HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 08-15-88ACTION AGEND~
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORTS
NO. 1
8-15-88
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 8, 1988
CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL:
Present: Puckett, Well, Le Jeune, Pontious
Absent: Baker
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.
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 July 11, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting
2. Minutes of the July 25, 1988 Plannin~ Commission Meeting
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
proposed Amendments to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274
DONAHUE SCHRIBER FOR THE IRVINE COMPANY
3501 JAMBOREE ROAD, SUITE 300
SOUTH TOWER
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
TUSTIN MARKET PLACE
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER AND CONFIGURATION OF
LOTS OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13274
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5 (SECTION 15305)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2521, recommending City Council approval of the proposed
amendments to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274.
Resolution 2521
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13274, FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE.
Chairman Pro-tem Pontious asked that Item 3 be removed from the consent calendar.
Planning Commission Acti
August 8, 1988
- Page two
~genda
Cmmtssto~r Wet1 moved, Puckett seconded to approve the consent calendar consisting
of the minutes Of the ~uly 11, '1988 and 4uly 25, 1988 ;eettngs. Motion carried 4-0.
PUBLTC HEARINGS
4. Use Permit 88-16
i
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
E NV I RONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH/PACIFIC SONRISE GRAPHICS
1372 IRVINE BLVD.
TUSTIN, CA 92680
FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH/THEODORE WYNN
1372 IRVINE BLVD.
TUSTIN, CA 92680
1372 IRVINE BLVD.
PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3)
AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL A 50 SQUARE FOOT MONUMENT SIGN WITH A 13
FOOT WIDE STUCCO COVERED BASE.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use
Permit 88-16 by adopting Resolution No. 2520 with the conditions
contained therein.
Resolution 2520 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
APPROVING A 5 FOOT HIGH, 50 SQUARE FOOT MONUMENT SIGN WITH A 13
FOOT WIDE BASE AT 1372 IRVINE BOULEVARD.
Presentation: Eric Haaland, Acting Assistant Planner
Cmmlsstoner Puckett ~ved, Weil seconded to approve Use Pe~it 88-16 by the adoption
of Regolutton No. 2520, with the condtt(~ns contained therein. Motion carried 4-0.
5. Use Permit 88-13, Variance 88-8
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENV I RONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
L.P. REPERTORY CO./WILLIAM DURKIN
14891FOXCROFT
TUSTIN, CA 92680
TUSTIN VILLAGE CENTER
1020 N. BATAVIA, #B
ORANGE, CA 92667
15732 "D" TUSTIN VILLAGE WAY, AT MC FADDEN
C-1, RETAIL COMMERCIAL
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A 150 SEAT DINNER THEATRE SELLING BEER
AND WINE FOR ON-SITE CONSUMPTION WITH LESS THAN THE REQUIRED
AMOUNT OF PARKING.
Recomendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit
88-13 and Variance 88-8 by adoption of Resolution No. 2519.
Pl anning Commi ssi on Acti
August 8, 1988
Page three
kgenda
Resolution 2519 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING USE PERMIT 88-13 AND VARIANCE 88-8 FOR A
150 SEAT DINNER THEATRE WITH ON-SITE CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND
WINE (TYPE 41) HAVING EIGHT PARKING SPACES LESS THAN THE
ZONING CODE REQUIREMENT IN THE C-1 DISTRICT AT 15732 TUSTIN
VILLAGE WAY, UNIT D. ·
Presentation: Eric Haaland, Acting Assistant Planner
Commissioner Wetl moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Use Permit 88-13 and Variance
88-8 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2519 with the following revisions:
Resolution No. 2519, Page two E. 1. delete "in that the center's present
parking use is exceptionally low,"
Exhibit A Item 2. replace "tenant improvement building" with "occupancy".
Exhibit A Item 7. line two after "... at any other time,", add "controlled by
ticket sales,".
Exhibit A Item 17. line two change "6" to '3".
Exhtbtt A. add:
'20. Applicant shall at all times maintain legal agreements wi th
neighboring tenants (existing and future) to provide additional
parking needed to meet the parking requirement for any audiences
larger than 126 patrons."
Motion carried 4-0.
3. Proposed Amendments to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274
Commissioner Puckett moved, Weil seconded to continue this matter as a consent
calendar item for a future meeting to"allow staff adequate time to clarify a
question regarding access behind the soft goods section. Motion carried 4-0.
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
STAFF CONCERNS
6. Report on actions taken at City Council meeting on August 1, 1988
Presentation: Steve Rubin, Senior Planner
__Actions were taken on the following items: Auto Center Zone Change 88-01
Daddy-O's Neon Sign appeal was approved
Planning Commission Actions ratified
Kenyon Drive addl tion approved
Approval of public hearing for Draft EIR for second amendment to the Town
Center Redevelopment Plan
Planntng Commission Ac~
August 8, 1988
Page four
Agenda
Staff noted that there w111 be a Pianntng Commission publtc hearing on the
Draft EIR for the To~n Center Redevelopment Plan Amendment on August 29, 1988
at 7:00 p.e. tn the Counctl Chambers.
COMNI SSION CONCERN
Com. tsstoner Wet1 asked tf staff could agendtze guidelines to publicize when a
bulldtng peradt Is necessary. The rest of the Coeetsslon concurred.
Commissioner Puckett regretfully restgned hts seat on the Planntng Commission to
enter the fade for a Clty Council seat.
Commissioner Wet1 moved, Le Jeune seconded to adjourn to the next regular meeting on
August 22, 1988 at 7:00 p.e. Hotlon carried 4-0.
AGENDA
.TUSTIN PLANNING COt4HISSION
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 8, 1988
CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 p.m., Clty Counctl Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ZNVOCATION
ROLL CALL:
Puckett, Wetl, Baker, Le Jeune, Ponttous
PUBLIC CONCERNS:
(Ltmited to 3 mtnutes per person for 1rems 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.)
le
®
Minutes of the July 11, 1988 Planning Commission Meetln~
Minutes of the July 25, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting
Proposed Amendments to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274
APPLICANT:
LOCATION'
REQUEST'
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS'
DONAHUE SCHRIBER FOR THE IRVINE COMPANY
3501 JAMBOREE ROAD, SUITE 300
SOUTH TOWER
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
TUSTIN MARKET PLACE
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER AND CONFIGURATION OF
LOTS OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13274
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS.5 (SECTION 15305)
Recommendation-It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No: 2521, recommending City Council approval of the proposed
amendments to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274.
. _
Resolution 2521 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13274, FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE.
Planning Commission Ager
August 8, lg88
Page two
UBLIC HEARINGS
4. Use Permit 88-16
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
E NV I RO NME NTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH/PACIFIC SONRISE GRAPHICS
1372 IRVINE BLVD.
TUSTIN, CA 92680
FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH/THEODORE WYNN
1372 IRVINE BLVD.
TUSTIN, CA 92680
1372 IRVINE BLVD.
PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3)
AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL A 50 SQUARE FOOT MONUMENT SIGN WITH A 13
FOOT WIDE STUCCO COVERED BASE.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use
Permit 88-16 by adopting Resolution No. 2520 with the conditions
contained therei n.
Resolution 2520 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
APPROVING A 5 FOOT HIGH, 50 SQUARE FOOT MONUMENT SIGN WITH A 13
FOOT WIDE BASE AT 1372 IRVINE BOULEVARD.
Presentation: Eric Haaland, Acting Assistant Planner
5. Use Permit 88-13, Variance 88-8
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENV I RONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
L.P. REPERTORY CO./WILLIAM DURKIN
14891 FOXCROFT
TUSTIN, CA 92680
TUSTIN VILLAGE CENTER
1020 N. BATAVIA, #B
ORANGE, CA 92667
15732 "D" TUSTIN VILLAGE WAY, AT MC FADDEN
C-1, RETAIL COMMERCIAL
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A 150 SEAT DINNER THEATRE SELLING BEER
AND WINE FOR ON-SITE CONSUMPTION WITH LESS THAN THE REQUIRED
AMOUNT OF PARKING.
Recomendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission aPprove Use Permit
88-13 and Variance 88-8 by adoption of Resolution No. 2519.
Resolution 2519
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING USE PERMIT 88-13 AND VARIANCE 88-8 FOR A
150 SEAT DINNER THEATRE WITH ON-SITE CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND
WINE (TYPE 41) HAVING EIGHT PARKING SPACES LESS THAN THE
ZONING CODE REQUIREMENT IN THE C-1 DISTRICT AT 15732 TUSTIN
VILLAGE WAY, UNIT D.
Presentation: Eric Haaland, Acting Assistant Planner
Planning Commission Ag~
August 8, 1988
Page three
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
STAFF CONCERNS
6. Report on acttons taken at Ctt¥ Council meeting on August 1, 1988
COMMISSION CONCERNS
AO~OURmENT
Adjourn to the next regular meettng of the Planntng Commission on August 22, 1988 at
7:00 p.m.
HINUTES
TUSTIN PLANNING COI~MISSION
· REGULAR HEETING
duly 11, 1988
CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 p.m., City Councl 1 Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL:
Present: Puckett, Well, Baker, Le Jeune
Absent- Pontious
PUBLIC CONCERMS: (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.
Mr. Joseph Crlsterna, 14521 Alder Lane, asked, regarding the possible purchase of
right-of-way behind the Peppertree tract, if a property owner did not wish to
purchase the land behind his home, would the possibility exist for his neighbors to
purchase that land.
The Director noted that this subject was scheduled for tonights agenda, however the
Irvine Company has asked for more time to further analyze the situation.
®
Reo..r~anlzation of the Commission
Commissioner Well opened nominations for the Chairman of 'the Planning Commission.
CommisSioner l'le Jeune nominated Commissioner Baker, Commissioner Puckett seconded the
nomination. Nominations were closed.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Le Jeune seconded to elect Commissioner Baker as
ChiliS'man. Motion Carried 4'-0o '
Cha_irman Baker opened nominations for Chairman Pro-rem of the Planning Commission.
CommisSioner Well nominated Commissioner Pontious, Commissioner Le Jeune seconded the
nomination.' .... NOminations were closed. , ............
Commissioner Well moved, Le Jeune seconded to elect Commissioner Pontious as Chairman
Pro-rem.I''' Motion carried 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.)
Planning Commission M1n~w_es
July 11, 1988 _
Page two
2. Minutes of the June 27, 1988 Plannin~ CommJssion meetin,.a~
3. Final Parcel Map 88-179
APPLICANT:
K.W. LAWLER AND ASSOCIATES
2832 WALNUT AVENUE, SUITE A
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680
OWNER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
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
Commissioner Puckett moved, Well seconded to approve the consent calendar. Motion
¢iarried 4-0.
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.
Planning Commission Mi, .es
July 11, 1988
Page three
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:
®
e
Draft addendum to Tustln 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 THELAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE I-5
FREEWAY, TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THEEXISTING 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 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
Staff added the following condition to Resolution No. 2513, Exhibit A, Page four'
"6.6 Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 87-201 shall be conditional upon City Council
approval of Zone Change 88-01. Should the City Council fail to approve Zone Change
88-01 Tentative Parcel Map 87-201 approval shall become null and void."
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the Tustin Ranch Road overpass was going to be built.
Staff responded that the overpass is currently in the plan check process and the
design has been finalized.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if this was a new EIR.
Staff responded that the new lot is subject to the same conditions applicable to all
Planning Commission Mih.~es
July 11, 1988
Page four
Auto Dealership lots in the area.
Commissioner Well commended staff on a good job and a very detailed report.
Commissioner Puckett also commended staff and asked if there was a major benefit to a
full cloverleaf.
The Director noted that the traffic analysis has indicated a different demand then
was originally proposed warranting only a partial cloverleaf design on the
interchange.
Commissioner Baker asked if staff had seen any plans of the bridge configuration and
if it is known how far the ramp is going to obstruct.
Staff noted that all bridge configurations have been designed to fit around the slope
and overpass.
Commissioner Baker asked if the walls along the freeway would be replaced.
Staff indicated that the new lot will have a new wall with a landscaped buffer on the
freeway side.
The public hearing was opened at 7:23 p.m.
Dan Mispagel, representing the Irvine Co.mpany, noted that the applicant concurred
fully with staff's report and recommendation for Planning Commission approval and
would be happy to answer any questions the Commission might have.
The public hearing was closed at 7:25 p.m.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the plans for the dealership will be brought before
the Commi ssi on.
Staff noted that the dealership is subject to the Design Review process and only the
approval of the Director of Community Development.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked how banners would be handled.
Staff indicated that any banner problems could be pursued through normal code
enforcement procedures.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if there was a conditional use permit issued for the
1 oudspeakers.
Staff noted that the issue of loudspeakers was very carefully considered and that
there is joint use of the paging and loudspeaker systems. These systems are
inspected and tested for noise levels and staff is working with the applicant.
Commissioner Puckett asked if there had been any complaints registered regarding the
noise levels.
Staff responded that they were not aware of any complaints.
Planning Commission M, Ces'
July 11, 1988
Page five
Commissioner Puckett moved, Wet1 seconded to recommend approval of draft addendum to
the Tusttn' Auto' cent~er EIR'84'2"t'o the City Council by adoption of Resolution No.
2510. Motion carrted 4-0.
Commissioner Wet1 moved, Le Jeune seconded to recommend to the City Council approval
bf"General Plan Amendment 88-01 "by the adoptton of Resolution No. 2511. Motion
carrted 4-0.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Le Jeune seconded to recommend approval to the City
Council o'f"~one change 88-01 bY the adOPt'ion. O'f Resolution No. 2512. Motion carried
4-0.
Con~ntsstoner Wetl moved, Le Jeune seconded to recon~nd to the City Council approval
ofll~entative Parcel Map 87-201 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2513 with one minor
revision. Motion carried 4-0.
· iii im
.
lazin .'
APPLICANT'
LOCATION'
REQUEST:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS'
Conditional Use Permit for a Master Sign Program for the Tustin Market Place;
and an Amendment to DeSign 'Review 87-37, for the Design ReVi.ew f.or t~eI1' p~o'j..ec~,
on the 'l'l~lnds'cape C'oncept Ifor~ the' Enterta(6meo~.. ,villa~e,, and i. for them. s.t°re..fr°ntl.
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)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2516, approving a nmster sign program for the Tustin Market Place and
amendments to Design Reviw 87-37 as it affects the landscape concept for the
Entertainment Village and the storefront glazing standard.
Resolutioh 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
July 11, 1988
Page si x
Commissioner Le Jeune asked for more information regarding window signage.
Staff noted that the sign program does not allow window signs except for a sign
noting store hours which is restricted to 144 square inches.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked who approves the signs.
Staff responded that signs are approved by the Community Development Department.
Commissioner Well asked for clari ficatlon on the tower signs.
Staff responded that the 35' buildings have one tower per building and they are
allowed two signs per tower facing different directions with a total of 260 square
feet for each sign face. Staff al so indicated that there will be no signage on the
back side of the tower or on the back of the buildings. One sign would face the
parking lot and the other would face Jamboree Road with nothing facing the freeway.
Commissioner Baker noting concern with reflections, asked what type of coating would
be applied to the aluminum cabinets.
Staff indicated that there will be a spray on "stucco texture look" coat on the
freeway pylons, monolithes and directional signs that wilt mimic the stucco texture
that is on the walls in a flat color.
Commissioner Baker asked for more information regarding the neon signage in the
Entertainment Vi 1 lage.
Staff indicated thai neon can only be within the letters of the sign. It was also
noted that the design of the Entertainment Village will be brought back to the
Planning Commission at a later date.
Commissioner Baker noted concern about the 50 foot monolithe and the 15 foot tall
yellow concrete pickets along Jamboree Road. He asked if the colors along Jamboree
would be up to the developer.
Staff noted that a low three foot screen wall along Jamboree in the same base color
as the monolithe was also discussed and that the yellow color was already approved to
be appropriate by the Commission. There will also be bougainvillas planted along
the base of the 15 foot pickets and along the monolithe.
Commissioner Baker asked if the 14 foot directional sign along E1 Camino Real could
name tenants.
Staff responded that the directional sign would name tenants and point to their
di recti on.
The public hearing was opened at 8:05 p.m.
Glenn Myers, of Donahue Schriber representing the Irvine Company indicated that he
would be happy to answer any questions the Commission had.
Planning Commlssion Hi,..¢es
July 11, 1988
Page seven
Commissioner Well noted her appreciation to Donahue Schriber for the change in the
perimeter wall color and for the time spent with the Planning Commission on the
workshops.
CommiSsioner Puckett noted that he was concerned when the pr. oject was first brought
to the Commission, however, now that the project is in construction he felt that the
colors are lost in the size of the project.
The public hearing was closed at 8:07 p.m.
Commissioner Le Jeune noted that there have been some positive changes since the
beginning of the project and that he felt that the project will work out very well.
Commissioner Baker asked if number 8 of Resolution No. 2516 was standard wording.
Staff indicated that it is standard wording and that signs must be approved by the
Planning Commission.
Commissioner Baker reiterated his concern regarding the yellow 15 foot pickets and
the 14 foot high tenant identification sign along E1 Camino Real.
Commissioner Weil moved, Puckett seconded to approve the Master Sign Program for the
Tusttn Market Place, amend Design Review 87-37 as it affects the landscape concept
for the Entertainment Village and amend the storefront glazing standards by the
adoption of Resolution No. 2516. Motion caried 4-0.
OLD BUSINESS
6. Abandoned Right-of-Way
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue their
discussion on this matter for 60 days.
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
Commissioner Weil moved, Puckett seconded to continue the issue of the abandoned
right-of-way. Motion carried 4-0.
7. Design Review No. 88-13
APPLICANT:
DADDY-O'S RESTAURANT
PAUL MARTINO
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
OWNER:
LOCATION:
jOHNSTOWN AMERICAN
23201 LAKE CENTER DRIVE
EL TORO, CA 92630
174 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
Planning. Commission Mi ,,utes
July 11, 1988
Page eight
-
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUE ST:
C-2 CENTRA~ 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 Shlngleton, Director of Community Development
Commissioner Well indicated that her concern was with consistency in the signs around
th6' City. IShe nbted two existing neon signs; a dry cleaners and Ruby's.
The Director indicated that those signs were either pre-existing or were inside of
windows which neither would require a building permit. A sign that was installed on
the outside of the building would need a building permit.
Commissioner Well asked if these existing signs in the downtown area posed a legal
problem and noted concern that there was inconsistency.
Clark Ide, representing the City Attorney's office responded that these existing
signs can not be legally affected. He stated that as long as the Planning
Commission's actions were consistent there were no legal problems.
The Director noted that the E1 Camino Real Specific Plan states that the signage must
be co~atible and complementary to the village identification, that signs shall be of
uniform size, color and style. Staff does not believe that the use of neon in this
particular case, at this particular location given its surroundings is compatible
with the statement. Ruby's sign is currently not operational.
Commissioner Baker indicated that he liked the sign that is in place currently.
.
.~.
Commissioner Well moved, Puckett seconded to deny the request for the use of exposed
n6'6n tubing by the adoption of Resolution No. 2517 with the following revision-
Item I. B. 2. will read "2. The E1 Camino Real Specific Plan which is currently
in place states that signs shall be of uniform size, color and style while being
compatible with and complimentary to the village identification. The recently
adopted Cultural Resources District also requires a finding of compatibility with
surrounding properties. The proposed neon sign is inconsistent with this surrounding
environment." Motion carried 4-0.
Commissioner Well stated that she felt more comfortable finding that the sign is
incompatible with the design of the downtown area.
Planning Commission Mi
July 11, 1988
Page nt ne
8. Rancho Maderas
i i
APPLICANT'
LOCATION'
REQUEST'
WESTERN NATIONAL PROPERTIES
630 THE CITY DRIVE SOUTH
ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92668
LOT 14, TRACT 12763
MODIFICATION TO DESIGN REVIEW 87-32
Reconmmndation' It is reconmmnded 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 Shtngleton, Director of Community Development
Con~ntssioner Wetl asked if the colors will renmln the same and if the exterior
would require n~re nmintenance.
Kevin Pohlson, representing Western National Properties noted that the colors would
renmtn'~h~ sanm and the owners and nmnagers of the property want to keep the project
nmintenance at a minimum.
Con~ntsstoner Puckett moved, Wetl Seconded to approve exterior architectural revisions
to D~ign" RevJew 87~32 by the adbptlon 01¥ Resolution No. 2515. Moti.on carried 4-0.
STAFF CONCERNS
9. Report on City, Council Actions taken at July 5, 1988 meetin9
Presentation' Christine Shingleton, Director of Con~nunity Development
No Planning Con~nission action necessary.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Le Jeune noted that all of the palm trees along Main Street had been
trimmed except for- the ones in front of Steven's Square.
Con~nissioner Well asked if staff had received any feedback from SCAG regarding their
90 day appeal period.
The Director noted that there would be a workshop the following week and asked if any
of the Commissioners were interested in attending.
Commissioner Wetl indicated that she would like to attend.
ii
Con~nisstoner Puckett complimented Commissioner Well on doing a fine job as Chairnmn.
m i
Planning Commission Mi, ,es
July 11, 1988
Page ten
Con~nissioner Baker asked about the status of the house on Red Hill and Garland.
i i
Mr. Ide noted that the issue is in a legal follow-up and is obtaining title
Information.
Commissioner Baker also thanked staff for the fine job being done on the Flood
Con(roil'channel along Red Hill Avenue.
The Director noted that there are three single~;family tracts open in Phase 2, they
are Branmlea, Bren-Osgood and J. M. Peters.
Con~ntssioner Le Jeune asked what was happening to the piece of property on Irvine
Boulevard'between Holt and Newport.
The Director noted that staff is expecting to receive a tentative proposal in the
near future.
Con~ntssioner Le Jeune thanked Commissioner Well for a fine job as Chairn~n and
thanked staffll"lfor the copy of the report on the JWA status.
ADgOURI~IENT
At 8:40 p.m Commissioner Well moved, Puckett seconded to adjourn to the next regular
scheduled neeting
I'on Jul~"125,' 1~'~8 lat 7'011~ p.m. Motion carried 4-0.
A. L. Baker
Chairman
Penni Fol~y
Se cre ta ry
MINUTES
TUSTZN PLANNING COI~qISSION
REGULAR MEETING
,luly 25, 1988
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/]:NVOCAT]:ON
ROLL CALL:
PUBL ZC CONCERNS:
Present: Puckett, Wetl, 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.
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.)
Minutes of the July 11, 1988 Planning Commission meeting will not be available
until August 8, 1988 due to the death of Ms. Foley's father..
No Commtssion Action Necessary.
OLD BUSINESS:
2. Density Bonuses and Other Incentives
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No.
2518 recommending City Council approval of a Density Bonus Policy.
Presentation: Steve Rubin, Senior Planner
Commissioner Le Jeune asked for clarification on the procedures for the density bonus
process.
Staff would use the preliminary design review process to determine bonus
unit eligibility. Owner would have to obtain verification of Section 8 certificates
for "X" number of units {if rental units). Then staff would bring the project to the
City Council who would-determine whether to give bonuses or an equivalent financial
value for the extra units. The developer could then move forward to the formal
design review process. If the project requires a conditional use permit or other
discretionary review it would be brought before the Commission.
P1 annl ng Commi ssl on Mi nu ~s
July 25, 1988 -
Page two
The Director noted that the City Council is the only City body that has the ability
to commit financial resources.
Lois Jeffrey, representing the City Attorney's office, indicated that the law was
originally written to require developers to enter into a development agreement to
provide this kind of density bonus. The intent of the law was that the legislative
body of the community was to enter into a financial commitment agreement with the
developer.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked for more information regarding the sale of the property
and whether inflation was taken into consideration.
Staff noted that controls for resale are not fully developed yet. Usually there are
CPI allowances along with allowances for improvements to the units.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if the developer stayed with the project for 30 years.
Staff responded that density bonuses run with the land. Once ownership units are
sold the developers would have no more involvement. The subsequent owner would be
responsible for the certification of resale compliance.
Commissioner Puckett asked if the provisions for square footage are adequate.
The Director indicated that those are figures consistent with most zoning ordinances
from other cities and with the East Tustin Specific Plan.
Commissioner Wetl noted that the report was very well done. She indicated that she
was especially glad to see the sensitivity to the increased parking and provisions
for owner occupied affordable housing. She asked if staff foresees any problems in
regard to when the control period is ended. She also asked what figures will be used
to determine the density.
Staff responded that it does not expect a lot of density bonus proposals.
The Director noted that the current Municipal Code and the East Tustin Specific Plan
vary in their interpretation to determine density. The Zoning Code allows staff to
make the determination based on the existing lot size (net minus dedications), and
the East Tustin Specific Plan uses gross acreage. Also, the determination factors
are rounded down in the figuring process.
Commissioner Well asked for a more detailed explanation of the annual compliance
certi fi cate.
Staff noted that it is a form"of annual verification used by all of the cities
surveyed. Once the overall process is approved, staff will proceed with creating
this process. Their goal would be to use a system 'that would burden the City the
least.
Commissioner Well asked how the Section 8 housing certificate worked.
P 1 ann1 ng Corem1 ss 1on Mi n~
July 25, 1988
Page three
The Director noted that the County Housing Authority, through funds made available
through the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, commits a certain
number of certificates that will be issued in any community in which there is an
existing contract for certifications of Section 8 on existing rental housing. A
Section 8 certificate is issued to two parties, a prospective renter and the property
owner with a rental unit. The property owner only has to charge the renter 30% of
their income for rent. HUD establishes minimum market rate rent levels with the
County in the area. The money provided to property owners supplements the difference
between the minimum market rent levels and 30% of the renter's income. The
certificate provided to the tenant that allows him to participate in the program is
proof that their income is certified annually. They must rent a certain type of unit
by class and household type.
Staff noted that there is only one of these proposals and that it is a small project.
Commissioner Ponttous asked if there was a reason for the 10 year minimum term.
Staff stated that it felt 10 years was a reasonable time period and that State law
states that there is a 30 year time limit where direct financial contributions are
involved.
Commissioner Pontlous asked if perhaps 15 years or longer Would be more appropriate.
She also pointed out that the resolution should say "developer/owner".
Commissioner Baker asked if this pertained to the East Tustin project.
The Director noted that if a developer submitted the same bonus provisions to comply
with the program they would quali fy.
Commissioner Baker asked how many locations the City had w. here this situation would
apply.
Staff responded that it would most likely be used in the R-3 zones in the western
edge of the City that may be redeveloped but it would likely be on a small scale.
Commissioner Baker asked for more clarification on the selling price controls.
Staff indicated that they had not yet developed a set of criteria for resale
controls. However, deed restrictions would contain them. Staff will look at
what other cities are doing in order to develop the most efficient type of controls.
Commissioner Baker asked about condomi ni um conversions.
The Director noted that the density bonus provisions are that more affordable units
must be provided if the City is providing any density bonuses or financial incentives
for a condominium or condo conversion project. If an existing apartment unit
previously approved under a density bonus or financial incentive by the City Council
was submitted for conversion, the project would be reviewed and conditioned based
upon whether or not stipulated ratios in the State law for condominium conversions
were adhered to and conditions would be imposed appropriately to maintain the
affordability of the units. There are adequate processes to safeguard against any
problems.
Planning Commission Min~.=s
July 25, 1988
Page four
Commissioner Baker asked what would happen if someone was out of compliance at their
annual certi fi cati on i nspecti on.
Lois Jeffrey noted that the development agreement would stipulate the impact of
non-compl iance.
The Director indicated changes to Step 4 of the resolution to be contained in the
mort on.
Commissioner Pontlous moved, Le Jeune seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 2518 with the
following corrections:
4. Step Four - Execute Development Agreement. The developer shall
enter into a' Development Agreement wi th the City which shall be
approved by the City Council. The Development Agreement shall
stipulate the following: compliance with a submitted development
plan and all Design Review and other descretionary conditions of
approval, the total number of allowed dwelling units {including
bonus units), the number of units to be set aside as
"affordable", the definition of affordable, the duration of the
agreement-(15 year minimum term, 30 years where mandated by State
and/or Federal .statute), annual certification of compliance,
requirement for recorded deed restrictions regulating resale of
ownership unit, relief for failure to comply, the requirement for
owner occupancy on ownership units and other information as
determined necessary by the Director of Community Development and
City Attorney' s office.
5. Step Five - On-Going Monitoring. A Certificate of Compliance to
the Development Agreement on an annual basis, as prescribed in
the Development Agreement.
recommending to the City Council approval of Density Bonus Policy. Motion carried
5-0.
NEW BUSX#ESS:
3. SCAG Reoional Plans
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Presentation: Christine A. Shtngleton, Director of Community Development
Commissioner Well noted appreciation for the information. She indicated that she
felt the 1994 total population figures are underestimated. She also asked what the
medi an income for Tustin is.
The Director noted that the figures were taken from HUD information for' the Los
Angeles and Orange County inter metropolitan area. Staff did not have the median
income figures but would research 'and return the most recent figures to the
Commi ssi on.
Commissioner Baker asked for' clarification of the 25% figure on page II-4 of the
Planning Commission Mi nu.es
July 25, 1988
Page fi ve
attached exhibit.
The Director noted that a City is either overconcentrated or it is not
overconcentrated with low or moderate level income units. The percentage of
concentration would determine whether an adjustment ratio is applied against a City's
future needs so cities will move closer to the regional average.
Commissioner Baker asked how the East Tustin Project would be considered.
The Director noted that the figures in the Housing Element were established by
subtracting 600 dwelling units within the affordable range from the 1983-1988
figures. The Irvine Company has made the option of affordable housing available for
the Ci ry.
Commissioner Wetl moved, Le Jeune seconded to receive and file the report. Motion
carried 5-0.
STAFF CONCERNS
4. Status Report on East Tusttn
- Recommendation: Receive and file.
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
Commissioner Pontious noted her appreciation for the information. The other
Commissioners agreed.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked who determines what denomination will settle at the
church si re.
Staff responded whoever buys the property.
Commissioner Le Jeune asked when the park site between the Auto Center and the
apartments is scheduled to be built.
The Director stated that the construction drawings were in the last plan check and
that the constuction bids would probably go out sometime in September, construction
will begin shortly.
Commissioner Baker asked what happened to the vegetation in the reservation area
along Browning to E1 'Camino Real.
The Director noted that the City was responsible for maintaining that area and that
there have been a few problems, however the Public Works Department is trying to
resolve those problems as quickly as possible.
5. City Council Action Agenda for July 18, 1988
Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development
The Director indicated that the following items were discussed:
Planning Commission
July 25, 1988
Page si x
Zone Change for the Auto Center Expansion
Assessment District 86-2
Fiscal Year [988-89 Budget
Final Parcel Hap 88-179
John Wayne Airport Status
Ad Hoc Street Naming Committee
Resolution for the League of California Cities RF_: Community Care Facilities
Daddy-o' s Sign Appeal
Commissioner Le Jeune noted that the applicant for Daddy-o's asked for a continuance
and then was not available to answer questions from the Commissioners when it was
brought to the Commission. He also brought up Fat Freddie's and the Sizzler's neon
stgns.
The Director noted that those locations are not In the Old Town area.
Commissioner Well noted that the discussion was that this use is the only one with
exposed neon.
The Director noted that the issue was the location of the-use in the Old Town area
and the finding of consistency with the Cultural Resources Ordinance.
Commissioner Well questioned if the Commission should define a time period for the
City Counci 1.
The Director noted that the background is that every building is a product of its own
time, and that compatibility and consistency within the surrounding environment 'is
the issue. '
Commissioner Le Jeune noted that the sign on the side of the building was set back
quite a distance and asked if that had been a staff requirement.
The Director responded that the applicant had chosen the location of the sign.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Le Jeune asked if there were any plans for the southwest corner of
Newport and E1 Camino Real.
The Director noted that there is a proposal for a commercial center at that
location. They are waiting for soil tests and soil reconstruction before they can
begin constructi on.
.Commissioner Puckett asked how many cinemas would be in the Entertainment Village in
the Market Place center.
Staff responded that they believe there will be six.
Commissioner Baker asked if there were any other sites in the City which would
require soil testing as in the old Southern Counties Oil property.
Pl'annlng Commission Min,~
-July 25, 1988
Page seven
The Director noted *that all use permits are conditioned to provide soils reports
prior to grading activity and certification from the Orange County Health Department
that the soil is safe to use.
Commissioner Baker congratulated Laura Pickup on becoming the Director of the Orange
Section of the American Planning Association.
AD,IOURI~Ek'T
At 8:20 p.m. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Weil seconded to adjourn to the next
regular scheduled meeting on August 8, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. in memory of Russell F.
Koelsch, father of Penni Foley, Secretary. Motion carried 5-0.
A. L. Baker
Chairman
Penni Foley
Secretary
Planning Commission
DATE:
SUB,1ECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
ENVI ROIIqElrrAL
STATUS:
AUGUST 8, 1988
PROPOSED AlqENDlqENTS TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13274
DOIIAHUE SCHRIBER FOR THE IRVINE COIqPANY
3501 JAiqBOREE ROAD, SUITE 300
SOUTH TOWER
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
TUSTIN MARKET PLACE
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED REDUCTION IN THE NIJIqBER AND CONFIGURATION OF
LOTS OF YESTING TENTATIYE TRACT NO. 13274
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5 (SECTION 15305)
RECQIdHENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt ResOlution No. 2521,
recommending City Council approval of the proposed amendments to Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 13274.
BACKGROUND:
On January 11, 1988, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2465
recommending City Council approval of Vesting Tentative Tract. No. 13274, which
proposed to subdivide a 129+ acre site into 28 numbered and two lettered lots
for the* development of the Tustin Market Place. At .that time, the lot
configuration was such that stand-alone buildings (as in the south village) or
attached (as in the hard and soft goods section) could have a separate land
lease or other form of lease. The ground lease concept for the hard and soft
goods sections has recently been altered, and the applicant is requesting to
amend the approved Tentative Map accordingly. Another reason for the proposed
amendment is a change in the type of construction being used for the attached
buildings, which requires the elimination of interior property lines in the hard
and soft goods sections (concrete tilt-up will continue to be used in these two
areas ).
DISCUSSION:
L The City Attorney's office has reviewed both the City's and State Subdivision
, Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Vestlng Tentative Tract No. [3274
August 8, [988
Page two
Codes relattng to amendments to approved Tentative Tract Haps. While both the
City's Subdivision Ordinance and the State Subdivision Hap Act allow such,
netther spells out a procedure for processing amendments. Upon surveying other
Cities procedures, the City Attorney's office has suggested an approach similar
to that of the City of Davis, where a mlnor amendments may be approved without a
publlc hearing upon the ftndtngs that: ([) no lots, units or building sites or
structures are added; (2) that the changes are consistent with the intent and
sptrtt of the orlginal tentative map approval; and (3) there are no resulting
violations of the City's Subdivision Ordinance or the State Subdivision Hap
Act. Once an amendment is approved, it would not alter the expiration date of
the tentative map. A review of the proposed amendments are as follows:
Phase ! -This consists of the hard goods section, presently under construction.
The prOposed amendment would eliminate the interior lot lines that divide lots
[9-23, as shown on the approved Tentative H~p (see reduction), and leave the
extertor lot line as is, becoming lot 10 (see attached amended map). The
location, placement and/or orientation of the exterior lot line would not be
altered. The net effect is that there will be no property lines dividing the
buildings (such as between Stor and the neighboring tenants).
Phase II - This consists of the soft goods section. The proposed amendment
Wobld eliminate the interior lot lines that divide lots 2-9 as shown on the.
approved Tentative Map-(see reduction), and leave the'exterior lot line,
becoming lot 3 (see attached amended map). The difference between Phase I and
Phase II is that the shape of lot 3 in Phase II is not .as tailored to the
building shape as lot 10 is in Phase I; however, placement of the buildings on
lot 3 will still be able to comply with the site plan that was approved with
Design Review 87-37.
Phase III - This consists of the Entertainment Village, both north and south of
E11 I~l~mtno
Real. Phase III would experience the most change with the proposed
amendment. This is a result of the continued evolution and refinement of the
village design and layout (at the time of the approval of Design Review 87-37,
it was the most conceptual design of the three phases). As the Commission is
aware, the entire Entertainment Village design will be brought before them for
final review and approval at a later date. As proposed, the north Village would
change from one large lot (#1 on approved map) to one slightly smaller lot for
the movie theatre and other retail spaces, plus three small lots for stand alone
buildings. The south Village would change from six stand alone lots (#'s 12-16
on the approved map) to seven smaller stand alone lots with the proposed
amendments (lots 11-17).
Despite the above noted changes, several lots would not change, namely the two
lettered lots, the retaining basin, the Caltrans dedications, the corners of New
Myford and E1 Camino and New Myford and Bryan, and the "panhandle" {lots A & B,
26, 25, 27, 18, 28 and 1, respectively on the approved map). Again, these lots
would not change in shape, size, orientation or location.
Corn rnuni~¥ Development Depar~rnen~
Planning Commission Report
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274
August 8, 1988
Page three
CONCLUSION:
Staff believes that the proposed amendment conforms to the criteria recommended
by the City Attorney and discussed earlier in this report, that is: (1) no lots,
units or building sites or structures have been added (the location of the lots
will remain largely the same while reducing in total number from 30 to 23
[including lettered lots]); (2) that the changes are consistent with the intent
and spirit of .the approved tentative map; and (3) the proposed changes do not
violate the provisions of the City's Subdivision Ordinance or the State
Subdivision Map Act; therefore, the proposed amendment should be approved.
Senior Planner
~Christine A. Shfngl~ton
Director of Community Development
SR:CAS:ts
Attachment: Resolution No. 2521
Reduction of approved Tentative Tract 13274
Amended Tentative Tract 13274
Community Development Depariment
2
3
4
5
RESOLUTION NO. 2521
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
AMENDMENTS TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13274, FOR
THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
.17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
-
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That the amended Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274 was submitted
to the Planning Commission by Donahue Schriber on behalf of the
Irvine Company for consideration.
B. That no lots, units or building sites or structures have been
added (the location of the lots will remain largely the same
while reducing in total number from 30 to 23 [including lettered
lots]).
C. That the amended map is consistent with the intent and spirit of
the approved Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274.
D. That the proposed amendments do not violate the provisions of
the City's Subdivision Ordinance or the State Subdivision Map
Act. ~ m
E. That the proposed .amended map has been determined 'to be
Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (Class 5, Section 15305).
F. That the proposed amended Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274 is
in conformance with the Tustin General Plan, adopted East Tustin
Specific Plan, Development Agreement and Subdivision Map Act as
it pertains to the development of Sector 12 (mixed use site).
Ge
That the City has reviewed the School Facilities Agreement
between the Irvine Company and the Tustin Unified School
District, the East Tustin Specific Plan, EIR 85-2 and the
impacts of the amended Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274 for
School District Facilities and finds and determines that the
impacts on School District facilities by approval of this
amended map are adequately addressed through the 'imposition of
school facility fees as a condition of approval as contained in
Exhibit B of Resolution No. 2465, incorporated herein by
reference.
H. That the design of the amended map will not conflict wi th
easements acquired or required by the public at large, for
access through or use of the property within the subdivision.
Resolution No. 2521
Page two
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
2~
I. That the amended map will not Impact the stte plan as approved
by Design Review 87-37.
II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council
approval of amended Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274 subject to the
followtng conditions:
A. Amended Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274 shall comply with all
conditions of approval for Tentative Tract No. 13274 as
contained in Exhibit 'B' of Resolution No. 2465.
B. All development and building placement shall comply with the
approved site plan and architectural designs approved with
Design Review 87-37.
C. The final design concept for the Entertainment Village shall be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to
submittal for building plan check.
D. That all buildings shall comply with all applicable building and
fi re codes.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the day of , 1988.
Aj' L. Baker
Chairman
Penni Foley
Recording Secretary
I
~\
l '
/
/
/
-- /
1.1
Planning Commission
DATE: AUGUST 8, 1988
· SUB~IECT:
USE PERHIT 88-16
APPLICANT:
FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH/PACIFIC SONRISE GRAPHICS
1372 IIWIN[ BLVD. .
TUSTIN, CA 92680
PROPERTY
OklNER:
FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH/THEODORE k'YNN
1372 IRVINE BLVD.
TUSTIN, CA 92680
LOCAT!ON:
1372 IRVINE BLVDo
ZONING:
PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL '
STATUS: CATEGORICALLY EXEHPT (CLASS 3)
.
REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL A 50 SQUARE FOOT HONUMENT SIGN HITH A 13
FOOT ¥IDE STUCCO COVERED BASE.
RECOI4HENDATION:
It ts recommended that the Planntng Commission approve Use Permtt 88-16 by
.adopting Resolution No. 2520 wtth the conditions contained theretn.
BACKGROUND:
rtrst Christian Church has proposed to tnsta11 a 50 square foot, Internally
Illuminated monument stgn mounted tn a Z3 foot wtde stuccoed base to replace
an extsttng monument slgn on the slte. All slgns tn the Institutional 0tstrtct
are subject to the revte~ and approval of a Use Permtt.
DISCUSSION:
iiiii
Submitted plans for the proposed monument stgn Indicate a 50 square foot,
Community Developmen~ DeparTment
Planning Commission Report
Use Permlt 88-16
August 8, 1988
Page
double-faced, Internally Illuminated cabinet set wtthln a 13 foot wtde, beige
colored stucco base that extends 1 1/2 feet beyond the wtdth of the cabtnet on
each stde (see Attachment [). The cabtnet peaks' tn the center and is topped
with tiles to give a pitched roof-spanish mtsslon effect. Two lines of
changible copy are proposed for the lower portion of the cabinet. The overall
design, color and mtertals of the sign are compatible with those of the Church
building. Staff's prtmary concern with the proposed sign ts with the 13 foot
base width and the 6 foot hetght, which combtned result in a substantial and
bulky structure located a mere 3 feet from the front property 11ne. If the base
were to be lowered one foot (resulting in an overall height of 5 feet) the
vtsual bulk and tmpact of the sign would be greatly reduced, whtle leaving the
architectural Integrity of the sign tntact.
CONCLUS T ON:
i
Staff has reviewed the proposed sign and recommends that the Use Permit be
approved with the condition that the height of the base be reduced by one foot,
as stipulated in Resolution No. 2520.
Ertc Haaland ~
Actlng Assistant Planner
:CAS: ts
Attachment: Resolution No. 2520
Plans
Otrector of Community Development
Community DeveloPment Departrnen~
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2520
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, APPROVING A 5 FOOT HIGH, 50 SQUARE FOOT
MONUMENT SIGN WITH A 13 FOOT WIDE BASE AT 1372 IRVINE
BOULEVARD.
The Planning Commission of the City of Tusttn does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That a proper application, Use Permit 88-16, has been filed on
behalf of First Christian Church to request authorization to
install a 5 foot high, 50 square foot monument sign with a 13
foot wide base at 1372 Irvtne Boulevard.
B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on
August 8, 1988 for said application.
C. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use
applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general
welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood
of such proposed use, .evidenced by the following findings:
1. The site is located in the Public and Institutional Zone.
2. The sign 'advertises a use allowed in the Public and
Institutional Zone.
D. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use
applied for will not be injurious or detrimental to the property
and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property,
nor to the general welfare of the City of Tusttn, and should be
granted.
E. That the proposed development shall be in accordance with the
development policies adopted by the City Council, Uniform
Building Codes as administered by the Building Official, Fire
Code as administered by the Orange County Fire Marshal and
street improvement requirements as administered by the City
Engineer.
F. That this project is Categorically Exempt (Class 3) from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
G. That final development plans shall require the review and
approval of the Community Development Department.
Resolution No. 2520
Page
The Planntng Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permtt No.
88-Z6, approving a 5 foot htgh, 50 square foot monument stgn wlth a
Z3 foot wtde base at Z372 Zrvtne Boulevarcl.
As
The base of the stgn shall be lowered one (].) foot, resulting tn
combtned hetght of ftve (5) feet for the stgn and eonument.
Be
The stgn shall be constructecl and Installed pursuant to the
submtttecl plans, or as herein modtftecl, date stamped August 8,
1988. Any modifications to these plans shall requtre the prtor
approval of the Community Oevelopment 01rector and/or Planntng
Commission (as determined by the 01rector).
Co
No other, freestanding stgns shall be Installed on-stte.
All provisions and regulations of the Tusttn Butldtng Codes
shall be met.
PASSED AND AOOPTED'at a regular meeting of the Tusttn Planntng Commission,
held on the clay of , 1988.
iii ii ii i · e ii i
A.'L. Baker
Chalrman
ii ii i i
P&nnf LF01 ey ........
Recorclt ng Secretary
Community DeveloPmen~ Departmem
Report' to the
Planning Commission
NO. 5
DATE. ·
SUBdECT:
APPLICANT:
AUGUST 8, 1988
USE PE~IqIT 88-13, VARIANCE 88-8
L.P. REPERTORY CO.JtIILLIAH DURKIN
14891 FOXCROFT
TI/STIN, CA 92680
OklJER:
LOCATION:
THSTIN VILLAJiE CENTER
1020 N. BATAVIA, #B
ORANGE, CA 92667
15732 'D' TUSTIN VILLAGE inlAY, AT HC FABDEN
ZONING:
C-1, RETAIL CONHERCIAL .
ENV IROmENTAL
STATUS: NEGATIVE DECLARATION
REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A 160 SEAT DINNER THEATRE SELLING BEER
AND ¥INE FOR ON-SITE.CONSUIqPTION TilTH LESS THAN THE REQUIRED
AIqouRT. OF PARKING.
:
REC(IIIENDATIOR:
It Is' recommended that th.e Planntng Commission approve Use Permtt 88-13 and
Varlance 88-8 by adoptton of Resolution No. 2519.
BACKGROUgD:
The applicant Is requesting approval of a use permtt fo~ra 160 seat dtnner
theatre with on-site consumption of beer and wine in an extsttng retatl center
located at the northeast corner of Mc Fadden Street and Tustin* Vtllage t~ay. A
Vartance is required for thts proposal as the site provides etght (8) parking
spaces less than requtred by the Zontng Code. The applicant justifies the
Variance wtth the possession of wrttten parking agreements from neighboring
tenants wtthtn the retatl center.
DISCUSSION:
ii
Staff has revte~ed the proposed use and submitted plans for conformance with the ·
i CommuniW Developmen~ Departmem
Planning Commission Report
L.P. Repretory Theatre
August 8, 1988
Page t~o
Tusttn Hunlclpal Code and Alcoholic Beverage Guidelines. The pertinent tssues
Identified wtth thts project tnclude: hours of operation, project location,
parktng tmpact and security. These ts'sues are discussed belew:
Hours of, Operation - The hours of operation are proposed to occur be~een
noon and ~idntght datly. A prevtous Use Permtt (78-21) was approved for a
st;ilar, larger dtnner theatre at 690 E1 Camtno Real (El Camtno Plaza)
that allowed operations to continue as late as mtdntght each night. This
proposal would be similarly restricted at ntght but differs from the E1
Camino Real Theatre in that weekday afternoon performances are requested.
.
Project Location - The proposed theatre ts to be located in a 6,204 square
foot space previously used for retail sales wtthtn an extstlng center
bounded by Tusttn Vtllage Way to the west, Mc Fadden Street to the south,
Newport Freeway to the east and the freeway on-ramp to the north. The
nearest adjacent residential property ts located to the north across the
freeway on-ramp at a dtstance of 350 feet from the proposed use. This
locatton tsolates the proposed theatre from residential uses which would
be vulnerable to notse.
Parktng,~Impact- The parktng provided for the retail center totals 196
exlstlng spaces whtle the requirement Inclusive of the dtnner theatre (50
spaces) is 204 spaces.. The applicant ts requesting a Variance for this
shortage, reasoning that parking agreements have been ma de wi th
neighboring tenants, and also that the available parking is presently
underused.
The applicant contends that the greatest need for parking will be at
night. In support of the application, the attached parking agreements
have been obtained which authorize the dinner theatre's use of 35 parking
spaces associated with building number three within the center, during the
evening hours when those businesses are closed. Additionally, the
applicant expects to have peak attendance on Sunday afternoons when these
same businesses would be closed. The dinner theatre's weekday and
Saturday afternoon audiences would have to be limited below capacity
through control of ticket sales, A concern with this issue is that the
attached parking agreements are from the.present tenants and are not
necessarily permanent and btndtng upon future tenants.
The applicant has submitted a parking survey intending to illustrate the
lack of use of the available parking by the existing uses within the
retail center (see attached). The study was performed by the applicant
through observations at random times over the course of three months. The
survey shows that an average of 19 out of the 196 available parking spaces
are presently being used. The highest count recorded is .42 spaces used
for Wednesday, March 23rd at 1:06 p.m. Repeated observations by staff
Corn rnuni:y Development DeparTment
Planntng Commission Report
L.P. Repretory Theatre
August 8, 1988
Page three
indicate a generally low usage of parking in the center as well. A
concern might be that some of the units in the center have been vacant
during the survey period and that the present furniture stores in building
.number one have a low parking need, which is reflected in the approval of
the lower parking requirement of 1 space per 400 square feet of floor area
by Planning Commission on a previous Use Permit (79-13). However, it
should be noted that the parking requirement of the vacant store space (75
spaces) falls well within the center's parking constraints according to
the provided survey (196 total spaces - 75 spaces for vacant area = 121
spaces available for present tenants), also Use Permit 79-13 required that
additional parking be provided if the approved furniture uses ever' change
to standard retail uses with higher parking requirements (1/200).
Based upon the above Information, staff 'believes that there ts adequate
justification relating to the proposed dinner theatre, to approve the requested
Variance, and presents the following findings:
A.
Be
That there are unusual or exceptional circumstances applicable to the
subject property which do not necessarily apply to other shopping
centers in the same zoning district; in that the center's present
parking use is exceptionally low, and that the dinner theatre's need.
for additional parking shall be at times that most businesses in the
center are not operating.
That the requested Variance would not convey a special privilege to
the applicant or'owner of the shopping center that is not enjoyed by
other businesses or property owners in the same zone; in that the
parking spaces expected to be utilized shall be those within the
subject center's private property as is the intention of provided
parking in all typical cases.
Ce
That the granting of this Variance will not be detrimental to the
value of adjacent and surrounding properties; in that existing
on-site parking is expected to accommodate the parking needs for this
property.
De
That the granting of this Variance will not be contrary to the City's
General Plan.
.
.Security - The Police Department has stated concerns of security for the
proposal. It is recommended that the dinner theatre install an alarm and
use a cash safe to mitigate the concern of robbery. The Police Department
also requests the ability to re-review the Use Permit to measure and
address any adverse impacts this use may have on the site.
Corn rnunity DeveloPrnen~ Departrnen~ ~
'Plan~tng Comrisston Report
L.P. Repretory Theatre
August 8, 1988
Page four.
CONCLUSTON'.
Staff has revtewed the application for conformance wtth the Zontng Code and
Alcoholic Sales Establishment Guidelines. ~Hth consideration of the above
11steal tssues and findings, and Incorporation of the conditions contained tn
Resolution No. 2511g, staff recommends approval of Use Permtt 88-13 and Variance
88-8.
Eric tlaaland
Acttng Assistant Planner
Otrector of Community Development
EH: CAS: ts
Attachment: Resolution No. 2519
Exhtbtt A
Parktng Study
Parktng Agreements
Applt cant' s Statement
Plans
Community DeveloPmen~ Departmen~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
23
24
25
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2519
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF T~E CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING USE PERMIT 88-13 AND
VARIANCE 88-8 FOR A 150 SEAT DINNER THEATRE' WITH
ON-SITE CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE (TYPE 41) HAVING
EIGHT PARKING SPACES LESS ll~AN THE ZONING CODE
REQUIREMENT IN THE C-1 DISTRICT AT 15732 TUSTIN
VILLAGE WAY, UNIT D.
The Planning Commission of the City o~ Tusttn does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. Proper applications, Use Permit No. 88-13 and Variance 88-8,
have been filed on behalf of L.P. Repertory/William Durkin to
request approval of a 150 seat dinner theatre with on-site
consumption of beer and wine (Type 41) having eight parking
spaces less than the Zoning Code requirement at 15732 Tustin
Village Way, Unit D.
B. A publlc hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said
applications on August 8; 1988.
C. Establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for
will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental
to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of
the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such
proposed use, as evidenced by the following findings:
1. The use as applied for is in conformance with the General
Plan, Tustin Zoning Code and the adopted guidelines for
alcoholic'beverage sales establishments.
2. The use applied for is a conditionally permitted use in the
C-1, Retail Commercial District.
3. The subject site is located a minimum of 350 feet from the
nearest residential site and a minimum of '1200 feet from
the nearest school and therefore, is not considered to have
an effect upon residents or school children based upon its
1 oca ti on. '
4. Alcohol sold on the premises shall be for on-site
consumption only.
D. The establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied
for will not be injurious or detrimental to the property and
improvements in the netgborhood of the subject property, nor to
the general welfare of the City of Tustin, and should be
granted.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
90
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. Z519
Page t~o
E. A Vartance from the parktng requirements of the Zontng Code ts
warranted due to the following requtred findings:
1. That there are uhusual or exceptional circumstances
applicable to the subject property whtch do not necessarily
apply to other shopptng centers In the same zontng
dtstr.tct; In that the center's present parktng use ts
exceptionally low, and that the dinner theatre's need for
additional parking shall be at times that most businesses
In the center are not operating.
2. That the requested Variance would not convey a special
privilege to the applicant or owner of the shopping center
that ts not enjoyed by other businesses or property owners
tn the same zone; In that the parking spaces expected to be
utilized shall be those within the subject center's private
property as ts the intention of provtded parktng tn all
typtcal cases.
3. That the granttng of thts Vartance will not be detrimental
to the value of adjacent and surrounding properties; In
that extstlng on-slte parktng ts expected to accommodate
the parklng needs for thts property.
4. That the granting of. thts Variance w111 not be contrary to
the Ctty's General Plan.
F. A. Negattve Declaration tn conformance with the California
Environmental Quality Act has been applted for and ts hereby
approved.
II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Use Permtt 88-13 and Varlance
88-8 authorizing a dinner theatre wtth on-site consumption of beer
and wine (Type 41) having eight parking spaces less than the Zoning
Code requirements' at 15732 Tusttn Village Way, Unit D, subject
conditions attached as Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tusttn Planning Commission,
held on the .... day of ........ , 198__.
~1"'" B~k~r '
Chairman
P~nnt F~leY '
Secretary
EXHZBZT A
Resolution No. 2519
Use Permit 88-13 and Vartance 88-8
Conditions of Approv&l
.
.
The proposed project shall substantially conform with submitted plans on ftle
with the Community Development Department, as herein modtfied or as modtfted by
the Director of Community Development in accordance with this exhibit.
Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this exhibit shall be
complied with prior to issuance of any tenant improvement building permits for
the project subject to review and approval by the Community Development
Department.
.
Tenant improvement plans shall be submitted for plan check. Requirements of the
Uniform Butldtng Codes, Fire Code, State Handicap and Energy Requirements shall
be complted with.
0
Sign plans for the proposed use shall be submitted for design review and
approval by the Director of Community Development.
.
Primary hours of operation shall ih. gin no earlier than 12:00 noon and end no
later than 12:00 midnight datly.
.
Use of the theatre shall be restricted to primarily theatrical productions, and
musical entertainment associated with a dinner theatre. Changes in the use of
the facility, for other than plays or stage shows, shall require the review of
the Community Oevelopment Otrector and possible amendment to the use permit.
Occupancy shall not exceed 126 patrons on weekdays and Saturdays before 6:00
p.m. nor shall it exceed 150 pa~crons at any other time, or that number of
persons determined to safely occupy premises by the County Fire Department, but
not to exceed 150.
8. Use shall conform to the City of Tustin Security Ordinance.
9. An alarm system and cash safe shall be installed to the satisfaction of city of
Tustin Police Department.
10. All alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on site.
11. Authorization for on-site sales of beer and wine is contingent upon the use of
the subject site remaining a dinner theatre. At such time as the dinner theatre
use is discontinued, the use permit shall become null and' void.
12. All persons serving alcoholic beverages shall be eighteen years of age or older
and supervised by someone twenty-one years of age or older. Said supervisor
shall be present in same area as point of sale.
13. Hours of sale of alcoholic beverages shall be limited to the hours when food is
served.
Exhtbtt A
Resolution 25:L9
page ~o
:L4. There shall be no pool tables or cotn operated games on the premlses at any
ttmeo
:LS. No outdoor seattng ts authorized at thts ]ocatton.
Thls Use Permtt and Vartance shall become null and votd unless butldtng permtts
are tssued and construction unde~ay wtthtn :~2 months of the date on thls
exhtbtt. The sales of beer and wine shall commence wlthtn :~2 months from the
date of'approval of thts Resolution or 1ts authorization shall become null and
void,
17. The Use Permtt shall be subject to re-revte~ by the Community Development and
Poltce Departments at 6 month Intervals over an 18 month pertod to assess any
adverse t mpacts to the area caused by the use.
18. Applicant shall obtain all necessa~ permtts for stgns, Improvements and uses as
per Ctt~y regulations.
Applicant shall slgn and return to the Ctty an Agreement to Conditions Imposed
form, stating agreement to comply ~tth the conditions placed upon thts Use
Perm1 t.
3/14/88 10.' O0 a.m. 13 4
3/15/88 11 = 15 a.m. 25 8
3/16/88 11..40 a.m. 18 7
3/19/88 ? = 25 p.m. 7 4
3/21/88 11: 48 a.m. 17 8
3/23/88 1.-06 p.m. 25 17
3/23/88 4: 30 p.m. 15 5
3/24/88 1=33 p.m. 23 8
3/28/88 6=00 p.m. 9 14
3/29/88 4: 30 p.m. 12 7
3/31/88 .12:00 p.m. 24 6
4/02/88 1: 30 p.m. 19 7
4/05/88 7: 45 p.m. 3 2
4/06/88 10:17 a.m. 9 5
4/07/88 3: 48 p.m. 25 9
4/11/88 10: O0 p.m. 13 4
4/11/88 4:00 p.m. 17 5
4/13/88 1:20 p.m. 20 8
4/19/88 3.:20 p.m. 12 6
5/10/88 10:30 a.m. 16 3
5/11/88 7:08 p.m. 7 7
5/13/88 3: O0 p.m. 17 8
5/17/88 8 = O0 p.m. 4 3
5/18/88 8:15 p.m. 9 5
5/20/88 6: 45 p.m. 5 7
5/23/88 7:30 p.m. 7 5
5/24/88 8:15 p.m. 6 6
5/25/88 2:15 p.m. 13 3
5/25/88 8:10 p.m. 4 5
6/03/88 2:00 p.m. 10 1
6/07/88 12:00 p.m. 16 7
6/08/88 5:15 p.m. 8 0
6/09/88 10:50 p.m. 13 7
6/10/88 10: 20am 11 1
6/11/88 12: 301an 11 4
6/12/88 11:15am 7 4
6/13/88 5: 25pm 13 1
6/15/88 4: 30[:m 14 5
6/16/88 3:30[:m 11 4
6/20/88 2:05pm 10 2
AVERAGE ...................... 13 ............. 6
1020 N BATAVIA STREET. SUITE B
ORANGE CAL';FORNIA 92667
(714) 997-7956
June 17, 1988
To The City Of Tustin Plannin$ Department:
As the owners of Tustin Village Center, we are very much
in favor of The L.P. Repertory Company opening a dinner theatre
within our shopping center.
We have asked some of our Tenants if they would like to have
a dinner theatre in the center and they were definitely interested.
We feel that The L.P. Repertory Company would be an asset to
our center, as well as a definite asset to the City of Tustin. The
dinner theatre would help generate much needed business to our
other Tenants.
We have ample parking to accommodate the dinner theatre and
do not feel that their use would create a problem due to their
business hours. We are careful to select our Tenants to insure a
harmonize Tenant mix and would not permit any one Tenant to over-
burden the parking facilities.
If you should have any further questions or concerns .reg~rd--
ing this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us'.
Sincerely,
TUSTIN VILLAGE CENTER
Pam Merritt, ~PM
General Manager
June 10, 1988
To ~h~m it May Ooncern;
As o~D~r of A~ICAN Sp~wny PRINTING CENTERS at Tustin Village Center,
I am in favor of the L.P. P~pertory Cxmpany opening a Dinner Theatre at
15732 "D", Tustin Village Way. Further, I authorize the use of my allotted
parking spaces by the thea~ during my non business hours. My operorating
hours are 8:30 a.m to 5:30 p.m.
; ---.} , 'o/
.'
~nager
15722 A-1 Tustin Village Way - Tustin, California 92680 - (714) 648-0115
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN;
As Manager of MAKITA F.S.C. At Tustin Village Center ,
I am in favor of the L.P. Reportory Company opening a
Dinner Theatre at 15732 "D" Tustin Village Way. Further,
I authorize the use of my alloted parking spaces by
the theatre during my non business hours. My operating
hours are 8:00 am to 4:30 pm.
Respect'fully, ~.,
Geoffrey H. DeVore
MAKITA F.S.C.
Plans of details of the variance requested
We are asking for a parking variance to Operate a dinner rhea.rte.
We presently have parking to seat 96 people and are requesting
18 additional parking spaces to accommodate 54 additional people
between the hours of 7-11 PM, Tuesday through Saturday nights and
1-5 PM on Sunday afternoons only.
1. The granting of a variance for additional parking will not be
detrimental to the public safety, health and welfare codes.
2. The parking lot has ample parking for all tenants in the center.
Three existing tenants have expressed their interest in having a
dinner theatre in the center and find that there would not be a
conflict with the parking since their businesses are closed during
our open hours. (Please see attached letters). The other tenants
hours are such that they would be closing shortly after our business
opens. Therefore, we feel that we would not be creating any diffi-
culties or hardships with regards to the 18 additional parking
spaces that we are requesting during the evening and Sunday after-
noon hours.
3. Brobdingnag will be t'he smallest dinner theatre in Orange
· County. To compete with the larger theatres in the area, a min-
imum seating of 150 is required. Anything less would not generate
the necessary funds to ensure the quality of shows L.P.R. is known
for.
Planning Commission
DATE: AUGUST 8, 1988
SUBJECT: REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - AUGUST 1, 1988
Oral presentatl on.
per
Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - August 1, 1988
Community Development Deparlment
ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF. THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 1, 1988
7:00 P.M.
:00 I. CALL TO ORDER
LL PRESENT
II. ROLL CALL
III. PRESENTATION
RESENTEO $3,250 1. CHILI COOK-OFF PROCEEDS
0 TUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL ANO FOOTHILL HIGH SCHOOL I~AD NIGHT COI~ITTEES FOR Alt ANNUITY FUND.
Margarete Thompson, Honorary Chairperson of the Chili Cook-Off
Con~nittee, will assist Mayor Hoesterey in the presentation.
RESENTEO
IV. PROCLAMATION
1. LION BRUCE MOREHEAD
Bruce Morehead was recently elected District Governor for Liors
International.
RESENTED A PROCLAPATION TO H. PORTER WYNN, RETIRING MINISTER OF TUSTIN FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
V.
EO RESOLUTION
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 1988-89 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION FEES TAX ROLL ASSESSMENT
T~-. propoco.d rates for solid waste collection to be placed on the
tax roll for fiscal year 1988-89 reflect the 3.33% increase in the
collection rate based on m the seven adjustment factors and the
January 1, 1989 County landfill fee increase of $3.50 per t6n.
Recon~endation: That the City Council:
RESOLUTION NO. 88-86 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CZTY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION
5473 ET SEQ. OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, FINALLY APPROVING AND ADOPTING A REPORT RELATIVE TO
PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY RECEIVING SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES,
DETERMINING THE CHARGES FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION TO BE ASSESSED
AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE LOTS OR PARCELS OF LAND AS THEY APPEAR ON THE-
CURRENT ASSESSMENT ROLL
Adopt Resolution No. 88-86 adopting the Sol id Waste Collection
.Report and approving the Annual Residential Charge of $72.72 per
unit for solid waste collection and the annual commercial can
charge of $77.28 per unit for sol id waste collection as
recommended by the Finance Department.
LAIRE MC NAIR VI. PUBLIC INPUT
X~NED SHE OIO NOT INTENTIONALLY VIOLATE BUILDING PERMIT RULES REGARDING HER MOVE OF HER
A 'ORE ANO REQUESTED THAT SHE NOT HAVE TO PAY A TRIPLE PENALTY. THIS ITEM TO BE AGENDIZED
Ok Z NEXT ~EETING.
ELEN EDGAR COMPLAINED THAT CARS ARE PARKING IN THE BIKE lANES.
[TY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 1 8-1-88
~S. EDGAR WAS ALSO ~NCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC PROBLEMS ON YORBA, CARROLL WAY AND 17TH STREET.
-m~E ARE 2 TCAI:FIC LIGHTS WITH LEFT HAND LANES GOING INTO NANNY'S. SHE WITNESSED THREE CARS
ROW TURNI~iG O# A RED LIGHT.-BOB LEDENDECKER TO LOOK AT THOSE I~ITERSECTIONS.
VII. CONSENT CALENDA~
;
)PROVEI) Will( ADDITION 1. APPROVAL OF' MINUTES - JULY 18, 1988, REGULAR MEETING
- NATT NISSON SPEAKING.
)PROVEO
2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,937,178.15
RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL Itl THE AMOUNT OF $177,248.65
:JECTEO
3. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 87-39; CLAIMANT-STEVE WAGONER AND CINDY
~ BLAKE, DATE OF LOSS-8/5/87, DATE FILED WITH CITY-11/13/87
, Reject subject claim for personal injuries in the amount of
$500,000 for each claimant as recommended by the City Attorney.
-'JECTED
:JECTED
'ED
:JECTED
4. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-1; CLAIMANT-ADAM NEAL WEISS, DATE OF
LOSS-11/10/87, DATE FILED WITH CITY-1/7/88
Reject subject c~aim for personal injury in the amount of
$2,500 as recommended by the City Attorney.
5. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 87-12; CLAIMANT-PAMELA AND JENNIFER VEEBURG,
DATE OF LOSS-11/21/87, DATE FILED WITH CITY-~2/19/88
Reject subject claim for personal injuries and property damage
in the amount of $250,000 as recommended by the City Attorney.
6. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-29; CLAIMANT-PACIFIC BELL, DATE OF
LOSS-2/5/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-5/2/88
~eject subject claim for property damage in .the a,,uunt of
$729.12 as recommended by the City Attorney.
: 7. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-30; CLAIMANT-MONIKA MALONE, DATE OF
LOSS-3/29/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-5/9/88
Reject subject claim for property and genenal damage; in the
amount of $5,662.57 as recommended by the City Attorney.
-:JECTEO
:JECTED
8.' REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-33; CLAIMANT-SHARON BERNADICKT, DATE OF
LOSS-3/9/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-5/16/88
Reject subject claim for personal injury in the amount of
$100,000 as recommended by the City Attorney.
9. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-42; CLAIMANT-TUSTIN UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, DATE OF LOSS-12/3/87, DATE FILED WITH CITY-6/29/88
Reject subject claim for damages of an undetermined amount .as
recommended by the City Attorney.
)OPTED
:SOLUTION 88-83
10. RESOLUTION NO. 88-83 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNI.A, AMENDING THE SCHEDULE FOR. TUST[N CITY CODE
VIOLATIONS
Adopt Resolution No. 88-83 amending the Bail Schedule of the
Tustin City Code as recommended by the Police Department.
TY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 2 8-1-88.
'PROVED
}OPTEO '
· ]SOLUTION 88-88
~PROVED AND
ITHOR~ZEO
11.. AUI,. _.IZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS ,,ITCHEN EQUIPMENT,.TUSTIN AREA
SENIOR CENTER
Approve the specifications for the purchase of kitchen equipment
for the Tustin Area Senior Center and authorize staff to
advertise for bi ds as recommened by the Community Services
Department.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 88-88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND
AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (SIERRA VISTA', KAREN
WAY, JAN MARIE, ArID PANKEY WELL SITE WATER MAIN, STREET AND STORM
DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS
Adopt Resolution No. 88-88 accepting said work and authorizing
the recordati,)n of the Notice of Completion as recommended by
the Public Works Department/Engineering Division:
13. REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DOMESTIC AND RECLAIf4ED
WATER FACILITIES iN JAMBOREE ROAD
Approve the reimbursement agreement between ~:he Irvine Ranch
Water District and the City for the constructir: of domestic and
reclaimed water facilities within Assessment District No 86-2
(Jamboree Ro.~d) and authorize the Mayor to execute said
agreement as recommended by the Public Works Department/
Engineering Division.
IOPTEO
!SOLUT ION 88-89'
~PROVED AND
ITHOR I ZED
14. RESOLUTION NO. 88-89 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CAL:FORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF LOWER PETERS CANYON RETARDING BASIN (FACILITY FO6
BO1) AND APPURTENANT FACILITIES, PROJECT NO. 90Q027, ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT NO. 86-2
Adopt Resolution No. 88-89 authorizing advertising for bids for
this project as recommened"by the Public Works Department/
Engineering Division.
15. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS - DONOR RECO;NITION/FOUNDERS'
WALL AND DEDICATION PLAQUES, TUSTIN AREA SENIOR CENi'ER
Approve the specifications for the purchase o;' two (2) bronze
cast plaques for the Tustin Area Senior Center and authorize
staff to advertise for bids as recommended by the Community
Services Department.
ITHORI ZEO'
16. SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM NO. 87-40, CLAIMANT: MARK FERCHLAND
Authorize the settlement of Claim No. 87-40, Mark Ferchland, in
the amount of $9,500 as recommended by the City Attorney.
VIII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION
iTRODUCED
:D~.NANCE 1011
1. MINUTES AND RECORDINGS OF CLOSED SESSION
ORDINANCE NO. 1011 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN., CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO
MINUTES OF CLOSED SESSIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation:
M. O. - That Ordinance No. 1011 have first reading by title only.
M. O. - That Ordinance No. 1011 be introduced.
TY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 3 8-1-88
'Eli
'^NCE 1010
IX. ORDINANCES FOR' ADOPTION
--
1. ORDINANCE NO. 1010 - ZONE CHANGE 88-01 FOR THE PROPOSED TUSTIN AUTO
CENTER EXPANS ION
The following Ordinance No. 1010 had first reading and introductiOn
at the July 18, 1988, meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. 1010 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 88-01 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, FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO PLANNED CO~4UNITY/COMMERCIAL AND
INCLUDING THE. INCORPORATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS KNOWN
AS THE EAST TUSTIN AUTO CENTER'
Recommend ~ti on:
M. O. - T~at Ordinance No. 1010 have second reading by title only.
M. O. - That Ordinance No. 1010 be passed and adopted.
(Roll Call Vote)
X. OLD BUSINESS
ECEIVEO
ND FILED
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 Coalitian
(ASC).
Recommendation: Receive and file as recommended by thL. Community
Development Department.
ELAY A£TION ON lltlS 2. PROPOSED SAN JUAN STREET VACATION
,tTIL AFTER THE SCHOOL
3A,RD D~-'CISION At the last two City' Council meetings, the Council discussed the
possibility of vacating a portion of Sa,i Juan Street adjacent to
both Tustin High School and Lambert Elementary School.
R. ecomm.e.ndation' Pleasure to the City Council.
)OPTED RESOLUTION
3. 88-90
3. CITY CLERK PRINTING AND MAILING SAMPLE BALLOTS AND CANDIDATES'
STATEMENTS
Pursuant to Council direction, Resolution No. 88-90 is for Council
adoption.
Recommendatioh' That the City Council'
RESOLUTION NO. 88-90 - A RESOLUTION 'OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR
ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES' STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO
THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION
Adopt Resolution No. 88-90 as recommended by the City Attorney.
[TY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 4 8-1-88
P~INTED 4. STREET NAMING COMMITTEE
FERGUSON TO THE
,TTEE. COUNCIL TO At the July 18, 1988 regular meeting, the ..City Council asked that
,VE PROGRESS REPORTS this item be returned in order that Mayor Hoesterey could place a
Rud THE COI~ITTEE name in nomination to the Street Naming Committee.
Recommendation: Mayor Ho6sterey wishes to 'nominate Gwen Ferguson.
XI. NEW BUSINESS
PPROVED STAFF 1. TUSTIN AREA SENIOR CENTER OPERATING PLAN
ECOHMENDATION
ITH THE ADVISORY BOARD The Tustin Area Senior Center is under construction and completion
0 BE COMPOSED OF is expected in early 1989.
LOYD EBEL
EN HUESTEREY, RUBY HAY,, R.j:co,mmendation: That the City Council:
ARGARETE THOI~SON, AND
ANET SCHWARTZ (,) Approve in concept the Senior Center Operating Plan.
(2) Appoint the inaugural members of the Senio6 Center Advisory
Board.
(3) Adopt as policy that seniors b,: actively involved in the
operation of the center.
·
(4) Adopt as policy that the philosophy of the Center is to provide
programs for seniors at little or no cost as recommended by the
Admi ni strati ye Services Department.
RESCU'm m ~OUESTED
~IAT THIS BE AGENOIZED
OR NOVEMBER AFTER THE
LECTION
2. FINANCE COMMITTEE
At its July 18, 1988 meeting~ the City Council directed that this
matter be agendized in response to Councilman Prescott's suggestion
that the City Council consider +.he establishment of a Finance
Commi ttee.
Recommendation- Pleasure of the City Council.
PPROVED NEON SIGN 3. EXPOSED NEON TUBING SIGN REQUEST AT 174 EAST MAIN STREET
~O SUGGESTED HE COME
~CI( TO THE COUNCIL FOR On July 11, 1988, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PPROVAL OF THE AWNING 2517 which denied the request of Daddy-O's Restaurant to allow the
use of exposed neon tubing on the front and side elevations of the
subject busi ness.
Recommendation' Pleasure of the City Council.
XII. REPORTS
~TIFIED
1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA- JULY 25, 1988
All actions of the Planning Commission become final unless appealed
by the City Council or member of the public.
Recommendation' Ratify the Planning Commission Action Agenda of
July 25, 1988.
[TY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 5 8-1-88
? CE ! YEO
2. PUBc.~ CONCERN OF COLUMBUS-TUSTIN PAN,, SITE
At the July 18, 1988 City Council meeting, Mrs. Marie Schultz raised
a concern on the use of Columbus-Tustin. park site as a construct i c, n
yard.
Recommendation: Recefve and file subject report.
'NNEDY REPORTED XIII. OTHER BUSINESS
~EEOING ON SECONO STREET FROM 4 P.M. TO 6 P.N. EACH'DAY. ·
-NNEDY REQUESTEO TILRT STAFF WRITE A POLITE LEI'rER TO 7 ELEVEN THAT THEY PROVIDE TRASH
3NTAINERS.
)GAR ~OMMENOED BOB LEDENOECICER FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT LIST.
)GAR REQUESTED STAFF TO (}~ANGE SIGNS COMING INTO THE CITY TO REFLECT THE CURRENT POPULATION.
)GAR REQUESTED A RE:,~)RT WITH SOMETHING .SPECIFIC, SUCF AS SPEED BUMPS, TO PREVENT SPEEDING ON
-'SIBENTIAL STREETS.
)UNCIL CONCURREO WITH KENNEDY THAT IF SOMEONE SPEAKS AT THE COUNCIL ~I~ETING, THEY SHOULD BE
~ICLUOEO IN THE MINUTES.
~ESCOTT COMMENOED THE POLICE OEPARTMENT FOR THEIR
)ESIEREY REQUESTED STAFF TO LOOK INTO PROVIDING MORE PARKING ON FIRST STREET ON THE I~ST SIDE
' TENNIAL.
-'NNEDY POINTED OUT THAT THE COUNCIL AS A G~OUP ~av= ASKED THE IRVINE COMPANY ll4AT THr
-ZSIDENTS OF THE CITY BE GIVEN A DISCOUNT ON THE (~.F COURSE FEES- SHE ASKED THAT STAFF ~ELP
THIS AREA. "
:44
XIV. ADJOURNMENT - To interviews of Parks and Recreation Commission
applicants on August 2, 1988, at 7:00 p.m., and then to the next Regular
Meeting on August 15, 1988, at 7:00 p.m.
'TY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 6 AUGUST 1, 1988
ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE TUSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AUGUST 1, 1988
7: O0 P.M.
:44
1. CALL TO ORDER
LL PRESENT
2. ROLL CALL
PPROVED 3.
PPROVED 4.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES- JULY 18, 1988, REGULAR MEETING
Recommendation: Approve Minutes.
APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $541,245.97
Recommendation: Approval of subject demands in the amount of
$541,245.97 as recommended by the Finance Department.
DOPTED 5. AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSMIT SECOND AMENDMENT TO TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT
ESOLUTIOr,,S PLAN, PRELIMINARY REPORT AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT TO
DA 88-07, ROA 88-08, AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES
DA 88-09
The Community Development Department has been coordinating with the firm
of Katz Hollis in preparation of Amendments to the Town Center
Redevelopment P1 an.
Recommendation: That the Redevelopment Agency:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 88- 07 - A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Rk~iVING AND AUTHORIZING CIRCULATION ur uKAr~
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TUSTIN TOWN CENTER AREA 'REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT, AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON, AND AUTHORIZING
PUBLICATION OF NOTICE 0~- COMPLETION AND AVAILABILITY OF DRAFT EIR AND
PUBLIC HEARING THEREON
Adopt Resolution No. RDA 88-07 receiving and authorizing circulation
of the Draft EIR and setting a Public Hearing on the Draft EIR as
recoliImended by the Community Development Department.
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 88-08 - A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY REPORT FOR THE SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TOWN CENTER AREA
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Adopt Resolution No. RDA 88-08 approving the Preliminary Project
Report and authorizing its transmittal to affected taxing agencies
as recommended by the Community Development Department.
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 88-09 - A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RECEIVING THE PROPOSED SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
AMENDED I~EDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TOWN CENTER AREA REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF PROPOSED SECOND AMENDMENT TO
AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES, THE FISCAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THE PLANNING
COMMISS ION
Adopt Resolution No. RDA 88-09 receiving proposed Second Amendment
and authorizing its transmittal to affected taxing agencies and
Planning Commission as recommended by the Community Development
Department.
-]L/EVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA PAGE 1 ~)-1-,~8
:)OPTED
· -:~nLUT ! ON
t-06
0
DESIGN ~¢IEW NO. 88-15 .FOR A TWO-UNIT h~ulTION TO AN EXISTING APARTMENT
COMPLEX LOCATED 17282-92 KENYO)! AVENUE
The Community Development Department has completed a review of the site
plan and architectural design of the proposed project.
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 88-06 - A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION OF
TWO 1093 SQUARE FOOT APARTMENT UNITS AT 17.282-92 KENYON AVENUE (DESIGN
REVIEW 88-15)
Approve the site plan and architectural design of the proposed
apartment units by the adoption of Resolution No. RDA 88-06 as
recommended by the Community Development Department.
~ESCOTT THANKED 7. OTHER BUSINESS ~
FAFF FOR PLACING THE AGENDA BOOKS AT THE BACK OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR USE BY THE AUDIENCE.
:52 8.
ADJOURNMENT - To the next Regular Meeting on Monday, August 15, 1988, at
7:00 p.m.
EDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA PAGE 2 8-1-88