The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 09-19-88 City CounCil C~mberS =l:O0 ~'~'' i1, ~lr, e~', Le ~eoae- ~°a[t~os' S~been C~L~D~R ~R~ conSiDeReD ~o~~ otsc~ :s~ ~ u~s~ s ~o_~ c~.to~-~ .,.~ ~_.,,o~ 0~_~5~"._.,, s~C~'~ _ ~, ~us: ~o~_~ ~o. ~so~~ ~c~ ~,~s~ ~ o~,, s~ ts ~t~ to~ 70 s ~t~ ' c~t~%, ~'"' ~[~,..~"~ [ s~' ~ reCU,:'%~ to ~" . ~[ uL'' ResOlUt~u" s'ce'~e Rubi n, Planning Commission Actt September 12, 1988 Page two tomtitI coved, Le ~eune seconded tO approve the consent calendar- pUBLIC REARI~GS . APPLICANT' UNITED ORANGE COUNTY NEON SIGNS INC. 13801 WEST STREET GAROEN GROVE, CA 92643 PROPERTY MARIE CALLENDERS oWNER: '/21 WES% FIRS% sTREET %US%I~, CA 92680 LOCATIOn' 721 WES% FIRS% sTREET COMMERCIAL GENERAL ' ~LA~ED U~I% DEVELOPMENT ZOninG: FIRS% sTREET S~ECIFIC ~LA~ - COMMERCIAL E~V I RO~ME~%AL , STATUS' CA%EGORICALL~ EXEMPT (CLASS 11} REQUEST' Au%~ORIZA%IO~ %0 I~s%ALL ~ 25 FO0% RIG~ LET%EKED FREEWA~ iDE~%IFICA%1OR ~OLE SIG~. 78 SQUARE FOOT, CHANNEL ~: Pleasure of the Planning Commissio,,n- Resolution No. 2524 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT FREEWAY iDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AT 721 WEST FIRST STREET Resolution No. 2524 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY (d) OF TUSTIN DENYING A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT FREEWAY iDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AT 721 WEST FIRST STREET. Presentation' Eric ~aaland, Acting Assistant Planner econded to approve Use ?ermit BB-14, Pontious ._s __ entificatiOnn pole sign.,_jby~_t~he moved, t freeway ts_stoner Shaheen i h, 78 squar.e lDO ere Item I. C. 4. Come foot h g to del a adoption of ResolutiOn (#De.s: Le Jeune and )Ieil)- APPLICANT' wINSTON TIRE COMPANY 900 W. ALAMEDA BURBANK, CA 91506 . wINSTON TIRE COMPANY oWNER' 900 W. ALAMEDA BURBANK, CA 91506 Planning Commission Actif September 12, 1988 Page three LOCAT I ON: ZONING: E NV IRO NMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: lenda 621 WEST FIRST STREET AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET. COMMERCIAL GENERAL-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CG-PUD) - FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3) FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT TO PERMIT THE REMODELING OF AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE. Recommendation' It is recommended that the Planning Commission either approve Use P~rmit 88-20--oY adopting Resolution No. 2529 or deny Use Permit 88-20 by adopting Resolution No. 2529(d). Resolution No. 2529 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A USE PERMIT TO REMODEL AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET, 621 WEST FIRST STREET. Resolution No. 2529 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF (d) TUSTIN CALIFORNIA, DENYING A USE PERMIT TO REMODEL AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND · AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET, 621 WEST FIRST STREET. Presentation' Ron Reese, Acting Associate Planner . . seconded to deny Use Permit 88-20 by the adoption O~ KeSOIUbmumm nv ........ ~ OLD BUSINESS 6. Pro osed Vacation of a Portion of San Juan Street between Orang_~ Street and~ L~-~oma Ori ye he Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. · recommended that t ..... ~ ^~ San Juan Street between Recommendatio_n It i s ion ota port, un v- ~26 finding that the propo?ed ?ac.at_ with the adopted General Plan. Orange Street and Charloma Drive ~s ~n conformance Resolution No. 2526: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SAN JUAN STREET BETWEEN ORANGE STREET AND CHARLOMA DRIVE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN Presentation' Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development and Ronald E. Wolford, Engineering Services Manager planntng Commission ActiOn, Agenda September [2, 1988 Page four to ftnd that the proposed vacatiOn of a ~oved, rte11 seconded C tsstoaer Pon~~~U~e "'" Orange street and Charlom 0rtve is in conformnce ~o~ton of San duan stree- b ~l~een of Resolution No. 2526. M~tton carrte~ · ~tth ~e adop~d General Plan by the adoptton BUSI#ESS 7. Recommendat~°n' Receive and fi Presentation' Laura Cay p~ckuP, 5en~ot p~anner No Co~ sst on acttoe aecessa~ ndtttons placed on Use pe~its and Variances . Revt~Ondtttons r~c~ .... ___ ~ necessary back-uP infor~tion and 8 .... ess Y ' - staff to prepare ~SO]U:IO~S Tut ~"~ F ..... red Presentation: Laura Cay pickuP, SeniOr Planner ft lan~age 0n lucre conditions for pro~ects ' dlrec~d s~ff to dry_ -~ut sensitive pro~ec~- SJOB The Co~ s ~ e~ sston s conce~ ~ ~blch address ~c ~ ~F CONCERNS ~ '~88 C~ty Council~ 9. Presentation' Christine Shingleton, Director of Co~unt~Y Oevelopmen~ No Co~Ssion acttoe necessa~ C01il~ISSIO# CO#C£R#S asked for a date for a Sign Code ~lorkshop- Co~atsstoner Le deune asked if there was anything that the City could do regarding Comi ssi oner Pontt ous tng at the corner of Red itill and #isson. ~n noted that he felt that being on the Comfission would be very Co~mtssioner Shahee Planntng Corem1 ss~on September 12, 1988 Page f~ve ,,genda Cmmtss¶oner get1 welcomd Co~misstoner Shaheen and asked about political stgns. __ Chatr~an Bake~r welcomd Comtsstoner Shaheen. __ . ADJOUR~qE#T ' At 9:50 p.m. ~ moved, Le Jeune seconded to adjourn to a time to be announced. AGENDA TUSTIN PI.ANNING COIqHISSION REGULAR REETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Wetl, Baker, Le Jeune, Pontious, Sheehan 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 August 22, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting _ 2. Minutes of the Au.~ust 29, 1988 S£ecial Planning Commission Meeting 3. Final Tract Map No. 13556 .. APPLICANT' DONAHUE SCHRIBER ON BEHALF OF THE THE IRVINE COMPANY LOCATION' THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE ZONING: MIXED USE, COMMERCIAL; EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN E NV I RO NMENTAL STATUS' THE PROJECT IS COVERED BY A PREVIOUS EIR (85-2), WITH ADDENDUM, FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN. NO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION' IS REQUIRED. REQUEST' AUTHORIZATION TO SUBDIVIDE A 49.967 ACRE SITE, BEING A PORTION OF AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 13274, INTO 11 NUMBERED LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING PHASE I OF THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE, A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, IN ADDITION TO MAKING CERTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATIONS TO THE CITY AND THE STATE. Recommendation' It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend ap'~roval of~Final Tract Map 13556 to the City Council by adopting Resolution No. 2531 as submitted or revised. Resolution No. 2531 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT MAP 13556 Presentation' Steve Rubin, Senior Planner Planning .Commission Agend~ September 12, 1988 Page two PUBLIC HEA~I#GS 4. Use Permit 88-14 APPLICANT' PROPERTY OWNER' LOCATION' ZONING' E NV I RONMENTAL STATUS' REQUEST' UNITED ORANGE COUNTY NEON SIGNS INC. 13801 WEST STREET GARDEN GROVE, CA 92643 MARIE CALLENDERS 721 WEST FIRST STREET TUSTIN, CA 92680 721 WEST FIRST STREET COMMERCIAL GENERAL - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN - COMMERCIAL CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT, CHANNEL LETTERED FREEWAY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN. Recommendation' Pleasure of the Planning Commission. · Resolution No. 2524 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT FREEWAY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AT 721 WEST FIRST STREET Resolution No. 2524 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY (d) OF TUSTIN DENYING A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT FREEWAY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AT 721 WEST FIRST STREET. Presentation' Eric Haaland, Acting Assistant Planner 5. Use Permit 88-20 APPLICANT' OWNER- LOCATION' ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS- REQUEST- WINSTON TIRE COMPANY 900 W. ALAMEDA BURBANK, CA 91506 WINSTON TIRE COMPANY 900 W. ALAMEDA BURBANK, CA 91506 621 WEST FIRST STREET AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF. FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET. COMMERCIAL GENERAL-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CG-PUD) - FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3) FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT' TO PERMIT THE REMODELING OF AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE. Planning Commission Agen~ September [2, 1988 Page three Recommendation' It is recommended that the Planntng Commission either approve Use P~rmit 88-20 by adopttng Resolution No. 2529 or deny Use Permit 88-20 by adopting Resolution No. 2529(d). Resolution No. 2529.A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE. CITY OF TUSTIN CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A USE PERMIT TO REMODEL AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET, 621 WEST FIRST STREET. Resolution No. 2529 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF (d) TUSTIN CALIFORNIA, DENYING A USE PERMIT TO REMODEL AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET, 621 WEST FIRST STREET. Presentation' Ron Reese, Acting Associate Planner OLD BUSINESS 6. Proposed Vacatton of a Portion of San Juan Street between Orange Street and_ Charloma Dr1 v& __ Recommendation:. It ts recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2526-finding-that the proposed vacation of a portion of San Juan Street between Orange Street and Charloma Drive is in conformance wtth the adopted General Plan. Resolution No. 2526' A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMM1:SSION OF THE CTTY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SAN JUAN STREET BETWEEN ORANGE STREET AND CHARLOMA DRIVE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN Presentation' Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development and Ronald E. Wolford, Engineering Services Manager NEW BUSINESS 7. Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (OCHWMP) Recommendation' Receive and file. Presentation' Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner 8. Review of Conditions Placed on Use Permits and Variances . Recommendation' Direct staff to prepare the necessary back-up information and resolutions f6r the preferred action alternative(s). Presentation' Laura Cay Pickup, Senior Planner Planning Commission Ageno September 12, 1988 Page four STAFF CONCERNS 9. Report on Actions Taken at the September 6, 1988 City Council Meeting Presentation: .Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development' COHMISSION CONCERNS ADJOURNHENT MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COHHISSION REGULAR NICETING AUGUST 22, I988 CALL TO ORDER: 7'00 p.m., City Counctl Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Neil, Baker, Le Jeune, Pontious 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 August 8, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting e APPLICANT' OWNER' LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Final Parcel Map 87-412 K.W. LAWLER & ASSOCIATES, INC. ON BEHALF OF CONTINENTAL MEDICAL SYSTEMS AND WESTERN NEURO CARE CENTER CONTINENTAL MEDICAL SYSTEMS P.O. BOX 715 MECHANICSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17055 165 N. MYRTLE AND 14581 YORBA STREET PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL (P & I) AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PR) CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 15 Recommendation' It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Final Parcel Map 87-412 to the City Council by the adoption of Resolution No. 2522, as submitted or revised. Resolution No. 2522 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 87-412. Planning Commission Mtnu August 22, 1988 Page two CONSENT CALENDER (Continued) . APPLICANT' LOCATION' REQUEST' ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS' Prqposed 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 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. Commissioner Wetl moved, Pontious seconded to approve the consent calendar. Motion carried 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. Use Permit 88-14 APPLICANT' PROPERTY OWNER' LOCATION' ZONING: E NV I RONME NTAL STATUS' REQUEST' UNITED ORANGE COUNTY NEON SIGNS INC. 13801 WEST SIXTH GARDEN GROVE, CA 92643 MARIE CALLENDER,'S 721 WEST FIRST STREET TUSTIN, CA 92680 721 WEST FIRST STREET COMMERCIAL GENERAL - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN - COMMERCIAL CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL A 35 FOOT HIGH, 98 SQUARE FOOT, CHANNEL LETTERED FREEWAY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN. Recommendation' It is recommended that the Planning Commission either deny the Use Permit for the sign as proposed, or continue the matter and direct the applicant to revise the plans as recommended by staff and/or the Commission. Resolution No. 2524d A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN DENYING A 35 FOOT HIGH, 98 SQUARE FOOT FREEWAY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AT 721 WEST FIRST STREET. Planning Commtssion Minul August 22, 1988 Page three Presentation: Eric Haaland, Acting Assistant Planner The public hearing was opened at 7-05 p.m. . Mr. John Acierno, manager of Marie Callender's stated that the restaurant is not ~ticed by freely traffic because there is no freeway exit on First Street. He also stated that it was his opinion that the sign, as proposed, based on the same usage in the City of Anaheim, would generate more business. Commissioner Well asked if any existing signs would be removed. -- · __ Mr. Aciern~o responded that this sign would be i n addition to all exi sting signs -- The public hearing was closed at 7-10 p.m. Commissioner Le jeune asked if the widening of the 55 freeway would affect this area. -- · __ Staff responded that it would be affected but was unaware as to what degree The public hearing was reopened at 7'12 p.m. ~_ Pat Massie, representing United Orange County Neon Signs, stated that Caltrans ~ndicated~to her that there will be a 20 foot widening of the off ramp and it wouldn't affect the Marie Callender's property· D. Anastacia Bingha~m, representing Abigail Abbott, 660 W. First Street, noted concern Tot the aesthetics of the area that will be affected by the sign and asked if the sign would obstruct the view from their building. Mr. Acierno, noted that he did not know if the sign would be visible or obstruct the New from ~he Abigail Abbott building. Commissioner Le Jeun~e asked if an updated sign code was available. was a general discussion regarding pole signs between the Commissioners and 1 ole signs require a use permit· There _ staff indicated t.hat, a! __P;A .~,, as it is within 300 feet of staff. Ultimately,_ om a :yp~ca~ pu~ .~'~C ..... ws However, this sign is different fr .... .. __ · t ically allo the centerline of the freeway and it is nigher than the cl:y yp ' Commissioner Ponttous noted that she wanted to assi st Marie Callender' s but was sti 11 ~oncerned about the~eight of the sign and the overall size. She asked the applicant if there were any other options. Mr. Acierno_, noted that the sign would be effective in the 25 foot height range and ghat he wanted to work with the City and maintain the aesthetic value of the view from the office building across First Street. '- Commissioner Well asked if the applicant had considered a wall sign, if the proposed s-ign would be do~ble faced and lit at night and noted that the sign is proposed to be in a residential area and that she felt that 98 square feet was a small billboard. She asked staff if there were any other precedents. Planning Commission Minut August 22, 1988 Page four Mr Acierno, responded that northbound lanes would be unable to see a wall sign, the Prbposed ~'ign is double faced and lit and that he would.not install any billboards. Staff noted that the most recent pole sign was Fat Freddies', which is more than 50 square feet, however, it replaced an existing freeway sign and is not located in a residential neighborhood. . . Commissioner Baker asked of Lois Jeffrey, the Deputy City Attorney, whether the Commission operates under the Sign Code or the First Street Specific Plan in this matter. Lois Jeffrey, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the decision is up to the Commissioi~'S discretion. She also noted that the Commission must make a finding that the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood. However, the First Street Specific Plan design criteria are basically guidelines for the Commi ssi on. Commissioner Baker asked what other compromises there might be. i i Staff indicated that a sign below the eave line parallel to the" freeway that would not be visible beyond the overpass would be the extreme and anything in between would be a compromise. Commissioner Well asked if the sign could be placed between the trees and the freeway. Staff noted that the trees extend to the property line. Commissioner Baker noted concern about the sign being too high and too large. Lois Jeffrey. suggested that if the applicant has proposed dropping the sign height there should also be some reduction in the square footage of the sign. Ms. Massey noted that the higher a sign is placed the larger the sign must be in order to maintain the proper prespective. Commissioner Pontious moved, Well seconded to continue the public hearing on Use Permit 88~14 until such time as the applicant can work with staff to submit revised plans. Motion carried 4-0. 5. Use Permit 88-17 _ APPLICANT- PROPERTY OWNER- LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: MR. & MRS. TSU-SHEN MAO/ROYAL TUSTIN CLEANERS 17331 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 TUSTIN PROPERTIES, A CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP 17251 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 17331 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET AT THE INTERSECTION OF CARROLL WAY. COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG). A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN FILED FOR THIS PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. P 1 anntng Commt ss t on Mi nut August 22, 1988 Page fi ve REQUEST: TO PERMIT THE RELOCATION OF AN EXISTING DRY CLEANING' STORE (ROYAL TUSTIN CLEANERS) FROM' A LARGER UNIT TO A SMALLER UNIT IN THE SAME SHOPPING CENTER (FRENCH QUARTER). Recommendation: That the Planning Commission approve Use Permtt 88-17 by adopttng Resolutton No. 2523 wi th the condtttons contained there1 n. Resolution No. 2523 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING A USE PERMIT FOR THE RELOCATION OF A DRY CLEANING STORE FROM A LARGER UNIT, 17331 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET, TO A SMALLER UNIT, 17301 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET, IN THE SAME SHOPPING CENTER (FRENCH QUARTER) AT THE .NORTHEAST CORNER OF EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET AND CARROLL WAY. Presentation: Ronald Reese, Acting Associate Planner The public hearing was opened at 7:35 p.m. The public hearing was closed at 7:36 p.m. Commissioner Well asked Lois Jeffrey if it would be appropriate to add a brief statement as to Why the applicant is-moving. Lois Jeffrey indicated that it was not necessary. Commissioner Baker noted concern over the agency responsible for the inspections. Staff noted that the building division as well as the South Coast Air Quality Management District and Fi re Department would be inspecting the project. A discussion regarding other safety measures and inspections ensued between the Commission and staff with staff indicating that all of the concerns will be taken care of as part of the final inspection requirements. Commissioner Ponttous moved, Wetl seconded to approve Use Permit 88-17 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2523 with the 'conditions contained therein. Motion carried 4-0. 6. Use Permtt 88-18 APPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: MR. JOHN KELLEHER ON BEHALF OF COLCO, LTD. 13812 NEWPORT AVENUE, SUITE 105 IN THECOLCO PROJECT AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF NEWPORT AVENUE AND WALNUT STREET. COMMERCIAL GENERAL, IN THE SOUTH/CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN FILED FOR THIS PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT TO INSTALL TENANT IMPROVEMENTS FOR A DRY CLEANING STORE (DRY CLEAN EXPRESS) AT 13812 NEWPORT AVENUE, SUITE 105 Planning Commission Minu! August 22, 1988 Page si x Recommendation' It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit "88-18 by adopting Resolution No. 2525 with the conditions contained therein. Resolution No. 2525 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING USE PERMIT 88-18 ALLOWING INSTALLATION OF TENANT IMPROVEMENTS AT 13812 NEWPORT AVENUE, SUITE 105, FOR THE PURPOSES OF OPERATING A DRY CLEANING STORE WITH ON-SITE CLEANING. Presentation' Bernard Chase, Planner The public hearing was opened at 7:44 p.m. The public hearing was closed at 7'45 p.m. Commissioner. Well moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve Use Permit 88-18 by the adoption of Resolu"l~ion NO. 2525 with the conditions contained therein. Motion carried 4-0. OLD BUSINESS ® Proposed Vacation ..of a Portion....Qf San Juan Street between i Oran~)e Street and Charl oma bri ve Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2526 finding that the proposed vacation of a portion of San Juan Street between Orange Street and Charloma Drive is in conformance with the adopted General Plan. Resolutibn No. 2526' A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SAN JUAN STREET BETWEEN ORANGE STREET AND CHARLOMA DRIVE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN Presentation' Ronald E. Wolford, Engineering Services Manager A discussion resulted between staff, the Commissioners and Mr. Wolford regarding the following' traffic study figures and what they encompass; freeway widening; the widening of E1 Camino Real and if it could be widened prior to the vacation of San Juan; procedures for the decision of the exact area to be vacated; clarification on how the County Master Plan of Arterial Highways effects the vacation; time frames for the vacation and the widening of other streets and highways in the area; reconfiguration of the site and minor changes; what would happen in the event that TUSD discontinues the use of the two schools; and if there is any impact expected on Orange Street. Planning Commission Minut August ZZ, 1988 Page seven Commissioner Well moved, PonttOus seconded to continue the discussion on the vacation of San Juan until the September, 12, 1988 meeting to provide the Commission adequate time to review the Traffic Study and to provide staff with time to provide a short summation of the traffic study for the project pri.or to approval. Motion carried 4-0. i, NEW BUSINESS 8. Temporary Use Permit APPLICANT: OWNER' LOCATION' ZONING' ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS' BOBBY GILBERT OF B & J TREE SERVICE 18741E. FAIRHAVEN SANTA ANA, CA 92705 FRANARGOFIN ARNEL DEVELOPMENT 950 SOUTH COAST DRIVE, #200 COSTA MESA, CA 92626 SOUTHSIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL 200 FEET EASTERLY OF NEWPORT AVENUE 1062 EL CAMINO REAL TUSTIN, CA 92680 RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-I) CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Resolution No. 2527: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT ALLOWING THE STORAGE OF FIREWOOD, VEHICLES AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT FOR B & J TREE SERVICE AS WELL AS THE SALE OF FIREWOOD FOR A PERIOD OF TIME NOT TO EXCEED SIX (6) MONTHS. Presentation: Steve Rubin, Acting Director of Community Development Toni Gilbert, 18741 E. Fairhaven, representing B & J Tree Service distributed pictures of another facility to represent what B & J was attempting to do at the site. She indicated that wood would be cut, split {splitter makes no more noise than a lawnmower) and stored at the facility and there will be no chipping done on site. The site would be used as a storage yard for firewood and equipment and there will be some sales of firewood from the site, mostly on weekends. The vehicles will be moved during the day to perform their tree service and stored on site overnight. She indicated that she had a conflict with the use permit being tied to the Certificate of Occupancy for the L.A. Land project across E1 Camino Real. She also indicated that she did not agree with staff's recommendation to put mesh on the fence stating that it was too expensive for a temporary use. She indicated that part of their lease agreement was that they would keep the va. cant lot adjacent to the site cleared of weeds and debris. She stated that B & J was looking for a more permanent location · in the area. Jommissioner Le Jeune confirmed through staff that a sign permit would have to be approved by staff and asked if this permit could be extended. Planning Commission Minut August 22, 1988 Page eight Staff responded that after a six month temporary use a Use Permit would need to be applied for and noticed to surrounding property owners, adding that storage of equipment is not listed as a permitted use in commercial zones. Commissioner Le Jeune voiced his concern that the splitter, and equipment be kept as far away from the re~'~aurants and their parking lots as possible. Ms. Gilbert indicated that the equipment would be stored toward the center of the site. Commissioner Well noted concern that the heavy equipment would leave mud on the Sidewalk and stre"et during the rainy season. She also requested that entrance and exit signs be required. Ms. Gilbert indicated that the only equipment stored there would be two 2 ton dump trucks, a Small splitter and a stump grinder (that would not be used at this site). She stated that they would lay gravel for the first 15 feet of the driveway and if necessary they will add more gravel to connect the driveways. She al so indicated that there was no intention to have any temporary shelters or structures. A general discussion ensued regarding the fencing, noise, performance bond, and i ntenti OhS of Cal trans. Commissioner Baker asked of Lois Jeffrey if there was a legal problem basing the use on the occupancy 6f the L.A. Land project. Lois Jeffrey, indicated that because of the temporary use the matter would be at the discretion of the Commission, as qnce the property owner changes the temporary use must stop unless permission from the new owner is obtained. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Pontious seconded to approve the Temporary Use Permit authorizing the storage of firewood, vehicles and support equipment and sales of firewood at 1062 E1 Camino Real for a period of six months by the adoption of Resolution No. 2527 including the following changes: II. C. eliminate "Said fence shall be screened with a mesh material similar to that used on tennis courts." Add "II. K. Approval of this Temporary Use Permit is contingent upon the applicant signing and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Director of Community Development. II. L. The applicant shall post "Entrance" and "Exit" signs at the site to coordinate traffic movement. II. M. The applicant shall prepare and present a written weed control program (including dates and times) to staff prior to occupancy of the site. II. N. Chipping operations shall be prohibited on the subject property." Motion Carried 4-0. Planning Commission Minu' August 22, 1988 Page ni ne STAFF CONCERNS 9. Report on City Council Actions taken at August 15, 1988 Meeting Presentation: Steve Rubin, Acting Director of Community Development The following actions were taken at the City Council meeting: Resolution approving Daddy-o's neon sign The Density Bonus Policy was continued Interviews for Planning Commission vacancy will be held on September 6, 1988 at 5:00 p.m. COMHI SS ION CONCERNS Commisioner Weil asked that a discussion on the Sign Code be agendized and that the wording on freeway signs is vague and needs to be restructured. Staff assured the Commission that the Sign Code Sub-committee is almost ready to meet. ADdOURI~qENT At 9-10 p.m. Commissioner Pontious moved, Well seconded to adjourn to a special public hearing session on the Town Center Redevelopment Plan Second Amendment Draft EIR on August 29, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. A. L. Baker Chairman Penni Foley Secretary MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 29, 1988 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., .City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ZNVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Wetl, Baker, Le Jeune, Pontious 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.) PUBLIC HEARINGS ® DRAFT EIR 88-02 FOR THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. Recommendati on' I t i s recommended that the P1 anning Commi s si on recommend certification of EIR 88-02 with incorporation of all responses to comments to the Redevelopment Agency by the adoption of Resolution 2528 as submitted or revised. Presentation' Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development Mike Houlihan, Michael Brandman Associates Tony Skidmore, Katz Hollis Coren & Associates The public hearing was opened at 7'17 p.m. The public hearing was closed at 7:18 p.m. Commissioner Weil moved, Le Jeune seconded to recommend to the Redevelopment Agency the certi.fication of Draft EIR 88-02 with incorporation of all responses to comments by the adoption of Resolution No. 2528 as submitted, Motion carried 4-0. Planning Commission Minu% August 29, 1988 Page two Commissioner Baker indicated that he was unclear on how Redevelopment was involved in the gymnasium at Columbus Tustin Park. Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent, noted that the gymnasium will be on City. property and that the Redevelopment Agency might possibly finance the gym. The Director, noted that if there is any potential possibility for Redevelopment Agency involvement during the life of the Redevelopment Plan than that possibility needs to be taken into account prior to the adoption of the Plan. Commissioner Baker questioned what would be considered first, the First Street Specific Plan, the relationship of the Redevelopment Plan or the Cultural Resources Overlay District. The Director indicated that in the development process planning and zoning would be considered first. The Redevelopment Plan Agency is the last body and has final discretion to review a project prior to bull ding permit issuance. Commissioner Baker asked if there would be any environmental issues involved in removing the house on the Water Department property and if there will be a traffic study done for the area surrounding the gymnasium, particularly on Bonita Street. The Director responded that there are no environmental issues in removing the house and that there has not been a traffic study performed on the Bonita Street area. She noted that Michael Brandman Associates had worked very closely with the City Engineering Department and focused on areas of potential impact. Commissioner Baker pointed out that on a map in the Plan; E1 Camino Real ended south of Red Hill as well as a few typographical errors in the document. The Director assured the Commission that the errors would be corrected by MBA. Commissioner Well inquired about the relocation of low income residents if their dwellings are demolished. The Director noted that if the Redevelopment Agency is financially involved in a project, the Agency must provide relocation benefits. It is the obligation and responsibility of the Agency to provide all benefits and the Agency would work wi th tenants to find them alternative locations. She indicated that there is minimal displacement anticipated from future Agency activities. Commissioner Weil asked that the Director further explain owner participation and tax benefits. The Director explained that once the Agency defines its goals and objectives there are owner participation opportunities for existing tenants and businesses. The _ Agency informs them and asks for a statement of interest to redevelop their )roperty. If there is no interest, the City can consider private negotiations with developers or solicit requests for proposals. With certain restrictions an owner can transfer the current tax base of their property, due to threat of condemnation, to another property of like value. She also indicated that there is an informal procedural manual that will be brought to the Commission in a workshop setting in the near future to explain the Redevelopment process, relocation and acquisition. Planning Commission Minu~ August 29, 1988 Page three Commissioner Bake~ asked for more information regarding the financial responsi-bility bf"the Agency. - The Director indicated that the preliminary report for the Amendment spells out what is expected in the Town Center area. Commissioner Le Jeune asked what the plans were for the Civic Center. The Director indicated that the plans are in the first phase of working drawings and it will take eight to twelve months before they are completed. ADdOURNIqENT At 7:45 p.m. Commissioner Pontious moved, Well seconded to adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission on September 12, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Motion carried 4-0. A. L. Baker Chairman Penni Foley Secretary Planning Commission · DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 SUBJECT: FINAL TRACT HAP NO. 13556 APPLICANT: DONANUE SCNRIBER ON BEHALF OF THE THE IRVINE COMPANY LOCATION: THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE ZONING: NIXED USE, CUMNERCIAL; EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ENV I RONNENTAL STATUS: THE PRO&ECT IS COVERED BY A PREVIOUS EIR (85-2), WITH ADDENDUN, FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN. NO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED. REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION TO SUBDIVIDE A 49.967 ACRE SITE, BEING A PORTION OF AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 13274, INTO 11 NUMBERED LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING PHASE I OF THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE, A NIXED USE COI~qERCIAL DEVELOPNENT, IN ADDITION TO MAKING CERT. AXN RIGHT-OF-gAY DEDICATIONS TO THE CITY AND THE STATE. RECONNENDAT I ON: It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Final Tract Map 13556 to the City Council by adopting Resolution No. 2531 as submitted or revised. BACKGROUND: On January 11, 1988, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2465, for the subdivision of a + 129 acre parcel into 28 numbered .and two (2) lettered lots for the purpose o~r developing the Tustin Market Place, a mixed use commerical center consisting of approximately 717,000 square feet of retail space, 55,000 square feet of restaurant/fast food space and a 1500 seat movie theatre complex. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map was subsequently approved by the City Council on February 1, 1988. On August 22, 1988, the Plannning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2521, recommending approval of certain amendments to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 to the City Council. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 88-98 app.roving the Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 on September 6, 1988. The original tentative map approval ..... Community Development Department r Planning Commission HeetJng Final Tract Map No. 13556 Septmber 12, 1988 Page two included numerous conditions which the applicant has complied with and the final map is ready for recordation with the Orange County Recorders Office. Prior to this recordation, the Final Map must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Due to the phased development of the Tustin Market Place, the applicant is filing a phased final map. Final Map 13556 incorporates the hard goods section and the south village as everything south of E1 Camino Real with the exception of the retention basin lot on the west side of the E1 Modena flood control channel. A second final map will be processed for all of the remaining parcels of amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 in conjunction with submittal and review of development plans for the next phase(s) of construction. Phased final maps are permitted pursuant to Section 66456.1 of the State Subdivision Map Act. CONCLU$ TON: - The Tentative Map approved for this project included various conditions of approval which required adjustments to the map. All of the required revisions are reflected on the final map and the required conditions of approval have been met. Staff has determined that the Final Map is in conformance with the Tentative Map approval, requirements of the East Tustin Specific Plan, Development Agreement, the City's Subdivision Code, the East Tustin EIR and the State Subdivision Map Act. Based upon this conformance, staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Final Map 13556 to the City Council by the adoption of Resolution No. 2531. ~tev~'1 Rub t n Senior Planner Director of Community opment SR:CAS:ts Attachment: Resolution No. 2531 Final Map 13556 Corn munity Developmen~ Depar~mem 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 19! 21 23 2~ 25 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2531 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT MAP 13556 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: .- I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows' A. That Final Tract Map 13556 has been submitted by Donahue Schriber. B. That a Public Hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 11, 1988. At this hearing the Planning Commission recommended approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 to the City Council. Subsequently, the City Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 on February 1, 1988. C. On August 22, 1988 the Planning Commission recommended approval of Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 to the City Council. Subsequently, the City Council approved Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 on September 6, 1988. D. That the proposed subdivision is in conformance wi th the Tustin Area General Plan, adopted East Tustin Specific Plan, Development Agreement and Subdivision Map Act as it pertains to the development of commercial properties. E. That the City has reviewed the status of the School Facilities Agreement between The Irvine .Company and the Tustin Unified School District, the East Tustin Specific Plan, EIR 85-2, the impacts of Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274 on School District facilities, and reviewed changes in State law, and finds and determines that the impacts on School District facilities by approval of this map are adequately addressed through the reservation of a high school site and elementary site in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map 12763, and imposition of school facilities fees as a condition of approval of Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13274. F. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. G. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of de ve 1 opme nt. H. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 20 21 22 25 Resolution No. 253! Page two I. That the destgn of the subdivision or the type of improvements proposed will not confllct with easements acquired by the public-at-large, for access through or use of the property withtn the proposed subdivision. J® That the destgn of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems. K. That the Final Map is in substantial conformance with the Tentative Map. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Final Tract Map 13556 subject to final approval of the City Engineer. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 1988. A. L'. Baker, Chairman Penni- Poley, secretary SHF£T 1 OF ~ TRACT NO 1355r- " ~J~B~R OF LOT~ ~T r, NU~ERED ~ ~ATE OF S~RVEY: ~Y ~ge7 DATE nl~ ~ DAVID H. WIEI~ L.I. ~. 4131 LEE A. f~-:l~ ~ ~lk, I~ C~TY REC~DER BY VE, ~ ~R~I~, ~ ~ P~TIE8 ~Vl~ ~ ~ TIM IN--BT IN I ~Y STA~ ~T I ~ A kl~ L~ ~ ~ ~ STA~. ~ CALIF~IAI T~ LA~ CO~ 8Y THIS ~. ~ ~REBY ~T TO ~ ~TI~ ~ ~TI~ ~T THIS~ ~ISTI~ ~ a ~ET8 ~ T~. T~ A~ ~ETE ~VEY ~ SAID ~P. AS ~N ~I~IN ~ D[STI~TIVE. B~R ~. ~E ~EBY ~ECATE ~Y 1~7,~ IT ~ECTLY ~P~B ~E ~Tfl ~. fly ~ ~ TO T~ P~IC F~ STREET P~B~ ~ C.~I~ ~.~ ~ ~E. R~ ~ DI~TI~, T~T T~ ~NT8 ~ ~ ~RAC]~ ~ ~Y ~ rILL ~Y T~ P~ITI~ i~ICA~D BY 841D ~ ~ T~ ~NT ~8 ~D WE ~Y ~EA~ ~ ~EI~I~ TO ~ Cl~ ~. ~TIN ~L ~I~R A~ RI~TS TO EL CAHI~ R~L ~ d~E. R~ ~T AT ~TR~T IN~CTI~ D~[D H~ILLI~ L S ¢131 ~ ~R~Y ~ICA~. TO T~ IRVI~ ~ VA~ DlS~ICT ~ PI~LI~ E~ F~ gAT~A~ ~ P~P~8 ~ ~ ~ THI~ ~. ~1~ EA~NT~ ~ ~ I ~Y ~TA~ ~T I ~ ~1~ ~1~ ~ ~ ~ F~ IT TO AN A~O COND[TI~ T~T ~ TREES S~ ~ P~N~D IN SAID PIPELI~ EA~T8 ~P ACTA~ CITY ~IVISI~ RE~TI~ ~VE ~N ~l~ ~ITH ~[TNO~3 ~RITTEN C~SENT FR~ T~[RV[~ ~ ~AT~ DISTRICT. ~ ~P 18 ~ICALkY ~ECT IN ~. ~T~ ~T ~TIFJ~ TO ~o ~. ~uD~ J ' _ ............, ..... ~ ?~ ~ ~'8 ~A~, VICE PRESI~NT -- A~ IST~T _ ~OTARY P~cl~: ZN A~~ ~.~M STATE, PE~Y APP~ ~VID ~. ~E~ ~ I PEABODY ~N TO ~ ( ~ ~D TO ~ ~ T~ BASIS ~ ] T0 K T~ VI~ P~I~T ~ ASSISTANT ~C~TMY C.R. ~ [NSTR~NT A~ ~N T~ ~ TO ~. T~ PER~ ~ E~T~ ~ IN, TReNT ~ BEHA~~ ~ID C~T[~ ~ A~E~D TO ~ ~T ~ Cl~ ~'8 ~A~ ~ ~ CiTY ~ ~TIN AT A ~ ~TI~ t~ ~ ~ ~ , I~e, ~ T~T ~RE~ ~ID ~IL DID, BY ~Udr~ ~. ~ PA~ ~ ~D, ~ S.~ID ~P A~ DID *~T ~ ~ ~ Y~ P~EC OA~ ~ZB ~ DAY ~ ,IW. ~Y E. V~ C~ ~K ~ ~TIN ~ ~'T~ ~M'I KA~, ] AGAI~T ~ L~ ~ 8Y THIS ~P ~ ~Y PANT ~RE~ F~ ~AID STATE, [~T.T~ES ~ S~CE~ A~BWTS ~TED ~ TAXES ~T YET PAYA~. DA~ ~S DAY ~ · R~RT ~. CE~ BY~ ~TY ~W'T~ ~CT~ ~U~ ~-T.(X ~ECT~ rATER DZS~RZCT. DO ~HEBY ~T~FY T~T T~ ~T~REST ~N R~ PR~ERTY ~VEYED ~ ~R~Y STA~ TO ~ RE~ ~ ~ ~TY ~T ~ PROVZSI~ 8Y ~DECAT~ A~ ~h ~ TH~ TRACT ~ ~E ~EBY A~EP~D BY T~ ~R' ~IVZSZ~ fl~ ACT ~VE KEN ~E~ ~l~ RE~ ~P~IT8 TQ ~ T~ PAINT ~ TAXES ~~ECIALA~T8 C~ECT~ AS TA~8~ ~ ~ ~VE~ ~[~D ~F]OER ~ ~LF ~ T~ BO~ ~ OIRECT~5 ~ T~ IRVI~ RASH~A~R BY ~1~ ~P. DISTRigT P~ANT TO AUT~RITY C~E~ BY ~uTI~ ~. 197B-Ill ~ ~ DiRfCT~S AD~T~ ~V~ 8. 1976. DA~ ~18 DAY ~ ~ . 1~8. d~KTARI, [Rvl~ RA~ ~ATER Ol~[CT ~ LI~A~ ~ T~BO~ ~ DI~CT~9T~RE~. ~E~ ~ a~ ~ ~Vl~8 C~TY ~ ] . A ~. NOTARY P~u[C IN ~ FCR S.(ID STATE PERS~LL~ ~ ~. ~J~ I, , ~T.~Y ~ ~ CI~ ~ ~TIN P~I~ ~l~l~. '~ PERS~.~Y KNOVN TO ~ (~ PROVED TO ~ ~ T~ BA~IS ~ SATI~ACT~Y EVIl) ~ ~EBY ~TA~ ~T ~l~ P~ WA8 ~1~ TO ~ CiTY ~ ~TIN P~I~ ~ '~T~SE :~ETARY ~ T~ 5OA~ ~ OI~CT~S ~ T~ IRVI~ ~ ~A~ DISTRICT, C~1~91~ AT A ~ ~TI~ ~ ~ OA~ ~ ~ PL~A~t~C1, T~e~LICA~NCYT~ EXECUT~ T~V[THIN IN6~T ~ A~ T~TT~ SAID P~I~ ~1~ DID, BY PAS~D A~ A~UN TO ~E ~0 BE T~ PERS~ ~ EXECUT~ T~ ~I~N [~TR~NT ~ ~F ~ ~ED, APPROVE SAID ~P AB C~RI~ TO ~ T~TATIVE ~ AS FI~, 5~[D P'~L[~ AGENCY A~ A~NO~L~D TO ~ THAT S~ ~[C A~Y ~E~T~ A~ AP~O~ BY 9AID P~I~ r~ SA~, DA~ ~lS DAY ~ · I~. VIT~SS MY HAND~ II NUMBERED BEING A PO~T~ON OF. ~. QATE UF SURVEY: MAY 1987 ;R^CT NO, 1355[ IN THE CITY OF TU~TIN, COUNT~ OF ~, ~l&l~, ~18 ~ BT. !~. S l GNAI'UI~ 0~! 881~1, PURSUANT TO TH[. PROVISIONS OF SECTION M4~ Ce) ~) ~ ~ ~lVlli~ ACT. T~ F~O~I~ Sl~S ~VE ~ ~l~. ~ED REC~ MARCH t7,1~4 iN DRAi~ P~POSES PER [~T~T ROAD'aAY P~P~ES PE~ [NSTR~NT ~. 88-~13 0.~.. ~O ~.~ ~A[D E.&SE~NT LiES ~ITH]N dA~E. KO~] [~TR~NT ~. ~-I~ 0.~.. RE~ED ~AY e. 19~ [SAID EA~NT INSTRb~NT NO. R[~ 3. THE [RVINE RANCH ~IATER DISTRICT HOU)EB OF. AN E~E'NT FOR ~ LINEm ANO APPUflTENANCE$ PER [NSTRUfl~NT NO. 07- I[~l'l,,,'J,~ O.R RECORDED IIARCH ~. 19~TNlO · INDIC~TEJ FOUND MIlT o IIOlCAI~8 2' I.P. ANO TA~ L..8. 4131 G~ A 8P*II~ ANO UA~ L.8. 4131 IN ~T PA~T ~ A ~ A~ TAG UI~IN ~ ~Y8 ~ ~Y~ ~. FI~ I~TB,~ ~o~ 10 i.P. ~ P.Y.C, ~ L.8. 4131 ~ P~T m A ~ ~ T~ ~.s. 4~3~ m ~ TO K ~t Ar ~ COT ~ ~ ~ ~INT8 MI~IN M ( ) I~ICA~8 ~ ~ ~ ~ R.8. ~tO~, R.S.B. 114 / ~4~ INDICATES AN IRREVOCA~I.,E OIrF~R 0F ~ICATI~ TO T~ CiTY ~ ~TIN F~ R~DgAY A~ ~E P~8 ~ AS I~NT ~. I~ICA~S ~ EA~NT F~ ~ ~ WA~R Pi~I~ ~8 ~ICA~D TO T~ I~VI~ R~ UAT~ OlaTRICT ~ I~ICA~S AN ~T F~ 8T~ ~IN ~ ~i~ TO ~ CiTY ~ ~TIN ~RE~ ' IN FAV~ ~ T~ IRVI~ RA~ MAT~ DIS~ICT, ~ ~ ~, ~ I~icA~s ~~ ~. ~ ~ I.T~T ' E~ F'yST~I~IN~" FA~ ~ ~ CITY ~TIN . , ~. ~t~ NL,~BER OF LOF~ 1[ NUHBERED · BEING A PORT~ON ~ . DATE OF SURVEY, ~A1 ]907 AND EASE~N~ NOTES. ~EE S~ET NO. 3 FOR B~ARY ~Y ~ S~E~ [~X ~AP. x-K ' BLOCK 4.4 IRVIHE'S SUBDIVI.~IOH M.M 1188 R.S. 86-1030 R.$.B. 114 / 2go 42 ~ DATA~ (1'Hie ~'~ET ONL. Y1 ,. o~.4,.,o- ,e~. o~.o,. 67' 14' 21 ' 90' 3,N67' 'lO° 22'V AAO, I,~' 4.I~ 17'~' ~' 19.30' 6,~4'~' 13' ~' ~.32' 6,~*~'51~ 74,88' ~,N49' 23' ~ 21 · 16' 13,31' 45'~' ~' 14,~'31' 15° ~' IS,Gl' 14'35' . ~' I ,~' lU, K ~'d'~ ~'~ l\ Iii.lo' SHEET I /u,lI u', z1.1o ,~ / o sCALE IN FEET SHEET '~ Oc 5 'R^CT NO 1355( NUMBgR OF ~ NUMBERED ~E~NG A P~T[ON ~ SEE 9~ET NO. 2 F~. BAS[8 ~ B~l~, ~T ~TE8 DAVID H, V{~{~ ~,l, ~, 413{ AND EASEMENT NOTES. ~{~ I~ SEE S~ET ~. 3 FOR ~ARY 9~Y A~ ~ET {~ H~. \ SEE '~. ¢o SHEET ,I1 R.S. 81~ - {030 R.S.B 114/2.9-42 BLOCK 4,4 IRVINE:'$ SUBDIVISION Ivi. M. I ~ DATA~ t'T~ln ~EET IN.~ SCALE ~N FEET o 5o -'--....... -"'"'"'" ""'"'""~'~ ~"rr, l,l ~ ..., ~,.. ~ ,~,-1,~ -i ~- 'lt"~ '~' '~I ,,- I :i 335 N~BER OF LUTS BEING A PORTION ~. SE~ S~T ~. ~ F~ eASES ~ B~RZ~. ~NT ~T~S DAVID M. VI~I~ L.8. m. 413t AND EASEMENT NOTES. ~%~ l~ SCALE IN FEET RS. ~6 ° 10,30 R.S.B. 114, / 2.9-4Z SEE II ~~'~ --~.-~ ..... SHEET OF ~.OTS PORTION OF SH~T. ~. ~ FOR BASIB ~ B~IG, ~T ~S DAVID H, VI~I~ L,I, ~, 4131 5HE~T N0. 3 FOR 8~Y S~V~ ~ ~T. ~ ~, iRVINE',.q SUBDIVJSION BLOCK 44 M.M. I / 88 R.S. ~6- 1030 R.S.B.114 / 29 - ,4, Z "41~' · k.~b I'] . ' :~" '~ I ,1'[I .__z~z~_~t{ .... ~//~ "~-'-'.~... ~ II SEE SHEET 6 SCALE IN FEET __.~r ~ DATA* (THIS ~'I~ET O~LY) Planni.ng Commission · · DATE: SEPTEHBER 12, 1988 SUBflECT: USE PERMIT 88-14 APPLICANT'. UNITED ORANGE COUNTY NEON SIGNS INC. 13801 NEST STREET GARDEN GROVE, CA 92643 PROPERTY OWNER: MARIE CALLENDERS 721 #EST FIRST STREET TUSTIN, CA 92680 LOCATION: 721 WEST FIRST STREET ZONING: COMMERCIAL GENERAL - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPHENT FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN - COI~ERCIAL ENV I RONMENTAL STATUS: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) REQUEST: A/ITHORIZATION TO INSTALL A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT, CHANNEL LETTEREO FREEWAY IOENTIFICATION POLE SIGN. RECOI"I~ENDATION' Pleasure of the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND: As directed by the Planning Commission at their August' 22nd meeting, 'the applicant has revised their original proposal for a 35 foot high, 98 square foot freeway pole sign, and is now proposing a 25 foot high, 78 square foot sign. The staff report for the original proposal is attached to provide background information and analysis. The revised plans are identifical to the original plans in. location, design, materials, colors, etc., excepting the reduced height and size of the sign. Community Development Department Planning Commission Report Use Permit 88-14 September 12, 1988 Page two ii ii DISCUSSION: . The revised plans propose a 12 foot wide, 6.5 foot tall, double faced sign placed upon a pole to create a combined height of' 25 feet. This proposal is a reduction of 10 feet in height, and 20 square feet in sign area as compared to the original proposal. The applicant has stated that the newly proposed 25 foot height for the pole sign would be the lowest height that would be visible to freeway traffic beyond the nearby freeway overpasses. It is their assertion that the visibility of a perpendicular, double-faced sign with a height lower than 25 feet would be blocked on the south side by trees on their property. The revised plans present a compromise between the larger original proposal and the Design Guidelines of the First Street Specific Plan. The Design Guidelines call for signs below the eavelines of structures and a general "small town feeling". The street facing eavelines of the building measure 11 feet high, while the gabled freeway (west) elevation eaves peak at 22 feet. The present proposal would still rise above these heights and would be visible from neighboring residences and businesses and the entrance to the City on First Street. CONCLUSION: Staff has reviewed the revised sign proposal and finds that the 'applicant has made some improvement to the proposal reviewed at the previous Planning Commission meeting. Two (2) resolutions have been prepared by staff should the Planning Commission choose to approve (Resolution No. 2524) or deny (Resolution No. 2524[d]) Use Permit 88-14. E~ic Ha~lano . Acting Assistant Planner Christi-ne A. Shingleton//ff Director of Community B~velopment EH:CAS:ts Attachments: Resolution No. 2524(d) Resolution No. 2524 Staff Report of August 22, 1988 Plans Community Developmcm Department 2 3 4 5 ? lO II 12 13 14 15 lO l? 19 2O 21 23 2~ 27 2~ RESOLUTION NO. 2524 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT FREEWAY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AT 721 WEST FIRST STREET The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application, Use Permit 88-14 has been filed by Orange County Neon Signs, Inc. on behalf of Marie Callenders to request authorization to install a 25 foot high, 78 square foot freeway identification pole sign at 721 West First Street. B. That public hearings were duly called, noticed and held for said application on August 22 and September 12, 1988. 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 Commercial General-Planed Unit Development District (First Street Specific Plan). 2. The use aplied for is in conformance with the Tustin Sign Code [Section 9481 (f)]. 3. The sign advertises a use allowed in the Commercial General-Planned Unit Development District (First Street Specific Plan). 4. That the proposed sign is in keeping with the Design Guidelines of the First Street Specific Plan. 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 Tustin, and should be granted. E. 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 Fi re Marshal and street improvement requirements as administered by the City Engineer. F. This project is catagorically exempt (Class 11) from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 2524 Page two G. Final development plans shall require the review and approval of the Community Development Department. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 88-14 to authorize a 25 foot high, 78 square foot freeway pole sign at 721 West First Street subject to the following conditions: A. The sign shall be constructed and installed pursuant to the submitted plans, or as herein modified, date stamped September 12, 1988. Any modifications to these plans shall require the approval of the Community Development Director and/or Planning Commission as determined by the Director. B. No other freestanding signs shall be installed on-site. C. All provisions and regulations of the Tustin Sign Code and applicable Building Codes shall be met. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 1988. A. L. Baker, Chairman Penni Foley Recording Secretary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2524 (d) A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN DENYING A 25 FOOT HIGH, 78 SQUARE FOOT FREEWAY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN AT 7'21 WEST FIRST STREET. 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 88-14, has been filed United Orange County Neon Signs Inc. on behalf of Marie Callenders to request authorization to install a 25 foot high, 78 square foot freeway identification pole sign at 721 West First Street. Be That public hearings were duly called, noticed and held for said application on August 22, 1988 and September 12, 1988. C. That this project is categorically exempt (Class 11) from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. D. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will, 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 Commercial General-Planned Unit Development District (First Street Specific Plan). 2. The proposal does not comply with the First Street Specific Plan Design Guidelines in the following respects' a. The sign rises above the eaveline of the restaurant structure. b. The sign does not promote the Design Guideline's goal of maintaining a "smal.1 town" feeling. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 1988. A'.L. Baker Chairman Penni Foley, Secretary Re'port ..to. the Planning Commission ITEM NO. 4 DATE: AUGUST 22, 1988 SUB,1E CT: USE PER,lIT 88-14 APPLICANT: UNITED ORANGE COUNTY NEON SIGNS INC. 13801 NEST STREET GARDEN GROVE, CA 92643 PROPERTY O#NER: LOCATI ON: ZONING: MARIE CALLENDER' S 721 NEST FIRST STREET TUSTIN, CA 92680 721 NEST FIRST STREET COMMERCIAL GENERAL - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN - COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11) REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION TO INSTALL A 35 FOOT HIGH, 98 SQUARE FOOT, CHANNEL LETTERED FREE#AY IDENTIFICATION POLE SIGN. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commisslon either deny the Use Permit for the stgn as proposed, or continue the matter and direct the applicant to revise the plans as recommended by staff and/.or the Commission. BACKGROUND: The applicant has proposed to place a 35 foot high pole sign oriented toward the Newport Freeway at the rear-interior edge of the lot for Marie Callender's restaurant, located at 72i W. First Street, to provide business identification to freeway traffic. A freeway sign for a restaurant located within 300 feet of a freeway centerline is exempt from height or size requirements subject to approval of a use permit pursuant to the City's Sign Code. .... Community Development DeparTment Planntng Commi ssion Report Use Permit 88-14 August 22, 1988 Page two DISCUSSION: Submitted plans for the proposed freeway sign indicate a 98 square ' foot (14 feet wide, 7 feet high), double faced, channel lettered sign mounted upon a pole to create a combined height of 35 feet. The sign face consists of script style channel letters that are colored white by day and rose by night (via neon) set within an unlit dark green background with an illuminated outer border that is colored white by day and turquoise by night (also via neon). The outer edge of the sign body and support pole are colored pale yellow. The sign is proposed to be located at the rear, interior edge of the restaurant site, across the parking lot from the existing building, in a landscaped corner abutting the freeway right-of-way on the west. This location is adjacent to a row of 20 foot tall trees to the south and a vacant parcel of land to the north. The abutting freeway is recessed below the grade of the restaurant site with the First Street and Irvine Boulevard overpasses at either side of the subject site. The height of the trees and the proximity of the freeway overpasses are the applicant's arguments for the proposed 35 foot height of the sign as they believe visibility would be diminished with a lower sign. The proposed height of the sign is staff's primary concern with the project. The First Street Specific Plan Design Guidelines call for maintaining a "small town" atmosphere as well as prohibiting signs higher than the eaveline of the related structure. At the height of 35 feet the sign would rise higher than the 11 foot high eaveline, the 22 foot high roof peaks, and the 30 foot high central tower. As proposed, the freeway sign would be visible from First Street as well as surrounding areas as well as upon entrance into the City from the west, over the First Street bridge. This proposal is not in compliance with the Design Guidelines of the First Street Specific Plan and staff has notified the applicant of this; however, the applicant is firm in their belief of the necessity, for the 35' height and has asked to seek Commission approval for the sign as proposed, rather than lowering its height. CONCLUS ION: Staff has reviewed the proposed sign and recommends that the Planning Commission deny Use Permit 88-14 by adopting Resolution No. 2524, or continue the hearing and direct the applicant to make applicable corrections to their proposal. ,, Eri~' Haaland Acting Assistant Planner. Steve Rubi n Acting Director of Community Development EH: S R: ts Attachment: Resolution No. 2424 (d) Cornrnunity De'veloprnen~ OeparTrnen~ Report Planning Commission DATE: SUBdE CT: APPLICANT: OIdNER: LOCATION: - ZONING: ENV I RORMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 USE PERMIT 88-20 IdlNSTON TIRE COMPANY 900 #. ALAMEDA BURBANK, CA 91506 #INSTON TIRE COMPANY 900 id. ALAMEDA BURBANK, CA 91506 621 WEST FIRST STREET AT THE' NORTHYEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET. COMMERCIAL GENERAL-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPHENT (CG-PUD) - FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS- 3) FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT TO PERMIT THE REMODELING OF AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE. RECOI~ENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission either approve Use Permit 88-20 by adopting Resolution No. 2529 or deny Use Permit 88-20 by adopting Resolution No. 2529(d). BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the remodel of an existing building located at 621 West First Street, to be used for tire sales and automotive service. The subject site was developed under Development Plan DP73-422 which was approved in June, 1973 for the construction of a 6,580 square foot building sited on a 31,514 square foot parcel. The building has been utilized since completion as a - catalog sales shbwroom and is located in the Commercial General-Planned Unit ..... Community Development Department Planning Commission Report Use Permlt 88-20 September 12, 1988 Page 'two Development (CG-PUD) District. The subject site is also located wtthin the First Street Specific' Plan (Specific Plan No. 10) whtch was approved in 1985 under Ctty Council Resolution No. 85-126. Staff have reviewed the Specific Plan and have provided the following summary of the goals and objectives of the First Street Spectfic Plan as tt relates to the subject site and proposed use: ° Guide and stimulate the use of properties along First Street. Promote the best use of properties which balances maximum development potential with compatible uses. Provide compatible "Use Changes" where existing uses are either no longer appropriate, marginal in character or where long term market potential is available. Encourage new uses which are appropriate and feasible and can be effectively lntergrated and located where they contribute most to the overall improvement of the area. Promote development, expansion or redevelopment that: a® Is a first priority (or.primary use). Meets prescribed development regulations. Is responsive to establish design guidelines. The subject site was identified in the Specific Plan as a site which was subject to a "Use Change" and designated as having a primary use of Commerical and a secondary use of Hotel/Motel Development. The Specific Plan identifies the proposed use as requiring approval of a conditional use permit. SC, USS 1011: The proposed use would occupy the old Hartman Building located at the northwest corner of First Street and Yorba Street. The location is bounded on the north by a two story multi-family apartment building, to the south across First Street by a two story office building, to the west by a single story medical office building and to the east, across Yorba Street single family dwellings. Staff is concerned with the proposed use as it relates to these adjacent uses and especially with the proposed west facing roll-up doors and the potential noise impact associated with the changing of tires and the repair of automobiles on the medical office building to the west and the apartment building to the north. Access to the site is provided at two separate locations. One access point is located along the north property line and consists of a 24 foot 6 inch driveway Com munity DeveloPment Department Planntng Commission Report Use Permit 88-20 September 12, 1988 .. Page three on Yorba Street. The other access point is located at the southwest corner of the property and consists of a 30 foot drive apron on First Street. Both drives provide access to the parking lot and the thirty-one (31) standard parking spaces, plus one handicapped space. The proposed service commercial use is required to have one (1) parking space for each 225 square feet of building area for a total of thirty (30) parking spaces. Winston Tire proposes to remodel the building which will entail the creation of service bays with the installation of two (2) new roll-up doors along the west elevation, which will be painted a buff color to match the slumpstone on the building. A new combination 6 foot 8 inch high slumpstone trash and tire storage enclosure will be constructed at the northwest corner of the building. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 9235d(4) outside storage of material's is prohibited. Therefore, the proposed used tire storage area located in conjunction with the trash enclosure shall be relocated inside the building or a separate totally enclosed structure shall have to be provided. A new store front, which will provide direct access from the parking lot, will be constructed at the southwest corner of the building and will consist of new glass windows and a glass entry door utilizing medium bronze color framing. A previously submitted elevation for the building indicated a roof element on the west elevation consisting of a mansard roof treatment with concrete terra cotta tile (Attachment 1). The Design Guidelines for First Street indicates that this type of roof overhang is highly desirable and should, therefore, be incorporated into the building remodeling program. The interior tenant improvements consist of a new six (6) bay service area, new tire storage area and a new waiting area. A new curb, gutter, sidewalk and wheelchair ramp is required to be installed, per City standards, at the northwest corner of First Street and Yorba Street. New landscaping will be provided around the trash enclosure, with additional planting to be provided where existing landscape needs improvement. Should the Commission wish to approve the proposed use, staff would suggest that all exterior stucco be painted in a buff color to freshen the look of the building. The Police Department also strongly encourages the applicant to- install an alarm system with central station monitoring capabilities, or an alarm directly routed to the Police Department. One of the purposes and intentions of the First Street Specific Plan is to achieve an overall positive identity for the First Street area. In reviewing the seven (7) auto related uses located between Newport Avenue and the subject site, staff is concerned that the negative impacts associated with these uses, i.e., noise, trash, disabled autos, etc. be perpetuated and allowed to encroach into this area of First Street which is predominately improved with office type uses and is also an entry point into the City. Community Development Depar~mem Planning Commission Report Use Permtt 88-20 September 12, 1988 Page four CONCLUS!ON: Staff has concluded that the primary consideration after reviewing the applicant's request is does the introduction of a tire sales and automotive service type use on this site contribute to a "Use change" which meets both the purpose and intent of-the Commercial General-Planned Unit Development and the First Street Specific Plan and contributes to the positive identity for the area that the Specific Plan is mandated to achieve. The Planning Commission should either approval Use Permit 88-20 by adopting Resolution No. 2529 or deny Use Permit 88-20 by adopting Resolution No. 2529(d). ROn~,Reese .... , Acting Associate Planner Christine A. Shinglet~ Director of Community Development RR-CAS'ts Attachment' Resolution No. 2529 and No. 2529(d) AI]I]ACI41~1qT i Corn munity Development Department 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ! 18 19. ~0 21 23 2~ 25 27 RESOLUTION NO. 2529 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN CALIFORNIA, APPROVING USE PERMIT 88-20 TO REMODEL AN EXISTING BUILDING TO BE USED FOR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET, 621 WEST FIRST STREET. The Planning Commission of the City of Tusttn does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: Ao That a proper application, Use Permit 88-20, has been filed on behalf of Winston Tire Company requesting authorization to remodel an existing building to be used for tire sales and automotive service located at the northwest corner of First Street and Yorba Street, 621 West First Street. Be That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said application on September 12, 1988. C. That this project has been determined to be Categorically Exempt (Class 3) from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. D. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of %he 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 use applied for is in conformance with the Tustin Genera 1 Pla n. 2. The site is located in the Commercial General-Planned Unit Development (CG-PUD) District and the First Street Specific Plan Area (Specific Plan No. 10). 3. The use applied for is a conditionally permitted use in the Commercial General-Planned Unit Development (CG-PUD) District and the First Street Specific Plan. 0 The use applied for is a new use on the site and conforms to uses permitted in the Commercial General-Planned Unit Development. 1 2 3 4 5 - 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1S 19 2O 21 22 23 2~ 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 2529 Page two 5. The use applied for is located w~thin an . existing, approved, commercial development. 6. The use permit provides the ability to avoid or mitigate any potential impacts of the proposed project through the imposition of appropriate conditions. E. 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 Tustin, and should be granted. F. 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. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Use Permit 88-20 to authorize the remodel of an existing building located at 621 West First Street for tire sales and automotive service and the installation of tenant improvements for the purpose of operating said tire store (Winston Tire) subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit 'A', attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 1988. A.L. Baker Chairman Penni Foley, Secretary EXHIBIT A Resolution No. 2529 1. The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted site plan for the project on file with the Community Development Department as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this exhibit. 2. Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to issuance of any building permit for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. 3. At building plan check, all tenant improvements shall be submitted and conform to all applicable Building, Fire, State and Federal codes and regulations. Detailed electrical, plumbing and mechanical plans shall be submitted for plan check and permits. 4. Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Orange County Fire Marshal prior to issuance of building permits including required fire flow and installation of fire sprinklers in the subject building. ~. 5. Applicant shall satisfy all Public Works Department requirements including the required dedication of additional right-of-way for the northwesterly corner of West First Street and Yorba Street in the form of a corner cut-off and a new wheelchair ramp constructed to current City Standards No. 124 at the northwest corner of First Street and Yorba Street. A legal description and sketch of this right-of-way dedication alo.ng with a copy of the latest vesting shall~also be required. In addition, the existing wheelchair ramp shall be removed and new curb and gutter and a sidewalk constructed in its place. This work shall be shown on a separate 24" X 36" sheet with all new construction referenced to the applicable City standard drawing number for Engineering Department review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. The applicant shall modify building elevations and proposed exterior materials as follows: A. The proposed westerly elevation shall include a sloping roof tile treatment as shown in Attachment I of the Planning Commission staff report dated September 12, 1988 eliminating the wood sided trim on the side of the building. B. All existing exterior stucco and the two (2) new roll up doors shall be painted in a buff color. C. All exterior colors to be used shall be subject to final review and approval of the Director of Community Development. D. The proposed outdoor tire storage area shall be completely enclosed as a building with elevations adjusted to reflect this change. The final elevation and treatments proposed shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of Community Development. Exhibit A Resolution No. 2529 Page two 7. All mechanical and electrical fixtures shall be adequately and decoratively screened. 8. There shall be no outdoor storage of any kind on the subject site. 9. Indicate lighting proposed in conjunction with proposed project. Provide lighting specifications and photometric data plans. 10. A completely detailed project sign program including location, size, colors and materials shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development Department. 11. A revised landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to reflect proposed alterations on the site. New landscaping will be required around the new trash enclosure and proposed tire storage building. The revised landscaping plan shall also include a review and replacement of existing landscaping and adequate landscape buffering along the northerly property line as deemed necessary by the Department of Community Development. The applicant shall refer to landscaping submittal requirements of the Community Development Department for all landscaping requirements. 12. Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all required fees as may be applicable including: A. Major thoroughfare and bridge fees to Tustin Public Works Department. B. Sanitary sewer connection fee to Orange County Sanitation District. C. All applicable building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department. D. New development fees to the Community Development Department. E. School facilities fee to the Tustin Unified School District subject to any agreement reached and executed between the District and Winston Tire. 13. Approval of Use Permit 88-20 is contingent upon the applicant signing and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Director of Community Development. 14. Approval of Use Permit 88-20 shall become null and void unless building permits are issued within 12 months of the date of the approval. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 9,0 21 22 23 25 2¢ 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2529(d) A RESOLUTION OF' THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF' THE CITY OF' TUSTIN CALIFORNIA, DENYING A USE PERMIT TO REMODEL AN EXISTING BUILDINGTO BEUSED F.OR TIRE SALES AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIRST STREET AND YORBA STREET, 621 WEST FIRST STREET. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper.application, Use Permit 88-20, has been filed on behalf of Winston Tire Company requesting authorization to remodel an existing building to be used for ti re sales and automotive service located at the northwest corner of First Street and Yorba Street, 621 West First Street. B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said application on September 12, 1988. C. That this project has been determined to be Categorically Exempt (Class 3) from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. De That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will, 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 Commercial General-Planned Unit Development (CG-PUD) District and the First Street Specific Plan Area (Specific Plan No. 10). 2. The use applied for is a conditionally permitted use in the Commercial General-Planned Unit Development (CG-PUD) District and the First Street Specific Plan. . The proposal does not comply with the First Street Specific Plan in the following respects: a. The proposed use does not constitute a "Use change" which meets both the purpose and intent of the Specific Plan. 2 3 Resolution No. 252.9(d) Page two ':'' 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1(; ~0 21 25 2(i 27 28 b. The proposed use does not promote the highest and best use for thts stte and does not balance maximum development potential wtth compatible uses. c. The proposed use does not contribute to the overall posttive tdentity of the area that the Specific Plan ts trying to achieve. d. The proposed use is not compatible with the medical related uses to the west or the apartment complex to the north Jn that the noise associated with the changtng of tires and the repair of automobiles could have a detrimental impact on these surrounding uses. e. The proposed use is not a use which can be effectively Integrated into thls location or a use which contributes most to the overall improvement of the area. f. The proposed use would perpetuate and allow the encroachment of an auto related use into an area predomtnately 1reproved with offtce uses and those negattve tn~acts associated with this use, i.e., noise, trash, dtsabled autos, etc. as can be seen in the seven (7) auto related uses located between the subject stte and Newport Avenue. II. The Planning Commission hereby denys Use Permit 88-20 to authorize the remodel of an existing buildtng located at 621 West First Street for tire sales and automotive service. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commlsslon, held on the day of , 1988. A.L. Baker Chairman Penni Foley, Secretary u JO Z.~, I 0 I- CO, uJ -~-:- ..Ii , ;., :; , 4,i i z 0 · · > ... ., "I 5 :.:, in I'll r- :. I rn 0 0 - Z ~: IT1 I. 0 · . . Z O~ -I m m z 'T ~J ~ m I ! . I I · · STORAGE · ~... °/' .?-'~.\ .'v YORBA ST. · 'Report to the. Planning Commission ITEM NO. 6 DATE: SUB,]E CT: SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SAN JUAN STREET BETNEEN ORANGE STREET AND CHARLOMA DRIVE RECOI~ENDATION It ts recommended that the Planntng Commission adopt Resolution No. 2526 finding that the proposed vacation of a portion, of._San Juan Street between Orange Street and Charloma Drive is in conformance with the adopted General Plan. BACKGROUND The Planning Commtsslon at their regular meeting on August 22, 1988 continued their discussion on thi~ matter untll September 12th to provide the Planning :ommisston wtth adequate time to revtew the Trafftc Study and to provide staff with ttme to prepare a short summation of the. Traffic Study for the proposed vacati on. Attached for the Commission's information is a Summary of the Traffic Analysis for the project along with the original staff report on the matter and recommended Resolution No. 2526 finding the vacation consistent with the Tustin General Plan. A ~epresentative from the Public Works Department including the City's Traffic Consultant will be in attendance to answer the Commission's questions on this matter. Chri~he Shingl~n Director of Community Development CAS:per Community Development Department SUMMARY SAN JUAN STREET CLOSURE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Prepared for: CITY OF TUSTIN Prepared by: Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. 1450 North Tustin Avenue, Suite 108 Santa Ana, California 92701 September 1, 1988 SUMMARY This report summarizes the results of a traffic study carried out to determine the traffic 'impacts associated with closing San Juan Street east of Orange Street and west of Charloma Drive in the City of Tustin. BACKGROUND AND SCOPE As part of the I-5 widening project to be carried out by Caltrans, additional right-of-way will be required on the north side of El Camino Real between Newport Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. Acquisition of this right-of-way will result in a net reduction in the Tustin High School property. A potential mitigation measure would be to close San Juan Street east of Orange Street and link the school properties north and south of San Juan Street into a single unit. The purpose of this study was to examine the traffic impacts of such a closure. To estimate the amount of traffic diversion that would occur due to the street closure, thru traffic on San Juan Street was measured by means of a special licence plate matching study. Impacts of that diversion on intersection levels of service was then estimated. In addition, the analysis estimated the amount of traffic generated by the residences and schools on and around San Juan Street, and calculated the number of local trips that would have a more circuitous routing as a result 6f the closure. THRU TRAFFIC DIVERSION A licence plate matching study was conducted in March, 1988, along San Juan Street between Red Hill Avenue and Newport Avenue. The results of this were as follows: Percentage of Thru Traffic Time Period Total AM Peak Hour 26% Noon Peak Hour 28% PM Peak Hour 37% Hence, the percentage of thru traffic varies from 26 percent in the morning to 37 percent in the evening. An average of about 30 percent of all traffic using San Juan Street on a daily basis is therefore thru traffic. The impact of thru trip diversions on intersection capacity utilization (ICU) is as follows: INTERSECTION - - - AH PK HOUR - - EXISTING W/DIVERSIONS - - - PM PK HOUR - - - EXISTING W/DIVERSIONS EL Cami no/Nesq>ort 0.88 0.88 0.92 0.93 San Juan/Neq~ort 0.43 0.43 0.46 0.45 San Juan/Red HiLL 0.71 0.64 0.60 0.60 EL Camino/Red HiLL 1.00 0.99 1.29 1.33 As indicated in this table, the trip diversions have minimal impact on most intersections. The highest impact is at the intersection of El Camino Real and Red Hill Avenue where during the PM peak hour the leU would be increased by four percent. All other intersections show either no change or a change of only one percent in ICU level. (Note that these ICUs assume the existing two-lane configuration for El Camino rather than the four-lane section planned for this facility in the future.) LOCAL TRAFFIC DIVERSION Some local traffic using San Juan Street to access Newport Avenue or Red Hill Avenue will be forced under the street closure tO use other facilities. Utt Drive, Lance Drive and Walnut Street are the facilities that are primarily effected in that regard. .. Impacts of this local rerouting are as follows: Trips (average daily) 1,042 Additional time per trip 2.4 minutes Total added time 626 minutes Additional distance per trip 1/4 mile Total added distance 261 miles Hence in total, local traffic will experience an additional 10 hours (626 minutes) of travel time per day and 261 miles of additional travel distance. DATE: AUGUST 15, 1988 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION · FROM: 'PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUBJECT: PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTIONOF SAN JUAN STREET BETWEEN ORANGE STREET AND CHARLOMA DRIVE RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution finding that the proposed vacation of a portion of San Juan Street between Orange Street and Charloma Drive is in conformance with the adopted General Plan. BACKGROUND: Caltrans is negotiating with the Tustin Unified School District to acquire land for the relocation of E1 Camino Real farther into the Tustin High School site. This is required because of the proposed widening of the I-5 freeway. The school site would lose about three acres of land which would reduce the school site to approximately 24 acres. School officials countered Caltrans' proposal with a suggestion that the ~ossibility of closing a portion of San Juan Street be pursued. This /ould allow the high school site to be physically joined with the Lambert School site which is about 10 acres in size. Caltrans provided the City with funds for preparation.of a San Juan Street closure traffic analysis which was prepared by the consulting firm of Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. The traffic study shows the impacts of the closure and will be a part of the negative'declaration to be prepared for this proposal. Following Planning Commission action, the City Council would then adopt a resolution of intention and set a public hearing on the vacat. proposal. At the conclusion of the hearing, a decision would be made. City staff will recommend, if the vacation is approved, that Caltrans and the school district be required to provide standard cul-de-sacs or a cul-de-sac and a knuckle at the end of the streets being retained for public use. The attached map shows the area proposed to be vacated and the surrounding area. ER~nledeErin~°-sl~'~es Minager · ANDREWS ST. 8RY J :~Z l/CZ. :Me 1168 ~,.f~ LEAR li*i 1172 I~ ,~H~ PARK 116o 118~ IWG L ANDREWS ,':' ST. C. C. LAM BERT ~'C/-JOOL PRC>POsE'D 131~Ol o o REAL .80NI TA EL CAMINO %41 AVE M I T l"' N I:' I I TUSTIN HIGH 5'¢/-t0D L. VEEH DR HILLVII[W , .M,,, J3852 0 14.131 · 14141 1414~ J'~J4S 1+fSI 14471 14.201 14203 14207 1421 ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2526 3 4 5 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SAN JUAN STREET BETWEEN ORANGE STREET AND CHARLOMA DRIVE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN 7 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby resolve as follows: 8 I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as 9 follows: 10 A. That the Tustin Unified School District and the California Department of Transportation have proposed that the 11 City of Tustin vacate a portion of San Juan Street between Orange Street and Charloma Drive. 12 B. That Section 65402 of the California Government 13 Code provides that no street shall be vacated or abandoned if the adopted General Plan or part thereof applies thereto until 14 such street vacation or abandonment has been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency as to conformity with said 15 adopted General Plan or part thereof. C. That the Planning Commission finds that Sah Juan Street is not part of the Circulation Element of the adopted 17 General Plan and does hereby find that the proposed vacation of a portion of San Juan Street between Orange Street and Charloma 18 Drive is in conformity with the adopted General Plan of the City of Tustin. 19 D. That a negative declaration will be prepared for 20 the project in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act. 21 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin 29 Planning Commission held on the day of 1988. ' 23 24 25 26 27 28 Penni Foley, Secretary Kathy Weil, Chairman epo'rt Planning to the , Commission DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ITEM NO. 7 TO: FROH ' SUB,)E CT: PLANNING CONMISSION COIqMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTI4ENT ORANGE COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN (OCHWMP) RECOINMENDATION.- Receive and file. BACKGROUND: [n 1986 the State Legislature adopted the Tanner Bill (AB2948) which requires all counties to adopt a hazardous waste management plan. The plan must provide for the processing and siting criteria for establishment of hazardous waste storage and treatment facilities. This law .also requires that each county provide adequate facilities to handle all the wastes that the county generates. ANALYSIS . Staff have been working closely with the County of Orange and representatives from each of the cities in the County on the preparation of the Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan {OCHWMP). The remainder of this report will focus upon the key issues related to the plan and the impending approval process that the Planning Commission and City Council will be involved in. In 1987 a draft plan was prepared for submittal to the .State Department of Health Services (DHS}. This plan contained the information required by the Tanner Bill and was submitted in December 1987. The DHS reviewed this draft plan and submitted comments back to the City/County Tanner Committee. Key issues to be addressed in the revised plan include' ® Fair Share Policy: While AB2948 requires each county to provide for treatment and storage of its own hazardous wastes, the counties in the Southern California area {south of Santa Barbara) agree that it would be very difficult to site each type of facility within each individual county. This type of layout would be extremely costly and redundant. The counties in the Southern Caifornia region have agreed to a fair share policy where by each county provides a pro-rata share of treatment and storage facilities rather than locating each type of facility within each county. Community Development Department · Planning Commission Meeting Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Pl an September 12, 1988 Page two This policy will provide for adequate facilities disbursed over the region. The DHS was concerned with this type of agreement and stated this type of arrangement does not meet the intent of AB2948. However, other counties throughout California had intended to use the same or a similar type of agreement and DHS may approve this program. ® Sittng.. Criteria' Another key issue in the OCHWMP which has met with the State's concern is the OCHWMP siting critiera. The criteria establishes development standards and locational criteria for the two major categories of hazardous waste facilities. These categories include residual repositories for long term storage of treated substances and other facilties such as treatment plants, incinerators, transfer, and temporary facilities. The plan established over 40 criteria for setbacks, site design, location to sensitive environmental areas and various technical requirements. Although the State has very specific site criteria for residuals repositories (long term storage of treated wastes), the OCHWMP draft applied these criteria to all facility types. The State determined that less restrictive criteria should be established for other facilities since their potential hazard level is much lower than residual repositories. It is important to note here that if a local justifiction chooses, it may establish more restrictive siting criteria. However, proper jurisdiction must be provided otherwise the State may disqualify them. 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The adoption of the OCHWMP is considered a 'project' under CEQA. The County is in the process of preparing a draft environmental impact report (EIR). The screen check document is being reviewed by the cities in Orange County and the document will be processed with the OCHWMP. This document will be a program EIR which each city can use when considering the OCHWMP for approval. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS' The OCHWMP must be approved by at least 50% of the local jurisdictions within the County and the Board of Supervisors. Should a city choose not to participate or deny approval of the plan, the state reserves the right to impose its own regulations on a city or county. For this reason, it is very important that Tustin participate in the process. Specifically, the State's pre-emption could result in location of a storage or treatment facility in the city without the right to practice our current land use decision-making process. community DeveloPmen~ Oepar~mem Planning Commission Meeting Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan September 12, 1988 Page three In the next two months, the County will request each City to review the revised OCHWMP and draft EIR. If the plan is approved by 505 of the cities and the County Board of Supervisors, the plan will be sent to the State for final approval. The plan must be filed with the State prior to February 1, 1989. Should the State approve the plan, each City wtll be responsible for establishing their own hazardous waste string criteria and process. For this purpose, an amendment to the General Plan and a Ctty Ordinance will be required. The EIR discussed previously, will serve as a program EIR and would apply to this amendment and oral1 nance. The OCHWMP includes a model ordinance which contains all procedures and the siting criteria. Each city can use this model for preparation of their own ordinance. Staff has worked closely with the County on this model to ensure that it meet Tustin's requirements and spectal needs. Once all approvals have been granted by the State, the cittes wtll have 180 days to process an ordinance and General Plan Amendment. CONCLUS I ON: This report is an update on the activities that staff have been involved in' regarding the OCHWMP. In the very near future, the Planning Commission can expect to see the draft OCHWMP and EIR for review and comment. L~ul~a Cay P~Ckul:g Seni or P1 anner ~hristide A. Shingle~on Director of Community Development LCP- CAS- ts Corn rnunity DeveloPment Department Report to the Planning Commission ITEM NO. '8 DATE: SEPTF. J~BER 12, 1988 TO: FROM: SUBdE CT: PLANNZNG COM#! SSION COlleNlYf DEVELO~ENT DEPARTMENT REVIEW OF CONOITZONS PLACED ON USE PERMITS AND VARZANCES RECOI~ENDATION: It is recommended that the Planntng Comm¶ssfon review and input on alternative approaches for reviewing conditions of approval on dlscretionary projects and Instruct staff to draft an appropriate polfcy resolution. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSZS: As part of 1ts review of the* CommUnity Development Department's 1988 Work Program, the Planning Commission expressed its deslre to implement a system of reviewing dl screttonary projects previously approved by the Planning Commission. Specifically, the'Commission was interested in reviewing previously approved Use Permits and Variances to ensure that the original conditions of approval on individual projects were being met. This was also an informational item discussed by the Commission wtth the City Council at their last jotnt workshop. Appropriately, staff have looked tnto a vartety of methods or procedures which could ensure compliance with conditions of approval on these types of projects. A survey of techniques used by other cities in California (primarily Orange County) was conducted, the results of which are contained in £xhibtt A attached to this report. The following ts a description and analysis of the current program and possible approaches staff could bring back to the Planning Commission for formal implementation. ® Current Review Procedures: The Community Development Department staff review projects for conformance to:' conditions of approval through the structural plan check process. Final certification that conditions have been met would be done at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested and the project planner inspects the site. No further compliance checks are made unless complaints are received by the Department. This process is also used by a majority of the cities surveyed. Community Development Department Planning Commission Report Review of Conditions Placed on Use Permits and Variances September 12, 1988 Page two 2. Conditional Review or Restricted Time Limit on Permits' This approach would be ~establiShed at the l~ime-a Use Permi~ o~ Variance is approved by the Commission. As a condition of approval, the applicant would be required to reapply to renew the permit at a preset time, such as one or two years from the original date of approval. Another option, as was used in the Plaza La Fayette parking variance, is that when problems arise within a specified time period as determined as a condition of approval on the project, additional mitigation conditions could be triggered or the application could be brought back to the Commission for additional review. Use of this type of approach can be time consuming if used for all discretionary actions since all projects would eventually come back to the Commission again and again. A manual tickler or computerized system would be established and would require constant staff review. Additionally, reftling an application is costly to the applicant and not appropriate for all types of applications, particularily larger projects. However, this approach is appropriate for sensitive uses such as parking variances where the total impact of the use or variance granted can not be established at the time of permit approval. Implementation of this program is discussed in a later section of this report. ® Regular Monitoring to Ensure. Compliance: This approach can be established through the use of a standard operating procedure whereby staff automatically reviews all permits for compliance with original conditions of approval. The Planning Commission could choose to establish a pre-set (annual, bi-annual) or varied time frame for review. No specific changes to the conditions of approval for discretionary actions would be required. The amount of staff time devoted to the implementation of this approach could be significant depending upon the time lines adopted by the Planning Commission, especially if all previously issued permits are included in this review process. Additionally site inspections and enforcement actions could require considerable code enforcement administration. Although program i above would not require implementation actions, programs 2 and 3 would need some type of department procedure to establish a work format. Both programs 2 and 3 could use any of the three implementation measures described in detail below. 1. Manual System' Should the Commission choose to adopt program 2 or 3, or a ~mbination of both, some form of tickler system would have to be created to guarantee that the applicant was meeting the established requirements. Staff could create a manually operated tickler file for notifying Corn rnunity DeveloPment Department -'~ I i i Planning Commission Report Review of Conditions Placed on Use Permits and Variances September 12, 1988 Page three applicants that an in-house review must be conducted (program 3). A manual system would require constant attention. 2. Computerized System: Implementation of a regular or annual review program can also be ultimately phased into a computerized format whereby all (previously approved and new) permits can be reviewed. This procedure would be implemented through the use of a computerized tickler system for regular review of all permits on file. The program could pick up all previously approved and new permits by use of a computer program which prepares a monthly report. This report would be used by Code Enforcement staff to set up inspections of the permits which are scheduled for their review. Since additional computer training and possible software would likely be need and have to be budgeted for this type of effort, this approach would need to be phased. The utlimate goal of the Community Development Department is to establish such a system, however,-this is a very lengthly and detailed process. This computerized review procedure can be implemented once the system is in operati on. 3. Agreement by Applicant: ~ This type of prodedure could be established as a condition of approval whereby the applicant agrees to annually file a letteh with the City every year with their Business License renewal or at some other specified period. The letter would state those actions the applicant has taken over the previous year to maintain compliance with the conditions of approval. This process could be used for the less sensitive uses which may not need an annual or bi-annual permit renewal. However, projects which are of a sentitive nature could be conditioned to also require a clause that states "if problems should arise, the Director of Community Development may require the permit to be reviewed by the Planning Commission". The problems would be in areas identified in the conditions of approval for items such as noise, parking and other nuisances which could be related to a specific project. The approach could then be inclusive and would require a modification to the Business License computer program if there was a desire to automate the tracking system. Additional staff time to review conformance wi th conditions of approval would be necessary to maintain the system. However, the applicant would not have to file a new application or the Planning Commission hold a hearing unless conditions are not satisfactorily complied with. · Com reunify DeveloPment Department ~>lannlng Commission Report Review of Conditions Placed on Use Permits and Variances September 12, 1988 Page four CONCLUSION: Thts report reviews the various techniques which staff could implement for annual permit review. The cholces range from the "do-nothing" approach to an annual review or a conditional review process. With Planning Commission input, staff would be prepared to draft an appropriate poltcy resolution that could be brought back at a future meeting defining on an approach which establishes different conditions whtch can be applied to specific types of discretionary applications. The use of the different conditions would be determined upon the "sensitiveness" of the permit or nature of the use applted for. Uaura ~ay-~i(~k/u~ - Senior Planner . L~Y L CP: CAS: ts Attachment: Exhibit A C~rlStihe A. Shingleton/~ Director of Community ~e~velopment Corn munity Development Department EXHIBIT A SURVEY RESULTS: REVIEW OF CONDITIONS 'OF ApPROVAL FOR DISCRETIONARY PERMITS CITY Anaheim Brea Buena Park ~ta Mesa Cypress Fountain Valley Fullerton Huntington Beach Irvine Laguna Beach La Habra ~ Palma Los Alamitos TECHNIQUE/PROCEDURE USED Staff review through plan check and final inspection. Sensitive uses are conditioned for annual or biannual renewal of application. A manual tickler file is used for these annual reviews, however a geo- based computer system is being implemented in the near future. Staff review through plan check and final inspection. Ail other reviews done on a complaint basis only. Same as Anaheim. However, the manual tickler system will remain in place for some time. Same as Buena Park. Same as Brea. Same as Buena Park. Same as Anaheim. Same as Buena Park. Planner confirms compliance with conditions of approval in plan check process prior to issuance of Building Permits and/or Certificate of Occupancy. Also, permits of a sensitive nature are conditioned for an annual or biannual renewal by the applicant. Conditions are checked through plan check and final inspection. Certain projects require special review which is coordinated through Business License renewals. Conditions of approval are reviewed only when a complaint is received. Same as Buena Park. Same as Buena Park. Newport Beach Same as Anaheim. Exhibit A --ge 2 Placentia San Clemente San Juan Capistrano Seal Beach Stanton Westminster Palo Alto ng Beach Same as La Habra. Same as La Habra.. Same as Irvine. Code Enforcement Staff conduct area inspections and they notify each permit holder that the inspection will be conducted. A manual tickler system is used to keep track of permits and conditions by project/inspection area. Same as Buena Park. Same as Buena Park, except that use of annual reviews is applied to sensitive uses only, not all applications. Same as La Habra. Use a computerized (geo-based) tickler system that sends a form letter to the permitee to advise them that the City will conduct an inspection to determine compliance with conditions of approval. This agency uses a 40 person Code Enforcement staff for inspections. _~eport to the Planning Commission Item No. 9 .. DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 SUBJECT' REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - SEPTEMBER 6, 1988 Oral presentation. o. ef Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - September 6, 1988 Community Development Department ACTION AGENDA OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 300 CENTENNIAL WAY SEPTENBER 6, 1988 7:00 P.M. 7:02 I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ALL PRESENT ROLL CALL PRESENTED III. PROCLAMATION - NATIONAL "DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION" (D.A.R.E.) DAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1988 JERI. BERES IV. PUBLIC INPUT PRESENTED A LETTER ANI) A PETITION WI1}I 22 SIGNATURES REQUESTING A STREET LIGHT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HOLLYHOCI( AND HELP IN CONTROLLING SPEEDING CARS ON BROOKSHIRE. PRESCOTT ASKED FOR A REPORT FRON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR THE NEXT MEETING. V. CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVED 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 15, 1988, REGULAR MEETING APPROVED 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,732,374.13 RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $175,727.80 RE '"~.TED 3. DENNIS WILLIAMS V. CITY OF TUSTIN, CLAIM NO. 88-25 Reject claimant's Application to File a Late Claim as recommended by the City Attorney. ADOPTED RESOLUTION 88-94 4. RESOLUTION NO. 88-94 -A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR' CONSTRUCTION OF TUSTIN RANCH NEIGHBORHOOD PARK TRACT NO. 12345 Adopt Resolution No. 88-94 approving plans and specifications for the. Tustin Ranch Neighborhood Park Tract No. 12345 and authorize staff to advertise for bids as recommended by the Community Services Department. ADOPTED RESOLUTION 88-99 5. RESOLUTI.ON NO. 88-99 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ARROYO AVENUE WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT BETWEEN SKYLINE AND LA LOMA Adopt Resol uti on No. 88-99 approving the plans and specifications for subject project and directing the City Clerk to advertise for bi ds as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. APPROVED STAFF RECOt~IE~IDATION AL~ ~ ED RESOLUTION 88-100 6. EQUIPMENT PURCHASE REQUEST Authorize sol icitation of proposals for the purchase of replacement and new equipment authorized in the 1988-89 Fiscal Budget as recommended by the Public Works Department/Fi eld Services Division. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 88-100 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN , CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (WALNUT STREET, ORANGE STREET, PROSPECT AVENUE, AND LOCKWOOD PLACE WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS ) CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE I ~-6-88 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 88-101 8. RESOLUTION NO. 88-101 - A RESOLUTION'OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION, FEDERAL AID PROJECT HES-O00S(241), TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS Adopt Resolution 88-101 accepting said work and authorizing the recordation of the Notice of Completion as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. APPROVED STAFF RECONNENOATI ON 9. GRANT OF EASEMENT TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON .COMPANY FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE TO THE NITRATE TREATMENT PLANT · Approve a grant of easement to the Southern California Edison Conpany for electric service to the nitrate treatment plant and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the easement as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. APPROVED STAFF 10. TAC-1 REQUEST RECO~llENDATION Create a new line item in the 1988-89 Non-Departmental Budget AND ~ELEN EDGAR TO and appropriate $2,000 for the purpose of mai*ntaining the TAC-1 REPORT BACK ON W~EN THEY con~nunity service effort for senior adults in Tustin as CAN INPLENENT THE PROGRAJ~ recommended by the Administrative Services Department. FOR AJ.L SENIORS. 11. RESOLUTION NO. 88-96 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ADOPTED OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 87-412 RESOLUTION NO. 88-96 Approve Final Parcel Map 87-412 by the adoption of Resolution No. 88-96 as recommended by the Community Development Department. ,ECO ~VED STAFF lINE ND AT I ON 12. CONSULTANT AGREEMENT FOR JAMBOREE ROAD CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING Authorize the execution of a consultant agreement with Hunsaker and Associates for the construction surveying services along Jamboree Road between Tustin Ranch Road and Chapman Avenue, subject to final approval by the City Attorney, as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. ADOPTED RESOLUTION 88-98 13. RESOLUTION NO. 88-98 -A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13274, FOR THE TUSTIN MARKET PLACE Adopt Resolution No. 88-98, approving the proposed amendments to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 13274 as recommended by the Community Development Department. APPROVED STAFF RECO~ENDATION 14. COMMUNICATIONS MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Authorize the execution of said agreefnent with the County of Orange as recommended by the Police Department. NONE NONE VI. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None VII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None VIII. OLD BUSINESS MOTION FAILED THAT 1. STATUS REPORT - JWA/CRAS/ASC THr CITY ACQUIRE NOISE M DRING EQUIPMENT. Update on the John Wayne Airport Noise Monitoring Program, Coalition RE~-~LVED AND FILED REPORT for a Responsible Airport Solution (CRAS) and Airport Site Coalition (ASC). Recommendation: Receive and file subject report as recommended by the Community Development Department. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 2 9-6-88 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 88-97 RECE I VED AND FILED RL:; '/ED A& ..... ~.LED CONT ! NUE O TO 9/19/88 4 VOTES FOR S~EEN AND I VOTE FOR PEDERSON RESOCUTION NO. 88-97, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $81,400,000 CITY OF TUSTIN ASSESSMENT OISTRICT NO. 86-2 LIMITED OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS The adoption of this resolution is the final approval sCep prior to the issuance of $81,400,000 of Improvement Bonds, the proceeds of which will be used to provide the Infrastructure Improvements as described in the Engineers Report approved by the City Council. Recommendation- Adopl~ the fbll6win~ resolution as recommended by the Finance IDepartment: RESOLUTION NO. 88-97 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $81,¢00,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF CITY OF TUSTIN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 86-2 LIMITED OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN OTHER RELATED MATTERS 3. TUSTIN RANCH DISCOUNT GOLF COURSE FEES This report is in response to an inquiry by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy requesting that the Irvine Co. consider discount green fees for City residents at the Tustin Ranch Golf Course. Recommendation: Receive and file subject report as recommended by the Community Development Department. 4. DENSITY BONUS POLICY At the meeting of August 15, 1988, Council directed staff to research and provide information on financial incentives of equivalent financial value as' an alternative to granting actual density bonuses. Recommendation: Receive and file subject report as recommended by the Community Development Department. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMITTEE At their regular meeting of August 15, 1988, the City Council continued this item and directed staff to verify the address of residence for Peggy Kisielius, an applicant for the Advisory Commi tree. Recommendation: Continue this item to the meeting of September 19, 1988, as recommended by the Community Development Department. 6. APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSIONER The following applicants are to be interviewed at 5:00 p.m. on September 6, 1'988: Edmund F. Shaheen; Edward M. Tansey, Sr.; and H. Porter Wynn. Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 3 9-6-88 IX. NEW BUS1NESS 1. REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVALS This is a consolidation of requests which have been received from various property owners regarding trees wi thin the publ i c-ri ght-of-way. APPROVED STAFF Recommendation: APprove tree removals at the following locations: RECO~NDATION AND ll4E 'liJ6Z' Amaganset, 14312 Heatherfield, 148 Mt. View, 1692 Heather, REPLACEMENT OF CA~ROTWOOD 14641 Dartmouth (at property owner's expense), 14631 Dartmouth (at TREES WITH MAGNOLIA TREES property owner's expense), 14651 Dartmouth (at property owner's expense), 2322 Figtree, 17382 Vinewood, 17391 Parker, 1751 Lance, 17472 Parker, 17372 Roseleaf, 14702 Brookline, 2321 Figtree, 17432 Parker, 14651 Mimosa, 17621 Amaganset, 2342 Anatree, 14022 Woodlawn, and 1782 Lance as recommended by the Public Works Department/Field Services Division. DENIED Recommendation: Deny property owners' requests for tree removal at the fol]owilll'ng locations: 1761 Andrews, 1781 Andrews, 1782 Andrews, 1792 Andrews, 1801 Andrews, 1802 Andrews, 13622 Falmouth and 13732 Falmouth as recommended by the Public Works Department/Fi eld Services Division. AW~U~DED CONTP. ACT TO 2. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS ON GREEN SULLY MILLER CONTRACTING VALLEY, UTT DRIVE, AND PUBLIC ALLEY SOUTH OF BONITA STREET CO.ANY AND APPROVED F = RECO~4ENDATION The bids for this project were opened on August 23, 1988. The low .... bid is $200,150.80. Recommendation: Award contract for subject project to Sully Miller Con.tracting Co. in the amount of $200,150.80, and allocate $35,500.00 from the Water Fund Enterprises account to cover .cost of required water main improvements on Green Valley Drive as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. APPROVED STAFF RECOl~ENDATION 3. AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF KITCHEN EQUIPMENT - TUSTIN AREA SENIOR CENTER At the August 1, 1988 meeting, the City Council authorized bi ds for kitchen equipment for the Senior Center. The provision of the equipment was not included in the construction contract as a cost efficiency. Recommendation' Authorize the purchase of kitchen equipment for the Tustin Area Senior Center in the amount of $24,694.88 from Tobias Design, Inc., of Fullerton. APPROVED STAFF RECO~ENDATION 4. AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF DONOR RECOGNITION/FOUNDERS' WALL AND DEDICATION PLAQUES - TUSTIN AREA SENIOR CENTER Recommendation' Authorize the purchase of two bronze cast plaques for the T'ustin Area Senior Center in the amount of $3,263.02 from La Haye Bronze, Inc., of Corona. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 4 9-6-88 .AGENDIZE FOR A ~ETING 5. TEN PERCENT REDUCTION OF WATER SURCHARGE FEE AFTER THE ELECTION WITH A ~.A, RLY DEFINED Councilman Prescott requested that this item be agendized. Ik ,'HENT OF DEBT AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE RATES Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council. ~ X. REPORTS RATIFIED 1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA- AUGUST 29, 1988 All actions of the Planning Commission beco'me final unless appealed by the City Council or member of the public. Recommendation: Ratify the Planning Commission Action Agenda of August ~11, i [~. RE CE I VED AND FILED 2. INVESTMENT SCHEDULE AS OF JULY 31, 1988 Recommendation: Receive and file investment schedule as of July 31, ~, as recommended by the Finance Department. RECE I VED AND FILED 3. TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT WALNUT AVENUE AND CHERRYWOOD LANE This report is in response to a City Council inquiry on the traffic signal modification at the intersection of Walnut Avenue and Cherrywood Lane. Recommendation: Receive and file subject report as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. CONFIRNED AND RECEIVED AND FILED 4. ON-STREET PARKING ON FIRST STREET At a previous meeting, the City Council requested staff to investigate the feasibility of providing additional on-street parking along the southerly side of First Street, westerly of Centenni al Way. Recommendation: Confirm that' the southerly side of First Street, westerly of Centennial Way was the desired location for additional on-street parking. In the event this location is confirmed, then receive and file subject report as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineeri ng Di vlsi on. RECE I VED ArID FILED 5. SANTA CLARA AVENUE TRAFFIC CONCERN At a previous City Council meeting, Mrs. Helen Edgar raised a concern regarding parked vehicles within the bicycle lanes along Santa Clara Avenue. Recommendation: Receive and file subject report as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. ik ,VED AND FILED 6. SEVENTEENTH STREET TRAFFIC CONCERNS, RTE. 55 FREEWAY TO YORBA STREET ( NORTH ) At a previous City Council meeting, Mrs. Helen Edgar raised a concern regarding the traffic conditions along Seventeenth Street between the Route 5·5 Freeway and Yorba Street (North'). CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 5 9-6-88 RE CE 1 VED AND FILED 7. CLARIFICATION REGARDING SHARED HOUSING PROGRAM At the previous meeting, Councilman Kelly requested clarification regarding a notice on the City of Tustin water service statement. .. . . Recommendation: Receive and file subject report as recommended by the Administrative Services Department. EDGAR REQUESTED XI. OTHER BUSINESS THAT THE TRAFFIC AT BRYAN AND FAR~4INGTON BE ANALYZED. .' EOGAR REQUESTED A JOINT SESSION WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION CO~ISSION REGARDING GDALS. ROYL~EN W~ITE SAID AN ORIENTATION SESSION WAS SET FOR SEPTEMBER 22~ AND THE FIRST REGULAR MEETING WOULD BE IN OCTOBER. EDGAR SUGGESTED THAT THE COUNCIL COULD ~EET WITH THEM SOMETIME IN NOVEMBER TO S~4ARE COF~40N g)ALS. COUNCIL (~)NCURRED TO AGENDIZE FOR THE NEXT MEETING POSSIBLE OPTIONS TO BENEFIT THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB AND W~AT OUR CO~WlITMENT WDULD BE. HOESTEREY ASKED FOR A REPORT REGARDING DRUNK PATROL TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS AND CO~4ENDED THE POLICE DEPT. RECESSED TO XII. CLOSED SESSION THESE CLOSED SESSIONS 1. Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to the authority of Government Code Section 54956.8 to confer with the City Manager and City Attorney and give instructions to the City's negotiator regarding negotiations with James Matt Nisson and Peggy Nisson ~-~ concerning acquisition of a portion of the real property at Red Hill Avenue and Walnut Avenue for additional street right-of-way. 2. Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to confer with the City Manager and City Attorney regarding pending litigation which has been initiated formally and to which the City is a party. The title of the litigation is North Tustin Homeowners Corporation, et al. v. City of Tustin, Nos. 53-29-58 and 53-32-27, Orange County Superior Court. 9:07 XIII. ADJOURNMENT - To a Special Meeting on Monday, September 12, 1988, at 6:00 p.m., at the McCharles House with the Tustin Unified School District Board of Education, and then to the next Regular Meeting on Monday, September 19, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 6 9-6-88 9:07 ALL PRESENT APPROVED le APPROVED AOOPTED RESOLUTION NO. ROA 88-12 Be APPROVED STAFF 6. RECO~ENDATION APPROVED STAFF 7. RECO)~MENDATION ACTION"'~k~ENDA OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR ~EETING OF THE llJSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SEPTEMBER 6, 1988 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 15, 1988, REGULAR MEETING Recommendation: Approve Minutes. i im APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,515.62 Recon~endation: Approval of subject demands in the amount of $13,515.62 as recommended by the Finance Department. MINUTES OF CLOSED SESSIONS The following Resolution No. RDA 88-12 follows the 'form of the resolution adopted by the City Council for minutes and tape recordings of meetings. It would .appear appropriate to have a similar procedure for closed meetings of the Redevelopment Agency. Recommendation: Adopt the following Resolution as recommended by the City Attorney' RESOLUTION NO. RDA 88-12 - A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RELATIVE TO MINUTES OF CLOSED SESSIONS OF THE AGENCY EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE WITH CHAMPION DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND NEWPORT AVENUE .. There has been interest expressed over the last several years with the potential development of three separate parcels at the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and Main Street in the South Central Redevelopment Area. Recommendation' Approve the Exclusive Agreement to Njgotiate with Champion Development Company as recommended by the Community Development Department. EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE WITH CMS DEVELOPMENT - PROPERTY IN VICINITY OF NEWPORT AVENUE AND SANTA ANA (I-5) FREEWAY To assist in future site acquisition and to reduce potential speculation, CMS Development is requesting that the Agency enter into a 180-day exclusive agreement to negotiate with them for development of the site. Recommendation' Approve the Exclusive Agreement'to Negotiate with CMS Development Co. as recommended by the Community Development Department. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA PAGE 1 SEPTEMBER 6, 1988 RECESSED TO CLOSED SESSION 9:11 8. CLOS~-U SESSION Closed Session of the Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to confer with the City Manager and City A.~torney regarding pending litigation which has been initiated formally and to which the City is a party. The title of the litigation is Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency v. Little Caesar Enterprises, et al. Case No. 46-02-70, Orange County Superior Court. 9. ADJOURNMENT - To the n~xt Regular Meeting 'on Monday, September 19, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA PAGE 2 SEPTEMBER 6, 1988