HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 08-18-86- I ~J~-' ACTION AGENDA
TUST'~N PLANNING COI~U'SSION
REGULAR I~:ETING
AUGUST 11, 1986
RE PORTS
NO. 1
8-18-86
CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m., City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL: Present: Puckett, Baker, Le Jeune, Pontious,
Absent: Wetl
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.)
Minutes of July 28, 1986 Planning Commission Meeting.
Commissioner Baker moved, LeOeune second to approve the Consent Calendar.
carrled 4-0.
)4orion
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Appli cant:
Locati on:
Request:
USE PERMIT 86-19
Ronnie and Dina Lee
14311 Newport Avenue
Authorization to operate a Palm Reading business
Jeff Davis, Associate Planner
Presentation:
Chairman Puckett opened the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
speak, he closed the hearing at 7:42 p.m.
Seeing no one wishing to
Commission discussion ensued with questions of staff and Suzanne Atktns regarding
signage, proximity to R-1 and R-3 residential zones, and limits imposed by Ordinance
No. 960.
Planntng Commission Action Agenda
August [1, [986
Page two
Chairman Puckett explained his opposition to this Use Permit is due to the proximity
to residential areas and wants to adhere to the limits imposed by Ordiance No. 960.
Chairman Puckettmoved denial of Use Permit 86-[9. The motion died for lack of a
second.
C~Isstoner Le Jeune moved, Baker second to approve Use Permit 86-19 by the adoption
of Resolution 2351. Motlon carrted 3-1, Puckett opposed.
3. USE PERMIT 86-24
Applicant: Frank Wu on behalf of Cal Pac Development
Location: 14572 - 14592 Holt Avenue
Request: To construct 19 townhomes in accordance with Specific Plan No.
6.
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Assistant Planner
Chairman Puckett opened the public hearing at 8:00 p.m.
speak, he closed the hearing at 8:01 p.m.
Seeing no one wishing to
Commission discussion ensued with questions of staff regarding entry to the
recreation area, parking and homeowner association.
Commissioner Baker requested item 3 in Exhibit "A" to Resolution 2350 be corrected to
reflect "or" instead of "of".
C~sstomer Ponttous moved, LeJeune second to approve Use Permit 86-24 by the
adoption of Resolution No. 2350. Motion carried 4-0.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
4. Construction Status in Communitg
Presentation: Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
Commission discussion and concurrence is for a tour and dinner break prior to the
September 22, 1986 Co, mission meeting.
The Cmmtsston also requested monthly status reports on construction projects.
5. Sign Review - Tustin French Quarter Pavilion
Presentation: Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
Cc_~__lsstoner Baker moved, LeJeune second to approve exposed neon signage for tenants
~f the Tusttn Pavilion Cafe building. L.~tton carried 4-0.
Planning Commission Actionn Agency
August 11, 1986
page three
6. Design Revtew Amendment - Tusttn French Quarter Pavlllon
Presentation: Laura Ptckup, Assistant Planner
Commissioner Ledeune moved, Ponttous second to deny hot ptnk neon trtm on the
Tusttn Pavtllon Cafe building. Norton carrted 4-0.
STAFF CONCERNS
7. REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS AUGUST 4, 1986.
8. INFORMATION ITEM - PENDING PUBLIC HEARING ON TENTATIVE TRACT 12763, BREN CO.
TOWNHOMES
9. STATUS OF AINSLIE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL.
Staff recommended the Commission amend the zoning regulation for certain properties
fronting on Sixth Street between B and Pacific.
Commissioner Ponttous moved, Legeune second to authorize staff to advertise for a
publlc hearing to amend the zoning regulation for certatn properties fronting on
Sixth Street between B and Pactftc. Motlon carrted 3-1, Baker opposed.
CONCERNS
Commissioner Le Jeune expressed concern with temporary banners around town and
requested staff forward a copy of the city's policy to him.
Commtssionner Baker questioned the status of the development agreement on East Tustin
and requested staff forward a copy to the Commission for review prior to
consideration.
Commissioner Baker questioned the status on acquisition of the car wash property.
Commissioner Ponttous requested staff guidelines on neon signage. Commissioner
LeJeune would like the guidelines to contain use inside of windows and whether they
blink.
Commissioner Baker expressed concern if our ordinance regulating palm reading is
adequate.
AD~OURI~ENT
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Baker second to adjourn to the next regularly scheduled
Planntng Coamdsslon meeting. Motion carried 4-0.
AGENDA
TUSTIN PLANNING COFgqlSSIOll
REGULAR HEEi'ING
AUGUST 11, 1986
CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m., City Counctl Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATXON
ROLL CALL: Puckett, Wet1, 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 July 28, 1986 Planning Commission Meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. USE PERMIT 86-19
Applicant: Ronnie and Dina Lee
Location: 14311 Newport Avenue
Request: Authorization to operate a Palm Reading business
Presentation: Jeff Davis, Associate Planner
3. USE PERMIT 86-24
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Frank Wu on behalf of Cal Pac Development
14572 - 14592 Holt Avenue
To construct 19 townhomes in accordance with Specific Plan No.
6.
Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Assistant Planner
Planning Commission Agenda
August 11, 1986
Page t~o
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEY BUSINESS
4. Construction Status in Community
Presentation: Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
5. Sign Review - Tustin French Quarter Pavilion
Presentation: Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
6. Design Revtew Amendment - Tusttn French Quarter Pavilion
Presentation: Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
STAFF CONCERNS
7. REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS AUGUST 4, 1986.
8. INFORMATION ITEM - PENDING PUBLIC HEARING ON TENTATIVE TRACT 12763, BREN CO.
TOWNHOMES
COMMISSIO# CONCERNS
ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
MZNUTES
TUSTTN PLANNTNG COll4TSSTON
REGULAR ~.ETT NG
,)ULY 28, 1986
~_- _- -__-
CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m., Ctty Counctl Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGZAIICE/ZNVOCATION
ROLL CALL: Puckett, Wet1, Baker, Le 0eune, Pontlous,
PUBLIC CONCERNS:
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of ~uly 14, 1986 Planntng Commission Meeting.
Commissioner Well moved, Baker second to approve the Consent Calendar.
carried 5-0.
Motion
PUBLTC HEARTNGS
2. USE PERMIT 86-22
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
Mr. Ty Pak
Authorization for off-stte beer and wtne
wtth a proposed flower shop
646 E. 1st Street
sales tn conjunction
Presentation:
Laura Ptckup, Assistant Planner
Commission discussion ensued concerning the age requirements for supervision at the
store, dellvery people and people receiving the alcohol/bouquet.
Chairman Puckett opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to
speak, he closed the. hearing at 7:37 p.m.
Commissioner Wetl moved,' Baker second to approve Use Permit 86-22 by the adoption of
Resolution No. 2347 with an addition at II. B. to require 21 year old supervision at
all times. Motion carried 5-0.
Planning Commission Mint
July 28, 1986
page two
3. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12719 AND DESIGN REVIEW 86-12
Applicant:
Request:
The Bren Company
To subdivide creating 218 single family detached residential
units.
Locati on:
Property bounded by Browning Avenue, E1 Camino Real and
Parkcenter Drive.
Presentation:
Jeffrey S. Davis, Associate Planner
Commission discussed ensued with questions and answers of staff concerning, the need
for private streets, sound attenuation for units near the freeway, 20' driveway
requirement and the development of the vacant strip along Browning.
Chairman Puckett opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. Ronda Heacock, The Bren
Company, presented a slide presentation and answered Commission questions regarding
the size of trees, lighting along the paseo, solar heating in the pool and parking in
front of the recreation area.
Seeing no one further wishing to speak, Chairman Puckett closed the public hearing at
8:07 p.m.
Commissioner Well moved, Pontious second to recommend to City Council approval of
Tentative Tract Map 12719. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Wetl moved, Le Jeune
second to approve Design Review 86-12 by the adoption of Resolution 2349 with an
a--d-d-(~lon B. 5. to add plumbing for future solar heating at the pool. Motion carried
5~0.
Pursuant to staff's request the Commission considered the Variance 86-4 before
Tentative Tract Map 12833.
5. VARIANCE 86-4
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
Mark Atnslte
Authorization to vary with the lot size requirement in order to
develop eight single family homes
405, 415 and 425 Sixth Street
Presentation:
Jeffrey S. Davis, Associate Planner
Chairman Puckett opened the public hearing on both Variance 86-4 and Tentative Tract
Map 12833 for consideration at 'the same time at 8:25 p.m. The following people
spoke:
Mark Atnslte, applicant, explained the problems with lot size and configuration.
Richard Vtnin~, 440 W. Main, opposed because this project will be the trend setter
for the rest of the street.
John Sauers, 515 S. Pactftc, opposed due to sub standard lot size and parking
problems.
Barbara Cox, 450-1/2 South "B" St., opposed due to inadequate access for fire and
trash.
Planning Commission Mtnu
July 28, 1986
page three
Jack Mason, 455 W. 6th, opposed due to the density and traffic problems.
Mr. and Mrs. Don Smith, 470 S. Pacific, submitted a letter in favor of the proposed
plan.
Seeing no one further wishing to speak, Chairman Puckett closed the hearing at 8:45
p.m.
Commission discussion ensued with questions and answers of Suzanne Atkins concerning
CC&R's regulating parking, fire hazards, and lot configuration.
Commissioner Wetl moved, LeJeune second to continue Variance 86-4 to September 8,
1986. Motion carried 5-0.
4. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12833
Applicant: Mark Ainslte
Request: To subdivide the proposed project into eight (8) separate lots.
Location: 405, 415 and 425 Sixth Street
Presentation: Jeffrey S. Davis, Associate Planner
Commissioner Well moved, LeJeune second to continue Tentative Tract Map 12833 to
September 8, 1986. Motion carrted'5-O.
Chairman Puckett called for a 5 minute recess at 9:05 p.m. to allow part of the
audience to leave. Reconvened at g:lO p.m.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. VARIANCE NO. 86-5
Applicant: Integrated Sign Associates on behalf of Home Federal Savings &
Loan
Request: Authorization to vary with the Tusttn Sign Ordinance as
pertains to tenant Identification and allowable sign area.
Location: 18231 Irvtne Blvd.
Presentation: Jeffrey S. Darts, Associate Planner
Chaiwflan Puckett opened the public heartng at 9:17 p.m. The following people spoke:
Ron Jenktns, Home Federal, explained that the sign ts to identify that they have an
ATM.
Curt Bauer, Integratod Signs, proposed to reduce the logo on the south elevation to
24"; reduce the sign to
Robert Atari, attorney, presented a sltde presentation of sign exceptions the
Commission has made tn the past and explained there is a hardship due to the building
location.
Seeing no one further wishing to speak, Chairman Puckett closed the hearing at 9:35
p.m.
Planning Commission Mint
July 28, 1986
page four
Pursuant to Rob Balen's suggestion, applican.t withdrew the' variance request and
submitted a request for a sign code exception.
Commissioner Weil moved, LeJeune second to accept the applicant's request to withdraw
Variance 86-5. Motion carried 4-0, Baker abstained.
Commissioner Well moved, Pontious second to accept the new sign as proposed with the
reduced logo which does not exceed the sign code of 64 square feet and deletion of
one of the originally proposed signs on the west side. Motion carried 4-0, Baker
abstained.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
STAFF' CONCERNS
7. DEPARTMENT STATUS ON AUTO CENTER FREEWAY SIGN
Presentatt on: Laura Pi ckup, Assistant P1 anner
8. REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS JULY 21, 1986
COI~I$$ION CONCERNS
Commissioner LeJeune expressed concern over the elimination of the bike lane on
Walnut Avenue in the industrial area. Well explained the Council eliminated the
lanes to allow the traffic to move more safely.
Commissioner Wetl expressed concern over the Tusttn Garage being used for storage and
a warehouse.
AD~IOURI~ENT
Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Wet1 second to adjourn at 10:00 p.m. to the next
regularly scheduled 'Planning Commission meeting. Morton carried 5-0.
CHARLES E. PUCKETT, CHAIRMAN
DONNA ORR, RECORDING SECRETARY
Planning Commission
DATE:
SUB4ECT:
AUGUST 11, 1986
OSE PEI~IT 86-19
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
RONNIE AgO DINA LEE
5675 FRANKLIN AVENUE
LOS ANGELES, CA 90028
14311 NEgPORT BLVD.
RETAIL COf~RCIAL (C-1)
ENYIROI~ENTAL
STATUS:
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
REQUEST: AUTIIORIZATION TO OPERATE A PALM READING BUSINESS AT THE
SUBJECT ADDRESS
RECOI~EliDED ACTION:
That the Commission approve Use Permit No. 86-19 subject to conditions and
findings contained In Resolution No. 2351.
SUMMARY:
Pursuant to recently adopted Ordinance No. 960, Palm Reading or Fortune Telling
businesses may be authorized tn the C-1 district subject to a Conditional Use
Permit.
In conjunction wtth the use permtt certain spectftc ftndtngs must be made by the
Commission in either approving or denying businesses regulated by Ordinance No.
960.
Use Permit Application No. 86-19 contains all necessary information and the
applicants meet all minimum requirements. However, the proposed site is within
500 feet of property zoned for residential use necessitating special
consideration of the Commission. In reviewing the circumstances peculiar to the
subject site, staff considers location, traffic counts, arterial roadways, and
the fact that the entry point to the nearest single family zoned properties
is more than 700 feet away, as grounds to approve the subject request.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 960 provides that Fortune-Telling type businesses are authorized
in C-1 or C-2 zones subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The
Ordinance further provides that such uses should be at least 500 feet from
sensitive areas such as residential zones, churches and/or schools.
Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Fortune Telling
page two
However, this restriction may be lifted by the Commission if a determination is
made that the location of a proposed business will not be detrimental to the
public health and welfare. The site the applicant has chosen is within 500 feet
of residentially zoned property.
In addition to zoning' and distance requirements, individual applicants are
subject to background investigations and must post a surety bond in the amount
of $10,000. Background checks have been satisfactorily completed and the
proposed bond format has been approved by the City Attorney's office.
Finally, if all other applicable conditions are mat, Orfdinance No. 960 mandates
that:
"The Planning Commission shall approve the issuance of a permit if they
find:
1) All the information contained in the application and supporting data is
true.
2) The applicant has not, within the previous one (1) year been convicted
of any violation of this poart or any law relating to fraud or moral
turpitude.
3) The applicant appeared in person at the hearing.
4) The applicant agrees to abide by and comply with all conditions of the
permit and this part.
D[SCUSSIO#:
Eventhough the applicant has submitted all required documents
Ordinance qualifying for approval of a Conditional Use Permit,
distance from residentially zoned property must be addressed.
pursuant to
the issue of
As shown on the attached Exhibit "A", the center in which the proposed business
is to be located is within 500 feet of residential zones. However, given the
orientation of the storefront (onto arterial roadways); that the center is
effectively buffered from residential zones by other commercial properties; and,
the applicant is willing to limit hours of operation; the location of the
proposed business should not be detrimental to the public health and welfare.
Accordingly, it is recommended that Use Permit 86-19 be approved by the adoption
of Resolution No 2351 with all conditions contained therein.
S, ROBERT BALEN,
PLANNING CONSULTANT
JD:do
attach: Exhibit "A"
Community Development Department
~PM .
R3 .f.; ~-*~
1500 .~.
MHP,
R3~ - -.,
1750 .
R3
R3
:PC
~COMM
./
EXHIBIT "A"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
· 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2351
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, APPROVING USE PERMIT 86-19 AUTHORIZING
A PALM READING BUSINESS AT 14311 NEWPORT AVENUE
The Planning Commission of the City of Tusttn does hereby resolve as
follows:
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
That a proper application (Use Permit No. 86-19) has been filed
on behalf of Ronnte and Dina Lee requesting authorization to
operate a Palm Reading business at 14311 Newport Avenue.
B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said
application.
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:
That the commercial use is in compliance with the Tusttn'
Zoning Code and the Tustin Area General Plan.
e
That resulting from storefront orientation, center location
and surrounding commercially zoned properties, the proposed
use is adequately buffered from residential zones within
500 feet.
e
That the subject site is bounded by arterial roadways with
traffic counts in excess of 20,000 average daily trips
further emphasizing the commercial characteristics of the
immediate vicinity.
That hours of operation of the subject business shall be
restricted.
That all requirements of Tustin Ordinance No. 960 have been
met.
That
a.
the following mandatory findings have been determined:
All information contained in the application and
supporting data is presumed to be true.
The applicant has not within the previous one {1) year
been convicted of any violations listed in Section
3800 et. seq. of the City Code, nor of any law
relating to fraud or moral turpitude.
c. The applicant appeared in person at the hearing.
1
2
5
6
?
9
10
11
12
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
2~
25
26
27
28
Resolution rio. 235].
page two
Id. The applicant will agree to and comply with all
conditions of approval contained in this resolution.
De
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.
Proposed development shall be in accordance with the development
policies adopted by the City Council, Uniform Building Codes as
administered by the Building Official, Fire Code as administered
by the Orange County Fire Marshal and street improvement
requirements as administered by the City Engineer.
F. This project is categorically exempt from the requirements of
California Environmental Quality Act.
II.
The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use. Permit No.
86-19 to authorize a Palm Reading business at 14311 Newport Avenue
subject to the following conditions:
A. That hours of operation at the proposed location shall be from
8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
If at such time the applicant wishes to alter said hours, a
formal request to the Planning Commission must be submitted,
reviewed and approved.
That signing for the subject business shall comply with the
Tustin Sign Ordinance and the approved Master Sign Plan for the
subject center.
Ce
That all requirements of Section 3800 et. seq. of the Municipal
Code must be adhered to at all times. Any violations thereof
will be grounds for initiation of proceedings to consider
revocation of Use Permit 86-19.
De
That the Commission reserves the right to review operations at
the subject site at a public hearing within one year of date of
approval.
That the applicant will not'commence business until after an
"Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form is completed, signed and
returned to the Community Development Department.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the day of , 1986.
DONNA ORR, Recording Secretary
CHARLES E. PUCK£TT, CHairman
Planning Commission
DATE:
SUBgECT:
AUGUST 11, 1986
USE PERMIT 86-24
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER:
MR. FRANK WU ON BEHALF OF CAL PAC OEVELOPMENT
14151 NEWPORT AVENUE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
LOCATION:
ZONING:
14572-92 HOLT AVENUE
R-3-3000: MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIOENTIAL IN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
NO. 6 (ONE UNIT FOR EVERY 3,000 SQ. FT. OF LOT AREA)
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN FILED FOR THIS PROgECT.
TO CONSTRUCT NINETEEN NEW TONNHOUSE UNITS WITHIN THE AREA OF
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 6
RECOI~ENDED ACTION:
That the Planning Commission approve Use Permit No. 86-24 by the adoption of
Resolution No. 2350.
SUlelARY:
In 1981 the Planning Agency approved Specific Plan No. 6. The Specific Plan was
adopted to ensure orderly development of townhouse type units with an integral
circulation system.
At this time, the applicant is proposing to develop lots 6, 7 and 8 as shown in
the attachment of Exhibit A which includes the guidelines and requirements of
Specific Plan No. 6 along with a map calling out the lot numbers. Mr. Wu's
application includes the request to construct 19 townhouse units within an
overall lot size area of 60,400 square feet with a density of one unit for every
3,178 square feet of lot area. The minimum density requirement is one unit for
every 3,000 square feet, therefore the overall density of this particular
project is somewhat less than Specific Plan No. 6 allows.
Community Development Department
Planning Commfssion Report
Wu Townhouses
page
BACKGROUND:
Back in 1981 an original request to develop lots 5, 6 and 7 was processed by
Mr. Arnold Hamala. A Tentative Tract Map was approved for the project; this
tract map included the development of 20 townhouse units on lots 5,6 and 7 of
the Specific Plan. Unfortunately, due to problems with land acquisition Mr.
Hamala was only able to develop the first phase of 10 townhouse units on lot 5.
Since 1981 and the adoption of the Specific Plan, lots 6, 7 and 8 have remained
as single family residences. Mr. Wu has been fortunate to obtain these
properties and is proposing development of nineteen townhouse dwelling units on
all three parcels.
ANALYSIS:
In reviewing this particular request, certain items of interest are considered
by staff. These items include, site and parking requirements, set back
requirements, architectural design, circulation, common area ownership and
maintenance, and compatibility with adjoining properties. These items are
discussed further as follows:
Site and Parking Requirements:
According to Specific Plan No. 6 the only site requirement is that a minimum of
40% of the land area be maintained for private and common open space. Common
open space includes recreation areas, front landscape areas, landscape strips
along Holt Avenue and some areas which are paved for access including driveway
areas.
Other requirements specifically related to this particular site are parking
requirements. The minimum is the provision of one attached garage space and a
covered carport space. Mr. Wu is proposing to provide a two car garage for each
individual unit. Also, in order to prepare for guest parking Mr. Wu is
providing a 19' double wide driveway for each unit. This would allow for an
additional two parking spaces, therefore four parking spaces per unit have been
provided.
In this application, the drive width for the interior circulation pattern is
only 24' wide. All streets will have to be posted for fire lanes and no
on-street parking will be allowed. Staff considers that since four parking
spaces per unit have been provided that any needs for guest parking can be
provided on each individual lot and therefore on-street parking will not be
necessary. This is an option provided by the Specific Plan.
Setbacks
According to the Specific Plan certain setback requirements have been outlined.
These setbacks are: (1) from Holt Avenue a minimum of a 20' structural setback
shall be provided; (2) side yard setbacks will be a minimum of 5'; (3) the side
ard setback is. in accordance to a. ~inimum side yard setback of 5' from each
uilding and aojoining property; (4) the rear yard setback is in line with
Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Wu Townhouses
page three
a 15' structural setback from the E1Modena Flood Control Channel, therefore all
buildings shall be setback structurally 15' from the rear property line.
In this project, the southerly property line is also abutting the Tustin channel
which also has a minimum requirement of 15' structural setback. The site plan
provides for a minimum of a 20' setback along Holt Avenue. All side yard
setback requirements are the minimum 5'. The rear yard setback is the minimum
15' and the southerly structural setback is 15'. All of these requirements
according to the Specific Plan for structural setbacks, have been met and are
considered acceptable by staff. All development standards and site design
elements are outlined in the attached Development Review Summary. {Exhibit B)
Architectural Design
Specific Plan No. 6 has certain architectural design guidelines which shall be
imposed upon each of the townhouse buildings constructed within the area. These
requirements include the use of gabled roofs. The roofing material is to be of
a heavy textured dark material such as wood shake, shingle or thick butt
composition shingle. Mr. Wu's request includes the use of all gabled roofs and
a dark wood shake shingle in accordance with the plan.
The exterior materials and colors shall be of a horizontal wood siding with a
minimal use of plaster elements. Earth tones are also encouraged and in this
particular application, wood siding is used on both the fences and walls of all
buildings and chimneys. The colors proposed are of a light coco brown and a
beige or white trim. Therefore, all earth tone colors have met the requirement
of the Specific Plan and the exterior wood siding is compatible with existing
structures in the area.
Certain design details area also incorporated into the Specific Plan. As
required, each window or sliding glass door shall be a french paned type as
opposed to single slide windows. The facia and barch boards of each particular
window, door or roof element shall be emphasized and fireplace chimneys are
sheeted in the horizontal wood siding. Mr. Wu's application incorporates all of
the architectural design guidelines incorporated into the Specific Plan.
To further emphasize the design of the project, Mr. Wu's has proposed attractive
landscape elements. These landscape elements include a landscaped strip along
Holt Avenue which is planted with ground cover or lawn materials and a planting
of six (6) city street trees. On the interior a minimum of 3' perimeter
landscaping is provided and also included is a recreation area. This recreation
area includes amenities such as a spa, barbeque and lawn area. In the interior
of the project, each particular unit has its own landscaped front planter area.
Planting materials include ground cover and trees as per city standards.
Circulation
lSpecific Plan No. 6 provided for an interior circulation system to be useable by
1 townhouse projects within the plan. According to Mr. Wu's project a slight
Community Development Department
Planning Commtssfon Report
Wu Townhouses
page four
deviation of the circulation pattern has been incorporated. This is due to the
requirement of the 15' structural setback from the southerly flood control
channel. This deviation in the plan has been incorporated to move the actual
access point to Holt Avenue to the very southerly llne of the property. The
Specific Plan incorporates a a more northerly position for this access point to
Holt Avenue. Staff contends that this particular location of the drive aisle
does not propose a problem for the project and is considered acceptable.
Common Area Ownership and Maintenance
This project proposes many areas to be considered in common ownership by all the
of the 19 townhome owners. These areas include a landscape lot along Holt
Avenue, all front yard landscape planter areas and a recreation area towards the
southerly portion of the lot. The most interesting amenity provided by this
project is the recreation area. Provided that the lot has an unusual shape,
this is proposed as the best location for a recreation area.
The recreation area includes a spa, barbeques and lawn area. This is to be
held in Common, as with all mother landscape lots and front yard planters,.and
routinely maintained by 'the association. A CC&R document will be filed with
the Tentative Tract Map which will be'brought to the Planning Commission at a
later date.
CONCLUSIONS:
In considering'this request the item of most importance is to consider the
compatibility of the project with the surrounding community. In essence, this
particular project builds out a Specific Plan that had a particular goal in
mind: to provide a unique property ownership Opportunity with compatible
architectural styles and land use. This particular request meets or exceeds all
of the requirements of the Specific Pla~, provides recreational opportunities
and is considered to be an asset to the area.
In completing the final build-out of Specific Plan No. 6 the City can assure
that piecemeal development of the area is not encouraged. An overall project of
this type ensures that the three lots remaining in the Specific Plan will be
developed to their potential and the goals and foresight of the community are
preserved.
Staff has considered certain conditions of approval as included in the attached
exhibit to the resolution of approval. The Resolution of Approval 2350 includes
certain conditions such as the requirement of the filing of a Tentative Tract
Community Development Department
Planntng Commission Report
Wu Townhouses
page five
Map. This tract map includes the document to be ftled which includes the CC&R's
for the maintenance and ownership of the common areas located within the
project. All landscape areas shall be maintained by a homeowners association
and shall also help to preserve the maintenance of the common circulation road.
Seeing that all requirements of Specific Plan No. 6 have been met or exceeded,
staff contends that this particular project would be an asset to the community
and therefore appropriate for Planning Commission approval.
~LAUR~A CAY PI
Assistant~
ROB BALEN,
Planning Consul rant
LP:do
attachments:
Exhibit A Specific Plan No. 6
Development Review Summary
Resolution No. 2350
Site. Plan
Elevations
Community Development Department
SI~CIFIC ~ ~. 6
~ Ff ~Clq* ~.. 81-52
TABLE OF CONT£NTS
II.
III.
IV.
V.
SECTION
I: Objectives
Stat1 sttcal Data
~4otes
Definitions'
Genera1 . Development Standards
A. Permitted Uses and Architectural Crtterta
B.* St~ Requ4rements
C. Setbacks
O. Butldtng Hetgh~
E. Landscaping
F. Parking Requirements
G. Fences and Walls
H. Storages and Refuse ~ollect~on Areas
%. Circulation Criteria
OBJECTIYES
A. Preserve and protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the
area by encouraging the orderly development of the subject property.
Plan for a consistent neighborhood development which conforms with the
General Plan for the City of Tustin and goals of the community.
Develop standards that will be uniformly applied to all lots within the
specific pl'an area, regardless of ownership.
II.
~'~ATI STICAL DATA
The specific plan area is bounded by Warren Avenue to the north; the North
Tusttn Channel to the south, Holt Avenue to the west, an.d the E1 Modena Channel
to the east.
The total acreage for the site Is approximately five (5) acres.
III.
1. Within the specific plan area, the continued use of the land as a single
family structure, as defined as a Residential Estate Oistrict (E-4), Tusttn
C!ty Code Section 9222 la, thereto shall be permitted.
2. No building permits shall be allowed~ for any pr.o. ject which does not conform
to the general development standards of this. plan.
3. Wher~ 'conflicts between these general development standards and other
zoning regulations exist, the provisions of the specific plan shall
prevat 1.
4. Review'of any pr~pqsed project shall be by Usa Permit, as outlined in
Tustin City Code Section' 9291, 9293, 9294, 9296.
5. Within the specific plan. area, water services will be provided by Tustin
Water Wor~s, sewerage facilities by the County Sanitation District Ho. 7,
electrical services by Southern California Edison, and gas services by
SoUthern California Gas. These service facilities are provided along Holt
Avenue. Drainage plans shall be reviewed by the Building Official and
conform to the requirements of the Orange Count7 Flood Control District.
6. Excess public land may be incorporated into the project without necessity
for plan amendment.
7. Upon application for m use permit for development, CC&R's shall be
submitted for review and approval that permit the incorporation of
subsequent development projects within the plan area.
IV. DEFINITIONS
1. Where applicable, definitions contained in Tustin City Code Section 9297
shall be utilized for these specific plan-regulations.
Townhouses: For the purposes of this specific plan, a townhouse shall be
defined as a multiple family dwelling with a private attached garage and
each dwelling unit. shall be located on an indtvidul lot of record and there
shall be no more than one dwelling unit on any lot.
Open Space: Common open space and pti
A. Private Open Space: Uncovered pati
owners or tenants of the dwelling.
vate open space.
o areas for the exclusive use of the
Bo
Common Open Space: Landscaping; lawn area, non-commercial outdoor
recreational facilities incidental to the residential development,
walkways, or necessary fire-fighting equipment and installations.
Each dwelling unit shall be guaranteed right of use to commonly owned
and maintained open space. Said common open space shall be designed so
as to be useable and suitable for recreational purposes and/or as a
visual amenity.
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Permitted Uses and Architectural Criteria
This specific plan is for the development of residential uses, with the
permissible type of building being a townhome dwelling as defined in
Section IV, No. 2.
2. The ~ntmum land area ~er dwelling unit shall be ~00 square feet.
Proposed projects are encouraged to utilize no more than two to three
units per building, but in no case shall any development proposal have
more than four dwelling units per building.
4. Exterior Design:
A. Roofs - Dominant roof for~ should be a conventional gable with
minimum use of shed or flat elements. Eaves should not be chipped.
B. Roofing - A heavy textured dark material, such as wood shake,
single or thick butt composition shingle.
Ce
Exterior Materials and Colors - A combination of horizontal wood
siding with minimal use of plaster elements is encouraged. Earth
tones will be used for the basic building exterior color.
Buildings may be trimmed with contrasting paints and stains.
De
Design Details -The following details are encouraged for
incorporation into the building elevation. Doors and windows
should be trimmed, with the use of multiple parted windows. Fascia
· and barge board should be en~hasized as a design element. Fireglace'
chimneys should be sheeted in horizontal siding and trimmed.
Site Requtremeflts
1. A minimum of 443% private and comon open space shall be provided
for each proposed project.
C. Setbacks
3,.Setback from Holt Avenue - 20 feet.
Setback from Warren Avenue- ~5 fee~.
3. Std, Yard - Side ~a~ sa~bac~ shall be a mtnt~ of f~ve feet.
Eee~ Yard - Eea~ ~a~d setbac~ shall be a mtnt~m of ~5 fee~,
se~a~ f~ ~e E1 ~odana Flood Control Channel and ~o~h TusCan
Channel shall be a minima of ~5 feet.
5. A~i~turml fea~re5 may proJ~t as foll~s:
a. Roof overhang, subject ~ the a~proval of the Co~unt~7
Development Dt~ctor ~7 proj~t six (6) feet into ~e
~ent7 (~0) feet ~a~ac~ area and ~r~ (3) feet in~ a
ftf~en (~5) foot ~ac~ a~a.
O. Butld~ng Height""'
Uniess o~e~tse sp~tfted ~n ~s plan, a3~ but~dtng helgh~ sha~3 no~
exc~ ~ 'stories or 35 feet.
E. Landscaping
Generol Statements.
a. Landscaping shall consist of an effective combination of street
trees, trees,' ground cover, and shrubbery, provided with
sut tabl · t rrt gati on.
b· Any undeveloped areas will be mai ntai ned tn a weed free
condi ti on.
c. Where feasible, preserving and maintaining existing mature
trees will be a priority.
Hol
a.
Avenue Landscape Treataent
A minimum five foot landscape setback from property lines to
fences or walls shall be planted with trees, shrubs and ground
cover. Fences shall be periodically off-sat at a greater depth
for aesthetic purposes.
Ge
Conmon Ownership Areas
. a. Such portions of the site shall be adequately landscaped with
trees or ground cover to provide both visua) amenity and
variety.
Landscape Maintenance
a. Property owners, individually and collectively through an
association shall be responsible for the,maintenance of private
and common open space and landscaped areas.
b. Lawn and ground covers are to be kept trim~ed and/or moved
regularly. All plantings in planting areas are to be kept free
of weeds and debris.
c. All plantings are to be kept in a healthy and growing
condition. Fertilization, cultivation, and tree pruning are to
be apart of regular maintsnanca.
d. Irrigation will be provided and adequately maintained to
provide an effective system of irrigation for plantings and
.trees throughout all areas.
e. Stakes, guys and ties on trees will be checked regularly for
correct function. Ties will be adjusted to avoid creating
abrasions or girdling to the stems. '.i
Parkin~
1.
Requirements
Each dwelling unit shall provide a minimum of two parking spaces
per unit, one o7 which shall be an enclosed attached garage. If a
carport is utilized for the second space, it shall also be attached
to the untt.
If a minimum.nineteen (lg) foot drive apron is provided per unit,
no additional guest parking is required. In lieu of the drive
approach, one-half parking space per dwelling unit for guest
pa~ing shall be provided;
3. Parking Space Dimensions
a. Enclosed spaces shall be a. minimum of ten by twenty feet.
b. Open spaces shall'be a minimum of g x 29.
Fences and Walls
~. All fences facing Holt Avenue, Warren Avenue, and the North Tustin
Channel shall match the materials and colors of the building
exteriors. They shall be limited to enclosing the private patio
area, and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height.
2'. A sol4d masonr~ wall six feet eight inches (6'-8") in height shall
be constructed along 'the E1 Modena Channel frontage.
Storage and Refuse Collection Areas
1. All outdoor storage areas and refuse collection areas shall be enclosed
and visuall7 screened so that materials stored within these areas shall
not be visible from access streets and adjacent propertT.
Circulation Crtterta
1. ' The number of access points to Holt Aveue shall be limited to two
locations, with one additional access allowed to Warren Avenue, per
Exhibit B. Precise locations for access points shall be approved by
the City Engineer.
2. Circulation within the specific plan area shall be a private street
, with a minimum width of twenty-four (2¢) feet with a nineteen (lg) feet
drive approach, and twenty-seven (27) feet with a shorter drive
approach, per Exhibit B.
3. Ortve approaches shall be a minimum of five feet and a maximum of seven
feet. To allow for par~ing in the drtye approach, a minimum length of
ni.neteen feet is required.
4. No on-site per, lng spaces shall-be designed that will require a vehicle
to bac~ onto Holt Avenue or Warren Avenue.
4
5
EXHIBIT Bp AMENDED
EXHIBIT B
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUMMARY
Project: Holt Avenue Townhomes; Proponent: Cal Pac Development
Location/District: 14572-92 Holt Avenue; R-3 3000, Specific Plan No. 6
Action: Use Permit No. 86-24 to approve construction of 19 townhomes.
Building:
Front Setback
Side Setback
Rear Setback
Gross Square Footage
Net Floor Square Footage
Height
Number of Stories
Materials/Colors
Lot Size
Lot Coverage
Parking:
Number of Spaces
Ratio (space/square footage)
Percent of Compact Spaces
Type
Uses:
Number of Public Notifications (Owners):
Environmental Status
District Requirement
20' from Holt Ave.
5' from project
15' from Flood Channel
*
35'
2
Wood Shake
Earth Tones,and Trims
3000 sq. ft per d.u.
60%
2.25 per d.u.
*
*
Townhouses
Propose~
20' from Holt Ave,
5' from project
15' from flood channe
60,400 sq. ft.
27,518 sq. ft.
27'
2
Wood Shak,
Earth Tones,and Trims
3179 sq. ft. per d.u.
45%
4 per d.u.
I per 362 sq.ft.
0
all standard
Townhouses
* 109
Negative Declaration Filed
* No Standard EXHIBIT B
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
REsoLuTION NO. 2350
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION OF 19
TOWNHOME UNITS IN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA NO. 6
LOCATED AT 14572-92 HOLT AVENUE.
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That a proper application, (Use Permit No. 86-24) has been filed
by Mr. Frank Wu on behalf of Cal Pac Development requesting
authorization to construct 19 new townhome units at 14572-92
Holt Avenue.
Bo
That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said
application.
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, as evidenced by the following findings:
1. All development requirements contained in Specific Plan
No. 6 have been met or exceeded.
2. As required by Specific Plan No. 6, a Use Permit must be
authorized prior to development in the Specific Plan Area.
Development of this property as 19 attached townhome units
is in conformance to the district zoning of R-3-3000
(Multi-family Residential, one unit for every 3000 square
feet of lot area).
4. All conditions as set forth in the attached Exhibit A shall
be required and conformed with.
D. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use
applied for will not be injurious or detrimental to the property
and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property,
nor to the general welfare of the City of Tusttn, and should be
granted.
E. Proposed development shall be in accordance with the development
policies adopted by the City Council, Uniform Building Codes as
administered by the Building Official, Fire Code as administered
by the Orange County Fire Marshal and street improvement
requirements as administered by the City Engineer.
F. A negative declaration has been filed for this project in
conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
G. ~Jnal develgpm~nt @lans ~h~ll require the review and approval of
the ~ommunl~y uevemopmen~ uepartment.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution t~O. 2350
page t~o
II.
The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No.
86-24 to authorize construction of 19 townhome units in Specific Plan
Area No. 6 at 14572-92 Holt Avenue subject to the conditions in
Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the day of , 198
CHARLES PUCKETT
Chairman
DONNA ORR,
Recording Secretary
DO:gt
Resolution No. 2350
page three
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 2350
e
Be
10.
11.
12.
All landscaped 'common' areas shall be maintained by the homeowner's
association.
All paved 'common' areas and including the recreation area shall be
maintained by the association.
All garages shall have an interior dimention of 20' x 20' minimum and
shall be maintained as permanent parking areas. No excess storage of
conversion of garages to another use will not be allowed.
All landscaped areas shall be planted per city requirements and a
final landscape plan shall be submitted and approved prior to
issuance of Building Permits.
A fire hydrant shall be installed on site per requirements of the
Orange County Fire Department.
A Tentative Tract Map shall be approved and filed prior to submittal
of plans to the Building Department and this Use Permit shall be null
and void if said Tract Map is not approved.
The final site plan shall be standardized and reflect all appropriate
City standard drawing numbers. The developer shall construct all
missing or damaged street improvements to said development per the
City of Tustin "Minimum Dsign Standards of Public Works" and "Street
Improvement Standards". This work shall consist of, but is not
limited to, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, drive apron, and street
pavement.
All streets located within the project shall be a minimum 24' in
width and shall be marked as fire lanes per the Orange County Fire
Department Standards.
All window and door treatments shall have depth in order to provide
authenticity to the paned window requirements of Specific Plan No. 6.
All standards and requirements of Specific Plan No. 6 shall be met or
exceeded.
A CC&R document shall be filed with the Tentative Tract Map.
An Agreement to Conditions Imposed form shall be signed and returned
to the Community Development Department.
Resolution No. 2350
page four
13. All garage doors shall be equipped with electrical garage door
openers.
14. Basic color scheme of exterior building treatments shall be of earth
tones and subject to the approval of the Community Development
Department.
Pl nnin Commission
DATE: AUGUST 11, 1986
SUBJECT:
STATUS ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
ITEM NO. 4 ·
RECI~9~ENDEO ACTION:
Recelve and fi*le.
BACKGROUND AND S~RY:
On July 14, 1986 the Planning Commission had expressed interest in obtaining
informaiton on the status of current construction projects within the City. At
the end of each month, the Building Department prepares a Building Activity
Report. This document contains various information on current projects and
those which have been completed since the first of the year.
Attached to this report is Exhibit A and B. Exhibit A is the Building Activity
Report which summarizes all permits issued in the month of June and compares
them with the~permtts issued since the first of the year. This report breaks
down the permits into type of construction so that further analysis can be made
by the Butldtng Official.
Exhibit B lists all current construction projects for the month of June. This
exhibit provides the project type, valuation in dollars, and the approximate
percentage of construction completed. Each project and its current status is
listed in this chart.
This report is currently forwarded to all Commission and Council members as well
as all department heads. Should you wish to schedule these reports for routine
Commission review, please advise staff accordingly.
LP:gt
attach: Exhibit A
Exhibit B
ROBERT BALEN
Planning Consultant
, Corn rnunity Developmenl Deparlment
CITY OF TUSTIN
300 Centennial Way "A"
Tustln, Calif. 92680 EXHIBIT
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
Month of JUW~ : FY 1986 -87
NEW RESIDENTIAL Numl)er Vllu~fle~ Year to O~te
CONSTRUCTION (Family) Permits I Units PIrmlta Units Valuation
1. Slngl~f~mily(detm=he~ '~1 1 49,000
2. Condominiums& 2 6 292,290
Townt~,,,,,-~ (SF-altache~
3. OuiV4x 1 i 63,800
4, ~ & four fim#y
Al~rlmlnt Buildlngl 2 8 146. 880
5. Five or more family
Ao~nment _~'_'!~!'~s 7 60 2,199,282
Total Firefly Units 13 76 2,751,252
NEW RESIDENTIAL
(Group & Transient)
3. c~oup Q~dem 1 97 2,300.000
Total Non-Family
NEW NON-RESIOENTIAL Num=er Vmu~tio~
(Commercial/Ind.) P~mlt~ SUuctur~ Ne, Permits Vilumion
z Churc~ a
.~ ]. 400,000
~,,~t-gl *PKESCROOL
4. Rlealrch & Development
Buildings
?.
~ ~. Structum~ Other ~.~:~ ~ 4,900 37 400,877
Total Non-Residential 2 ~ 4,900 68 30,0].7,811
RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS NumbS' Vllultlo~
AND ALTERATIONS Permits Stmcturea No. Permits Valuation
1. Room Additions 3 ~ 25,000 25 426,460
5. ~ ?~ 85.500 45 411. :t62
Total Residential 14 ~ 120,340 124 1,047,438
INON-RESIDENTIAL ADOl- Numar viluat~o~ Year to Date
TIONS & ALTERATIONS Permits Stmcture~ No~ Permits Valuit~on
z Comme~cml eldg& 11 ~:~f~,.~ 510,899 72 1,622,
152
Total Non-Residential 2.5 ~ .:~, ~ 861 t 379 292 11,913,912
TOTAL MONTH AND Unit~ Units 173
YEAR TO DATE
41 986,619 Pa~mlt~98 48,030,413
,/
EXHIBIT "A''~
CONVERSIONS Permit. Units Add~:l
~ Viluat~
(No~fle~ntial Bldg.)
To~I ~nversions
Redeve~nt A~ea Ye~ To D~te
Numar ' Units T~n ~nter (TC) ~mi~ Units Removed'J
DEMOLITIONS ~mi~ ~ ~t~ntral (~
Total Demolitions
PERMIT~ INSPECTION~ I N~ Pe~its N~ Pe~iti I~ti~ In~i~l FEES
COLLE~IONS ~ ~M M~th Y~ to Olte ~M M~th YI~ lo Dill ~ll M~th Yea~ to Dale
B~I 50 478, 72 1,605 2,167.76 27,649.11
~ 38 338 , 64 1,277 1,250.00 16,681.00
M~inM 20 21~ ~ lt09~ 878.00 8,704.25
Gr~ 26 4 24 146.00 3,929.73
~ 178 1,879 398 7,271 15,289.56 427,647.'30
TOTAL
M~OR PERMIT A~IVI~ OVER $1~,~
RDA
~M~ ~te ~reM
1. Hey Shov Room ~5551 ~d H$11 5eccy ~e~$~A 140~000
2. ge8cau=a~c ~.t 1368~ ~e~o=~ Gcock & ~ck 1~000 ~/C
3. Taco ~ell ~.t 17502 17ch Sccee~ Taco Bell Co=u. 190,000
6.
7.
8.
9.
(714) 544-8890
ROGER E. HARRIS
Building Official
Planning Commission
DATE:
SUBdECT:
APPLICANT:
AUGUST 11, 1986
DESIGN REVIEW OF RASTER SIGN PLAN FOR TUSTIN PAVILLION CAFE
gR. BARRY WATKINS
#ATKIIiS CONNERCIAL PROPERTIES
17251 E. 17th STREET, UNIT D
TUSTIN, CA 92680
PROPERTY
OgRER:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
gR. GEORGE BROO~ELL
440 PACIFIC STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
17245 E. 17th STREET,
TUSTIN, CA 92680
CG-CORHERCIAL GENERAL
ENVIROI~qENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
CATEGORICALLY EXEHPT, CLASS II
USE OF EXPOSED NEON TUBING TENANT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS ON THE
TUSTIN PAVILLION CAFE BUILDING
RECOI~ENDED ACTION:
That the Planning Commission approve the use of exposed neon stgnage for the
tenants to be located in the Tusttn Pavillion Cafe building.
SUGARY:
The applicant, Mr. Barry Watktns, is proposing to use exposed neon tubing signs
for the individual tenants located within the Pavtllion Cafe. The use of the
tenant signage would be located in specific areas which are restricted in their
size due to the nature of the Sign Code Tustin currently enforces. Therefore,
staff is recommending approval of the limited exposed neon signs for the tenants
at this location.
Community Development DeparTment
Planntng Commission Report
Pavtllton sign
page t~o
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSZS:
This request Involves the use of exposed neon tubing signs for three tenants
within the Tustln Pavilion Cafe building. Each individual tenant is allowed
stgnage by code. This stgnage is ltmtted to [5~ of the store front area for
primary signs. As proposed, the stgns meet the code requirements in terms of
size and location. According to the Tustin Sign Code tt is necessary for the
Planning Commission to give prior approval for any use of exposed neon signs.
All the signs shall be located on walls directly adjacent to each individual
user. No variance In stze or other requests wtll be necessary at this time.
Staff considers that the signs, although exposed neon tubing in nature, are
limited to restricted areas on the building and the size can be somewhat
restricted. The use of this type of neon signing has been approved for other
local businesses such as Coco's Restaurant, located approximately 1/2 mile
away. Each individual tenant is allowed signage based upon 15~ of the primary
store front and $~ of each adjoining secondary wall. Seeing that the Pavilion
Cafe is of a modern concept and architectural design, the use of exposed neon
signing further emphasizes this image. Recent approvals of other neon signs in
the area provide for some local continuity while allowing individual identity to
the businesses located in the Pavilion. This proposal meets all requirements of
the code in regards to size and location of signage. Therefore, based upon the
conditions discussed in this report, staff considers the use of exposed neon
signs appropriate at this location.
LAURA CAY PICKUP
Assistant Planner
Planning Consultant
LP:do
attach:
elevations
Community Development Department
Pl nnin Commission
· DATE:
AUGUST 11, 1986
S~JE~:
DESIGN REVIEW FOR TUSTIN PAVILLION CAKE
APPLICANT:
HR. BARRY WATKINS
#ATKXNS COI~ERCIAL PROPERTIES
17251 E. 17th STREET, UNIT D
TUSTZN, CA 92680
PROPERTY
OWNER:
HR. GEORGE BROO~ELL
440 PACIFIC STREET
TUSTIN, CA92680
LOCATION:
17245 E. 17th STREET
ZONING:
CG-COMMERCIAL GENERAL
ENVIROMqENTAL
STATUS:
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS I
REQUEST:
AUDITION OF EXPOSED NEON TRIM ON PERIMETER OF RESTAURANT
BUILDING TO BE LOCATED IN THE TUSTIN FRENCH QUARTER
RECO~qENDED ACTION:
That the Plannin9 Commission deny the request to apply hot pink colored neon
trim on the Tusttn Pavtllion Cafe building located at 17245 E. 17th Street,
Tustin.
SU#lqARY:
On February 11, 1985, the Tustin Planning Commission approved an amendment to
the original use permit number 84-14 which authorized the construction of the
Tustin Pavtlljon Cafe. This amendment to the use permit approved the design of
the building, an alcoholic beverage license for beer and wine, and addition of
outdoor seating for the restaurants.
The applicant Mr. Barry Watkins is proposing an addition to the original design
review of the Pavlllton Cafe building. This addition is in the form of a hot
pink colored exposed neon tubing to be an accent trim located on the perimeter
roof line of the building. Due to the lack of continuity of this proposed
addition to the center, staff is recommending denial for this particular request.
Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Tusttn French Quarter
page two
BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS:
In February, 1985, Planning Commission had approved the amendment to the
original use permit. This amendment included the approval for the turquoise
blue roof, outdoor seating with table umbrellas which included generic food
names and the approval for one alcoholic beverage establishment for beer and
wine on site sales. Currently, the applicant is requesting that the Planning
Commission review and approve an addition to the exterior building which was not
previously approved.
This addition includes the use of exposed neon tubing to be a trim placed on the
exterior facia trim of the roof located on all four sides of the building. This
exposed neon tubing is to be a hot pink type color which is considered to'match
the indoor accent trim of the building. Unfortunately, the use of exposed neon
tubing is only to be approved by the Planning Commission through design review
process according to Tustin Sign Code.
The use of tht~ particular type of neon trim is consistent with buildings
typically located in downtown Santa Ana, near South Coast Plaza and in certain
areas of Costa Mesa. However, staff considers .that this particular type of
architectural detail is not consistent within the local area of the shopping
center.
Recently other local businesses have requested approval for exposed neon tubing
however, these requests have been limited to slgnage only and are used as an
accent to the building in limited areas. This particular request requires the
approval of the trim all along the perimeter of the buildlng at the roof-top
level.
The overall concept and design of the Pavillton is very visually striking
without the use of the neon trim. The architectural type, although somewhat
similar, stands out. Due to the inconsistency with surrounding architectural
features and the fact that the building proposes to be very noticeable, staff
recommends that the Planning Commission deny this request.
LP:do
P,1 anning Consul rant
attach:
site plan and elevations
Community Development Department
Pl nnin Commission
DATE: August 11, 1986
SUBOECT: REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - August 4, 1986
Oral presentation.
do
Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - August 4, 1986
, Community Development Department
A~FION ADENDA OF A REGULA~R ~ETING
OF THE llISTIN CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 4, 1986
7:00 P.M.
7:03
I. CALL TO ORDER
ALL P~ESENT II.
EXCE~ ~ENNEDY
III.
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC HEARING
ADOPTED R~SOUF~ION 1. PROPOSED ANNEXATION NO. 137 - DIAMOND
NO. 86-87 86-87
HEAD/GARLAND RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-87 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CIlIF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, MAKING APPLICATION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY
KNOWN AS DIAMOND HEAD ANNEXATION NO. 137 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN
Reco,,,,endation: Conduct a public hearing to receive testimony from
affected residents; and adopt Resolution No. 86-87 at conclusion of the
hearing.
KEN BRYAN IV. PUBLIC INPUT
ASKED k~IEN A MOVIE THEATRE WOULD BE COMING TO TUSTIN AND MAYOR SALTARELLI RESPONDED THAT THE
CITY IS WORKING WITH THE IRVINE COMPANY FOR ONE AT HYFORD ROAD AND THE FREEWAY, I~AYBE IN 18
MONTHS OR TWO YEARS.
Ye
At,ROVED
APPROVED
APPROVED STAFF
RECO~NDATION
APPROVED S~AFF
RECOm~NDATION
ADOPTED RESO. br~ION 5.
NO. 86-97
APPROVED STAFF
RECONI~ENDATION
ADOPTED RESOUF~ION 7.
NO. 86-98
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 21, 1986, REGULAR MEETING
2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,167,252.97
RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $138,834.83
3. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 86-36; CLAIMANT: COURTNEY SPECK; DATE OF LOSS:
4/1/86; DATE FILED WITH CITY: 7/14/86
Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney.
4. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 86-24; CLAIMANT: ROBERT MICHAELS; DATE OF LOSS:
5/17/86; DATE FILED WITH CITY: 6/2/86
Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-97 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FIXING AND DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE
REQUIRED FROM PROPERTY TAXES OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND FIXING THE RATE
OF TAXES ON THE TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF TUSTIN TO SERVICE
THE DEBT OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
1986-87
Adopt Resolution No. 86-97 as recommended by the Finance Department.
6. DECLARATION OF SURPLUS EQUIPMENT & AUTHORIZATION TO AUCTION SAME
Declare the rolling stock/vehicles listed in the staff report as
surplus; and authorize the sale of same by Porter Auction as recom-
mended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-98 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT NO CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED WITH RESPECT
TO THE PROPOSED NEWPORT AVENUE GRADE CROSSING
Adopt Resolution No. 86-98 as recommended by the City Manager.
PAGE I
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA
8-4-86
ADOPTED RESOLUTION 8.
~. 8~-94
RESOLUTION NO. 86-94 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE LOUDSPEAKER CRITERIA FOR THE TUSTIN
AUTO CENTER
Adopt Resolution No. 86-94 pursuant to City Council action on
July 21, 1986.
ADOPTED RESOLIFFION 9. RESOLUTION NO. 86-92 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NO. 86-92 TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR ANIMAL SHELTER AND
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES AS PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE
Adopt Resolution No. 86-92 as recommended by the Community Develop-
merit Department.
ADOPTED 10.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-88
ADOPTED 11.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-95
APPROVED 12.
STAFF RECOIw~ENDATION
VI.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 86-201 LOCATED AT 2472, 14451 AND
14471 CHAMBERS ROAD
Adopt Resolution No. 86-88 pursuant to City Council action on
July 21, 1986.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-95 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12719
Adopt Resolution No. 86-95 as recommended by the Community Develop-
ment Department.
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR EL MODENA-IRVINE CHANNEL {FACILITY FO7) IMPROVE-
MENTS, REACH I AND REACH II, FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-1 {PHASE V-A)
AND {PHASE V-B)
Award the contract for subject project to K.E.C. Company {sole
bidder}, Corona, in the amount of $8,294,078.50 as recommended by
the Public Works Department/Engineering Division.
ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None
VII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
TABLED
IX.
1. CONSOLIDATION OF GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS
Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council.
NEW BUSINESS
APPROVED STAFF
RECOM~ENDATION
1. PREPARATION OF SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - EAST TUSTIN
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
FIED
X®
Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute contracts
and agreements between the City and The Irvine Company necessary for the
firm of Michael Brandman Associates, Inc., to prepare the subject Sup-
plemental Environmental Impact Report.
REPORTS
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA
1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - JULY 28, 1986
All actions of the Planning Commission become final unless appealed by
the City Council or member of the public.
PAGE 2 8-4-86
MANAGER XI. OTHER BUSINESS
ESTED A CLOSED SESSION FOR PERSONNEL MATTERS.
THE CITY I~GER REQUESTED THAT THE COUNCIL ADJOURN TO AN ADJOURNED )EETING ON MONDAY, AUGUST
11, 1986, AT 6:00 P.M. REGARDING ASSESSIqENT DISTRICT 85-1.
ROURKE RESPONDED TO I~)GAR THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE THE SALE OF COMMUNICOM
BEFORE THE SALE COULD BE FINAL.
HOESTEREY THANK~ STAFF FOR STRIPING THE STREETS IN PEPPERTREE.
KELLY REPORTED THAT HE HAD BEEN Ill CONTACT WITH CITIZENS kq40 ARE OPPOSED TO THE ACTION A~D
OPERATIONS OF THE JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT. THEY ARE CONSIDERING TAKING THE MATTER TO THE SMALL
CLAINS COURT. HE FELT THE CITY SHOULD CHANGE THE NOISE LEVELS OF THE NOISE ELEMENT. THE
ATTORNEY SAID THAT THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS PREEMPTED THE CITY FROM DOING THAT.
THE MAYOR ASKED HIM TO GIVE THE COUNCIL A REPORT ON MJAT SPECIFICALLY HE IS ASKING THE COUNCIL
TO DO.
KELLY REQUESTED STAFF TO ASK CANDIDATES TO REMOVE THEIR CAMPAIGN SIGNS MIICH ARE STILL UP FROM
THE olJgE ELECTION.
SALTARELLI REQUESTED THAT WE CONSIDER POLICY OF I)RUG liSTING FOR CITY EMPLOYEES. ROURKE TO
LOOK INTO WHAT WE CAN DO UNDER THE LAW.
RP~KE RESPONDED TO HOESTEREY THAT A NEETING WAS HELD EANLIER TDOAY REGARDING ACTIONS TO BE
REGARDING THE PROPERTY ON ANAGANSET WAy.
8.,4 XII. ADJOURNMENT
To the Redevelopment Agency, thence to a Closed Session regarding Personnel
matters, thence To an Adjourned Regular Meeting on August 11, 1986, at 6:00
p.m., regarding Assessment District bond financing and thence to the next
Regular Meeting on Monday, August 18, 1986, at 7:00 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 3 8-4-86
ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE TUSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AUGUST 4, 1986
7:00 P,M,
8:14 1. CALL TO ORDER
ALL 2. ROLL CALL
PRESENT EXCEPT KENNEDY
APPROVED 3.
APPROVAL OF #INUTES - JULY 21, 1986, REGULAR HEETING
Recmmendatton: Approve.
APPROVED
APPROVAL OF ~HANDS - JUNE, 1986
Recommendation: Approve Demands in the amount of $191,172.93 for the month of
June, 1986, as recommended by the Finance Department.
HUSTON 5. OTHER BUSINESS
REPORTED THAT HE HAD DISTRIBUTED TO COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. RDA 86-10 AND RDA 86-11 REGARDING A
HEARING ON AUGUST 18.
SALTARELLI REPORTED THAT HE HAD HET WITH THE CITY HANAGER AND MAYOR OF SANTA ANA AND HAD
SOLICITED THEIR HELP ON THE NEgPORT AVENUE AND EDINGER RAILROAD CROSSING.
8:16 6. ADJOURNMENT
To the next Regular Meeting on August 18, 1986, at 7:00 p.m.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA Page i 8-4-86
Planning Commission
DRTE:
SUB~IECT:
AUGUST 11, 1986
IIIFORIqATION ITEM/PENDZNG PUBLIC HEARING
- 011 TENTATIVE TRACT 12732
RECGI~E#DED ACTIO#:
Receive and File. If the Commission wishes that specific issues be addressed at
the hearing scheduled for August.25, lg86, now would be the appropriate time to
express your concerns.
DISCUS~IO#:
In conformance with East Tusttn (Phase. I) Planned Community Regulations, the
Bren Company has filed Tentative Tract Map 12732 with the Community Development
Department. The hearing is scheduled for Commission consideration on August 25,
1986.
In order to familiarize the Planning Commission with the project and provide you
with an adequate review period, we have scheduled a preliminary review/study
session' for'the August 11 meeting. Jeff Davis is the staff planner assigned to
present this case to the Planning Commission. If you have any questions
regarding the design, please call Jeff or me at 544-8890.
As proposed, the project is in substantial conformance to the site design
criteria and parking requirements set up by PC regulations. Staff intends to
recommend approval of the project. Since its filing a few months ago, the
project has been redesigned to satisfy all of staff's concerns. The study
session review scheduled for this meeting is to solicit comments from the
Planning Commission about the project.-
This will afford the applicant and staff adequate time to respond to concerns
prior to the public hearing August 25, 1986.
ROB BALEN,
Planning Consultant
JD:do
attach:
Site plan
Tentative Tract Map 12732
Elevati ons
Community Development Department