended by the Finance Department.
6. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-27; CLAIMANT-KIRK WATILO, DATE OF
LOSS-2/10/88, DATE FI1. ED WITH CITY-4/26/88
Reject subject claim for property damage in the amount of
$314.40 as recommended by the City Attorney.
7. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 87-33; CLAIMANT-MARY ANN CARTER AND LINDA
GRIFFIN, DATE OF LOSS-8/24/87, DATE FILED WITH CITY-9/8/87
Reject subject claim for property damage and personal injury in
the amount of $1,000,000 as recommended by the City Attorney.
8. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-22; CLAIMANT-JASON PFEIFER, DATE OF
LOSS-12/16/87, DATE FILED WITH CITY-3/23/88
Reject subject claim for property damage and personal injury in
the amount of $265,188.82 as recommended by the City Attorney.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 1 JULY 5, 1988
ADOPTED
IZESOLUT !ON
88.-69
ADOPTED
RESOLUTION ·
NO. 88-71
APPROI/ED: (1)
CONTINUANCE TO
7/].8/88 AND (2)
EXTENSION OF
EXISTING CONTRACTS
APPROVED AND
AUTHORIZED
ADOPTED
RESOLUTION
NO. 88-6
ADOPTED
RESOLUTION
NO. 88-74
ADOPTED
RESOLUTION
NO. 88-75
9. RESOLUTION NO. 88-69 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TF[E CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 88-206
LOCATED AT 1302 INDUSTRIAL WAY
Approve Tentati,ve Parcel Map. 88-206 by adoption of Resolution
No. 88-69 as recommended by the Community Development
Department.
10. RESOLUTION NO. 88-71 -A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RELATING TO THE COMPENSATION OF PART-TIME
EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN.
Adopt Resolution No. 88-71 relating to the compensation of
part-time employees as recommended by the Administrative
Services Department.
11. AUTHORIZATION FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES/STRUCTURAL PLAN CHECK AND
INFRASTUCTURE SERVICES
Approve the agreements with the firms of Melad & Associates,
Roger Leggett, Inc., BSI Consultants, Inc. and GPS Consulting
Engineering and authorize the City Manager to execute said
agreements subject to City Attorney approval as to form as
recommended by the Community Development Department,
12. EAST TUSTIN; AMENDMENT TO SUBDI'VISION AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 12870 &
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENTS OF COSTS FOR INFRASTRUCURE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR EAST TUSTIN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-2
Approve amendment to Subdivision Agreement and Reimbursement
Agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute as
recommended by the Public Works Department and City Attorney's
office.
13.. RESOLUTION NO. 88-6 -A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING .UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
NC). 10, NEWPORT/MCFADDEN AVENUE, AND ORDERING THE CONVERSION
~ Adopt Resolution No. 88-6 establishing Underground Utility
: District No. 10, Newport/McFadden Avenue and ordering the
conversi on as recommended by the Publ i c Works Depart-
ment/Engineeri'ng Division.
14. RESOLUTION NO. 88-74 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF GRADING, DRAINAGE FACILITIES AND WATER LINE
RELOCATION ON JAMBOREE ROAD FROM TUSTIN RANCH ROAD TO CHAPMAN
AVENUE (NEW)
Adopt Resolution No. 88-74 approving plans and specifications
and authorizing advertising of bi ds as recommended by the
Public Works Department/Engineering Division.
15. RESOLUTION NO. 88-75 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF
A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION 'TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8,
1988, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE
PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO
GENERAL LAW CITIES
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 2 JULY 5, 1988
AOOPTEO
IESOLUTION
O. 88-76
RESOLUTION NO. 88-76 - A RESOLUTION Or THE CItY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA,. REQUESTING-THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 'OF THE
COUNTY OF ORANGE TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE
HELD ON NOVEMBER 8, 1988, WITH THE Sl~ATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION .TO BE
HELD' ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 23302 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE
.Adopt Resolutions No..88-75 and No. 88-76 as recommended by the
City Clerk.
NONE
VII, ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION
VIII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
ADOPTEO
ORDINANCE
~0. 997
1. ADOPTION OF FIRE CODE - ORDINANCE NO. 997
The following Ordinance No. 997 had first reading and introduction
at the May 16, 1988, meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. 997 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING SPECIFIED SECTIONS OF ARTICLE 5 OF
THE TUSTIN CITY CODE AND ADOPTING THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND UNIFORM
FIRE CODE STANDARDS, 1985 EDITIONS, WITH AMENDMENTS THERETO AND THE
UNIFORM FIRE CODE 1987 SUPPLEMENT AS THE FIRE PROTECTION
REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN
IX.
Recommendat i on:
M.O. "That" Ordinance No. 997 have second-reading by title only.
M. O. - That Ordinance No. 997 be passed and adopted.
(Roll Call Vote)
OLD BUSINESS
RECEIVED
AND FI)ED
1. STATUS REPORT - JWA/CRAS/ASC
Update on the John Wayne Airport Noise Monitoring -Program,
Coalition for a Responsible Airport Solution (CRAS) and Airport
Site Coalition {ASC).
~PPROVEI) STAFF
tECO~4EN~ATION
dlTH THE ADDITION
:)F:(1) COPY OF
COUNCIL LETTER BE
) ISTR~BUTED TO OTHER
~.C. OELEGATION
[ NO [ VIDUALS ANO
INTERESTED COMMUNITY
iEMBERS SUCH AS
~)NALEE ELLIOTT AND
4ALT DAVIS AND (2)
STAFF TO PREPARE A
~Er-aE. UT ION FOR
· NTATION BY COUNCIL
Fb .,:AGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES ON AUGUST 14
Recommendation: Receive and file as recommended by the Community
Development Department.
2. RESIDENTIAL'COMMUNITY CARE AND DRUG/ALCOHOL RECOVERY FACILITIES
City Council, at their meeting on June 20, 1988, continued their
discussion on the subject topic to permit the Community Development
Department and City Attorney's office to evaluate the ability of tile
City to regulate residential community care and drug and alcohol
recovery faci 1 itl es.
Recommendation: That the City Council
(1) Authorize the Mayor to transmit correspondence to local state
legislators, the League of California Cities and surrounding
cities requesting support for modifications to state law
relating to.licensing of community care and drug and alcohol
recovery faci 1 iti es.
(2) Instruct staff to initiate a code enforcement action against
Yorba House I, 13682 Yorba Street.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 3 JULY 5, 1988
RECEIVED AND
FI LED SUBJECT
REPORT
X. ' NEW BUSI N_ .S
1.. OUTDOOR SEATING
The City Councii at their regular meeting on June 20, 1988,-
requested that Council review recently adopted outdoor seating
guidelines approved by the Planning Commission on June 13, 1988.
Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council
APPROVED STAFF
RECOI~EI~ATION
WITH REPLACEMENT
TO BE A I~GNOLIA
TREE AT 2332
FI G TREE DRIVE
2. REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVALS
There is a consolidation of requests which have been received from
various property owners regarding trees within the public
ri ght-of-way.
Recommendation: Approve tree removals at the following locations:
14902 8raeburn, 14791 Briarcliff, 1751 Heather, 14711 Mimosa, 13741
Malena, 1201-1202 Prospect, 14431 Emerywood, 14521 Emerywood, 142317
Cloverbrook,. 14801 Branbury, 1035 Irvine Blvd., 14061 Charloma,
14892 Bridgeport, 14412 Heights, 17461 Norwood Park, 14261
Heatherfield, 2332 Figtree and 14432 Cloverbrook as recommended by
the Public Works Department/Field Services Division.
APPROVED STAFF
RECOIqMENDATION
3. REJECTION OF FORMAL EQUIPMENT BID
Council authorized, at their meeting of April 4, 1988, solicitation
.of bids for the purchase of a pick-up cab and chassis-with a utility
bed. Only one bid was received and it did not totally comply with
the speci fi cati OhS.
Recommenu~tion: Reject the bid received from Jim Click Ford on uune
9, 1988, in the amount of $13,018.38, for a pick-up cab and chassis
with uti'lity bed, and authorize staff tp revise the specifications
and rebid the unit as recommended by the Public Works Depart-
ment/Field Services.
ITEM CONTINUED
TO 7/18/88 AND CITY
A1-FORNEY TO INTERPRET
CALIF- GOVT. CODE
SECTION 54957.2 RE:
RECORDER VS. MINUTE
BOOK
4. CLOSED SESSION MINUTES
Councilman Prescott has requested that the Ci{y Council consider
adoption of an ordinance pursuant to Section 54957.2 of the
Cal iforni a Government 'Code.
Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council.
APPROVED
CONTINUANCE TO
7/18/88
5. OPTION OF THE CITY PRINTING AND MAILING THEIR OWN CAMPAIGN
STATEMENTS FOR THE NOVEMBER 8, 1988, CONSOLIDATED GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION
At a Registrar of Voters election seminar, the City was informed
that some cities who have consolidated their elections were printing
their own sample ballots because it gave more exposure to their
candidates.
Recommendation- Pleasure of the City Council.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 4 JULY 5, 1988
XI. REPORTS
RATIFIEO
.
1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA- JUNE 27, 1988
All actions of the Planning Commission become final unless appealed
6y the City Council or member of the public.
Recommendation: Ratify .the Planning Commission Action Agenda of
June 27, 1988.
RE CE I VED
AND FILED
mODEL ORiel NANCE
TO BE AGENDIZED
ON 7/18/88
ITEM CONTINUED
TO 7/18/88. STAFF
TO: (1) RETURN
WITH TI~ETABLE FOR
COORDINATING EFFORTS
OF VACATING SAg JUAN
STREET/WIDENING OF
EL CAHINO AND (2)
REVERSIONARY CLAUSE
2. INVESTMENT SCHEDULE AS OF JUNE 30, 1988
Recommendation: Receive and file subject report.
3. CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION ORDINANCE - SUPPLEMENTARY MEMORANDUM
Recommendation: Receive and file subject report.
4. PROPOSED SAN JUAN STREET VACATION
In September 1987, the City'Council authorized staff to proceed with
a traffic analysis to investigate the feasibility of vacating a
portion of San Juan Street adjacent to Tustin High School and
Lambert Elementary School. This authorization came as a result of
Caltrans' request to the City to consider the vacation of San Juan
Street. The firm of Austin-Foust Associates was the City's
selection to complete thb analysis of this potential street closure.
Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council.
XII. OTHER BUSINESS
PRESCOTT ..... .. . REQUESTED POLITIIiAL GRAFFITI POSTERS ON TRAFFIC CONTROL BOXES AT
FIRST/NEWPORT A~ RED HILL/I-5 BE REMOVED.
· REPORTED CEMENT BLOCK AT S/E CORNER OF PARKING STRUCTURE NOT PROPERLY
~ REPAIRED.
REQUESTED AGENOIZING OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD ISSUE ON 7/18/88.
REQUESllEO COUNCIL HAVE JOINT DINNER Will( TUSTIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
REQUESTED ADJOURNMENT IN ~MORY OF SEVEN MARINES KILLED IN HELICOPTER
CRASH IN JAPAN ON JUNE 25.
EDGAR ........ SUPPORTED AGENDIZING OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD ISSUE ON 7/18/88 WITH
INCLUSION OF PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND COST OF DETAILED PLANS.
REQUESTED PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD ON 7/18/88 FOR THE 1988-89 FISCAL
BUDGET.
KENNEDY ........ REQUESTED AGENOiZING OF TUSTIN EMERGENCY PLAN.
REQUESTED AGENDIZING OF GOVT. CODE SECTION 54957.7 (BROWN ACT),
SPECIFICALLY CONFIDENTIALITY.
8:50 P.N.
xiII. ADJOURNMENT - In memory of seven Marines to the next Regular Meeting on
7/18/88 at 7-00 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 5 JULY 5, 1988
ACTION A~NDA OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINb O'F
THE TUSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
JULY 5, 1988
7:00 P.M.
8:51 P.M. 1.
HOESTEREY 2.
ABSENT
APPROVED WITH 3.
CORRECTION
APPROVED 4.
NONE 5.
8:53 P.N. 6.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 20, 1988, REGULAR ~EETING
Recon~endation: Approve Minutes.
APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,624.30
Recon~nendation: Approval of subject demands in the amount of
$65,6'2"4.30 as recon~nended by the Finance Department.
OTHER BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT - To the next Regular Meeting on Monday, July 18, 1988, at
7:00 p.m.
~EDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA PAGE i JULY 5, 1988