The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Comm. for 7-27-87 AGENDA TUSTIN PLANNING CORHISSION REGULAR MEETING ~ULY 27, 1987 CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF~LLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Puckett, Well, Baker, Le Jeune, Pontious REORGANIZATION: (The Chairman will open the meeting up to nominations from the Commission for Chairman. Upon election of a Chairman, new Chairman will open nominations and hold election of Vice-Chairman.) 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 June 29, 1987 Plannin~ Commission Meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. USE PERMIT 87-13 Appplicant/Property Owner: Mr. Duskin Keller and Mr. Tim Keller 18826 Windwood Lane, Santa Aha, Ca 92705 Location: 210 S. Pacific Street Request To build a 2360 Square foot second single family unit Resolution No. 2417 Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin authorizing construction of a 2360 square foot second single family unit at 210 S. Pacific Street ~resentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Associate Planner Planning Commission Agenda July 27, 1987 ~age two PUBLIC HEARINGS {continued) 3. Zone Change 87-1, 87-2 General Plan Amendment 87-1 Applicant: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 Location: Properties located on the west side of Newport Avenue between the I-5 Freeway and Mitchell Avenue and on the east side of Newport Avenue between Main and San Juan Streets Resolution No. 2413 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California, recommending that the City Council amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan {General Plan Amendment 87-1) for properties generally located on the east side of "B" Street south of the 1-5 Freeway from (M-F) Multi-family and (C) Commercial to the {PC-C) Planned Community Commercial Distict Resolution No. 2412 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, recommending Zone Change 87-1 to rezone properties generally located east of Newport Avenue between Main Street and San Juan from (CG) Commercial General and (CG-PUD) Commercial General Planned Unit Development-to (PC-C) Planned Community Commercial. ,esolution No. 2414 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, recommending Zone Change 87-2 to rezone properties generally located west of Newport Avenue between the I-5 Freeway and Mitchell Avenue from Multiple Family Residential {R-3) and Retail Commercial {C-1) to Planned Community Commercial (PC-C) Resolution No. 2411 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, establishing guidelines for review of Conditional Use Permit applications and proposed development plans on properties located in the Planned Community Commercial District. Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Associate Planner 4. Use Permit 87-14 and Variance 87-04 Applicant: Mr. Don Greinke on behalf of Southern Counties Oil Location: 13918 - 13922 Newport Avenue and 1016 - 1022 Bonita Avenue, parcels are continguous Request: Use Permit 87-14 to authorize a self-service, card-locking commercial fuel facility at the subject address and to install an eight {8) foot block wall at the subject address; and Variance 87-04 to authorize the placement of a sign in the front 'setback area and to authorize placement of a freestanding control building within a side yard setback area. Planning Commission Agend~ July 27, 1987 Page three Resolution No. 2420 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, approving Use Permit 87-14 authorizing a 24 hour self-service commercial fuel pumping opertion and an eight (8) foot high block wall on the properties known as 13918-13922 Newport Avenue and 1016-1022 Bonita Avenue Resolution No. 2421 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, approving Variance application 87-04 authorizing placement of a business identification sign in a 15' highway setback area and authorizing a free-standing building within the required side yard setback area for the properties located at 13918-13922 Newport Avenue and 1016-1022 Bonita Avenue Presentation: Jeffrey S. Davis, Senior Planner 5. Use Permit NO. 87-15 & Variance No. 87-03 Applicant: 30th Street Architects on behalf of Ruby's Restaurant Owner; John Prescott Location: Ruby's Restaurant 205 E1 Camino Real - SE Corner of E1 Camino Real and Second Street ~Request: Authorization for an On-site beer and wine license, Type 41. Parking Variance permit nine {9) instead of the required 35 parking spaces. Resolution No. 2418 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, authorizing a beer and wine license for on-site sales at 205 E1 Camino Real Resolution No. 2419 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, approving Variance No. 87-03, allowing an existing non-conforming restaurant at 205 E1Camtno Real to vary with the parking requirements in the C-2 zone. Presentation: Patrizia Materassi, Planner 6. Amendment No. 1 to Use Permit 87-7 Applicant: Mr. Mark Dotta on behalf of Red Hill Lutheran Church Location: 13200 Red Hill Avenue Owner: Red Hill Lutheran Church Request: Authorization to add 2,100 square feet of storage space in a basement. Planntng Commission Agenda July 27, 1987 Oage four Resolution No. 2422: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California, approving Amendment No. 1 to Use Permit 87-7 authorizing 2,100 square feet of basement storage at 13200 Red Hill Avenue. Presentation: Jeffrey S. Davis, Senior Planner OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 7. Neon Sign for Saba's Market Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Associate Planner STAFF CONCERNS 8. Report on Actions Taken at July 6, 1987 City Council Meetin9 Presentation: Christine Shlngleton, Director of Community Development n. Report on Actions Taken at July 20, 1987 City Council Meeting /resentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development COMMISSION CONCERNS ROJOURNMENT Adjourn to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on August 10, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 29, I987 CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Puckett, Well, Le Jeune, Pontlous Absent: Baker PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda) IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. CONSENT CALENDAR: (ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.) 1. Approval of Minutes of June 8, 1987 Plannln9 Commission Meetin~ 2. Final EIR 87-1 - North/South Road Project Adopt Resolution No. 2415: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin that the Enviromental Impact Report prepared in conjunction with the North/South Road Project is recognized as adequate and complete making findings with respect to mitigation of significant environmental effects and recommending to the City Council certification on Final Environmental Impact Report 87-1 3. General Plan Consistency / North/South Road Project Chairman Puckett pulled Item 2 for further discussion. Commissioner Well moved, Le Jeune seconded to approve the consent calendar Items i and 3. Motion carried: 4-0. Staff noted that there were some typographical errors in the Response to Comments that would be rectified before going to City Council. Aileen Capp, 10031 Deer Haven, Cowen Heights, requested that the Response to Comments list the exact addresses from which the project would be visible. Rob Balen, LSA, stated that he had completed another check of the view shed, it would have no impact on Deer Haven Commissioner Well, asked that staff comply wi th Ms. Capp's request. Planntng Commission Minutes June 29, 1987 Page two Staff will clarify Figure 23 to reflect that addition. Item 2 - Commissioner Well moved, Puckett seconded to recognize EIR 87-1 as adequate and complete and to recommend to City Council certification of EIR 87-1 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2415 with the addition that the Response to Comments reflect the addresses of Ms. Capp's concerns expressed at the Commission meeting of June 8, 1987. Motion carried 4-0. PUBLIC HEA~RINGS 4. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 87-02 - Large Family Day Care Nomes Recommendation: Recommend to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 87-02 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2408. Resolution No. 2408: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin recommending amendment of Section 9223a6 of the Tustin Municipal Code relating to Large Family Day Care Homes Presentation: Jeffrey S. Davis, Senior Planner The public hearing was opened at 7:42 p.m. The public hearing was closed at 7:43 p.m. Commissioner Well moved, Puckett seconded approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 87-2 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2408 with the following changes: Page 1, Section II a) the last phrase to read "and a list of property owners within 100 feet of the exterior property boundaries of the proposed day care home." and Page 2, Section g) to read "The play yard of the home must be enclosed by a minimum six-foot high fence setback from the required front yard." Motion carried: 4-0. 5. Use Permit No. 87-12 Applicant: Bonnie Engleberg of Saba's Market 13841 Tusttn East Drive Tustin, Ca. 92680 Location: 14161 Newport Avenue, Suites C and D Zoning: C-1; Retail Commercial Request: Authorization for an off-site beer and wine license in conjunction with a 890 square foot convenience market use. Resolution No. 2410: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, authorizing off-site beer and wine sales in conjunction with a 890 square foot convenience market use at 14161 Newport Avenue, Unit C and D. Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Associate Planner The public hearing was opened at 7:52 p.m. The public hearing was closed at 7:53 p.m. Planntng Commission Minutes June 29, 1987 Page three Commissioner Puckett clarified with staff that Parents Who Care had no negative response to this item. Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Well seconded to approve Use Permit No. 87-12 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2410. Motion carried: 4-0. The Comflsston recessed at 7:55 p.m. The Commission reconvened at 8:35 p.m. OLD BUSINESS 6. Zone Change 87-1, 87-2 and General Plan Amendment 87-1 Location: Properties located on the west side of Newport Avenue between the I-5 Freeway and Mitchell Avenue and on the east side of Newport Avenue between Main and San Juan Streets. Recommendation: Direct staff to advertise a public hearing for Zone Change 87-1, 87-2 and General Plan Amendment 87-1. Presentation: Laura Cay Pickup, Associate Planner Commissioners Le Jeune clarified that development under PUD would require a Use Permit. Mr. Robert Laird, 13548 La Jara St., Cerritos, a property owner on the south side of the freeway feels that his property is being devalued by the freeway widening and the City's proposal. Staff noted that appraisals indicate that the property value might be increased if it were changed from residential to commercial. Commissioner Le Jeune asked that staff add the proposed freeway expansion on the map. Mr. Phil Shindler, property owner on Newport Avenue indicated that he felt the area needed to.be developed and was in favor of the changes. He asked for Planning Commission input regarding what they desire to see in that area. Commissioner Well, asked that staff verify that property owners and businesses within 300 feet are noticed and also that PCC is the most flexible commercial zoning development plan possible. Commissioner Puckett asked the schedule for the public hearing. The planning Commission hearing will be on July 13, the first reading of the required Ordinance before City Council is tentatively scheduled for July 20, and the second reading is tentatively scheduled for August 3. Commissioner Puckett moved, Pontious seconded to direct staff to advertise a public hearing for Zone Change 87-1, 87-2 and General Plan Amendment 87-1. Vote 4-0. Planning Commtston Hln~tes June 29, 1987 Page four NLrti BUSZNESS STAFF CONCERNS 7. Report on City Council Actions Taken at June [5, lg87 and 3une 22, [987 meettngs Presentation: Christine Shingleton, Director of Oo~unlty 0evelopment 8. Re-organization of Planning Commission It was noted that at the next Commission meeting, reorganization of the Commtsslon is required. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Le Jeune asked the status on Sign Code and Parking Ordinance meetings. Commissioner Well asked that staff agendize the issue of sign guidelines at Tustin Plaza in order to include orange and asked the status on the meeting with City Council for Joint workshop. She requested an informal agenda for that meeting. ADJOURla4ENT: At 9:10 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to the next regular scheduled meeting on July 13, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. by unanimous informal consent. Charles E. Puckett Chairman Penni Foley Recording Secretary ITEM NO. 2 Planning Commission DATE: JULY 27, 1987 SUBJECT: USE PERMIT 87-13 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: MR. DUSKIN KELLER AND MR. TIM KELLER 18826 WINDWOOD LANE, SANTA ANA, CA 92705 LOCATION: 210 S. PACIFIC STREET ZONING: R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 3 REQUEST: TO BUILD A 2360 SQUARE FOOT SECOND SINGLE FAMILY UNIT RECOi~ENDED ACTION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit 87-13 by the' adoption of Resolution No. 2417. BACKGROUND: Submitted development plans propose construction of a 2,360 square foot second single family unit and attached two car garage on an existing .3 acre, R-1 zoned lot which is 55 feet in width and 243 feet deep. The applicant also proposes to provide a detached two car garage for the existing single family unit at the center portion of the lot. Section 9223 (b) of the Zoning Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for construction of a second single family unit in the R-1 zone. The subject project is located in the 01d Town residential area in a predominantly single family area. However, numerous sites in the area contain second units such as this proposal. The property faces Pacific Street on the east and is surrounded by single family homes on the north, south and west. .... Community Development Department Planning Commission Report Use Permit No. 87-13 July 27, 1987 Page Two ANALYSIS: The proposed unit is subject to specific Development Standards established by the Zoning Code. A summary of minimum requirements as compared against the proposed project is as follows: DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CODE REQUIREMENT PROPOSED PROJECT Front yard setbacks 25 feet 169 feet Side yard setbacks 5 feet 5 feet Rear yard setbacks 20 feet 20 feet Building Height 30 feet 13.5 feet Minimum Building Site 12,000 sq. ft. 13,365 sq. ft. Off-Street Parking 2 garage spaces 2 garage spaces per unit per unit The location of the se'cond unit is set back 20 feet from the garage aJdition and a total of 89 feet from the existing single family residence. The property directly to the south contains a second single family unit with a similar site layout. The new unit is located, a minimum of eighteen {18) feet from the neighboring unit which is located on the property to the south (see attached plans for clarification). ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES: As proposed, the new unit and detached garage will incorporate architectural elements which match the existing unit. Both structures will have wood horizontal siding, french parted windows and dark composition roof shin~les. The overall effect is somewhat victorian in style and is to be painted pastel yellow with white trim. The existing structure and the new unit and garage will be compatible with the surrounding area. There are numerous woodsided buildings with french paned windows in the neighborhood. Staff considers the architectural elements to be in harmony with the existing structure and the neighborhood as a whole. Community DeveloPment Depar~mem J Planning Commission Report Use Permit No. 87-13 July 27, 1987 Page Three CONCLUSIONS The subject project is located in the Old Town Tustin area where the lot sizes are consistenly large in size. Numerous properties have second units on the rear such as this proposal. Staff considers the site plan, architecture and lot coverage to be compatible with the area and recommends approval of the project subject to conditions contained in Resolution No. 2417. Laura Ca~ Pi~J~p,~' /~J C~ristine A. Shingleton, ~_ Associate Planner Director Of Community Development LCP:CAS:ts:pef Attachments: Site Plan Elevations Resolution No. 2417 Community Development Depar~mem J RESOLUTION NO. 2417 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION OF A 2360 SQUARE FOOT SECOND SINGLE FAMILY UNIT AT 4 210 S. PACIFIC STREET 5 The Planning Commission of ~the City of Tustin doe~ hereby r~solve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: ? A. That a proper application, (Use Permit No. 87-13) has been filed on behalf of Mr. Duskin Keller and Mr. Tim Keller to construct a 2360 square foot second single family unit and detached garage 9 at 210 S. Pacific Street. 10 B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. 11 C. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use ]2 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. This project is located in the Single Family Land Use catagory of the Tustin General Plan'; ]0 2. The use applied for is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan. 17 3. This project is located in the R-1 (Single Family ]8 Residential) zone and the use applied for is a conditionally 19 permitted use in the R-1 zone; 4. The proposed project meets all development standards of the zoning code. 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 25 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. Resolution No. 2417 ] page two F. This project is categorically exempt (Class 3) from the $ California Environmental Quality Act. G. Final development plans shall require the review and approval of the Community Development Department. 5 -II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 0 87-13 to authorize construction of a 2360 square foot second single family unit at 210 S. Pacific Street subject to the following ? conditions: A. Final development plans shall substantially conform with the approved plan, date stamped July 13, 1987, as herein modified. Any changes to these plans shall require prior approval by the Community Development Director. 10 B. Unless otherwise specified, conditions contained in this 1] resolution shall be complied with prior to issuance of any Building permits for the project, subject to review and approval 12 by the Community Development Department. C. 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 Design Standards of 15 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. D. All building materials and colors shall match those of the existing front unit. ]8 E. All unpaved surfaces shall be landscaped and irrigated prior to 19 issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Should any new irrigation systems be installed Building permits will be required. F. Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all required fees: 1. All applicable building plan check and permit fees to the 23 Building Division; 2. Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program to the Public Works Department; 3. New Development Tax to the Building Division; 25 4. East Orange County Water District fees to the Water Department; 5. Orange County Sanitation District No. 7 sewer connection fee to the Public Works Department; 6. School Tax fees to the Tustin Unified School District. Reso]ution No. 2417 ~ page three 4 H. At building plan check provide technical details and plans for all utility installations including cable TV, telephone, gas, 5 water and electricity. 0 I. At building plan check submit: ? 1. Construction plans; 2. Structural calculations; $ 3. Title 24 energy calculations; 4. Grading and drainage plans based on Orange County surveyors 9 Bench Mark location as deemed necessary by the Building Official. 10 J. Applicant shall comply with all regulations of Orange County 11 Fire Chief including fire flow; installation, where requested, of fire hydrants; and compliance with all requirements 12 pertaining to construction. ]3 K. The project shall conform with the following requirements of the Public Works and Engineering Departments: 1. The existing Edison, telephone and CATV services to.the ]5 single family structure on the site shall be converted to underground service. Also, the proposed structures must be ]O served with underground service. 17 2. A separate street improvement plan will be required showing all proposed construction within the public right-of-way. ]8 All construction items shown on this plan shall be referenced to the applicable City standard drawing number 19 and shall include but not be limited to the following: 20 a) Construction or replacement of any missing or damaged curb and gutter and sidewalk; 21 b) Sanitary sewer service; c) Domestic water service; 22 d) Undergrounding of Edision, telephone and CATV services; 23 e) A 5800 HPSV street light on marbelite pole with underground service shall be installed 15 feet north 24 of the southerly property line; 25 3. City Plan No. S-108 shows an existing 4" sewer lateral to the property line of this parcel. Calculations shall be submitted for Building Department approval showing that 2G this 4" lateral will be adequate. .1 Resolution No. 2417 2 Page four 3 4 L. The existing and proposed access driveway shall be resurfaced to current City standards. 5 M. The subject property shall not be further subdivided for 6 purposes of creating i'ndividual lots for sale of each unit. Subject property shall remain as one lot in its entirety. ? N. No additional exterior or garage access to or from front bedroom 8 proposed in second story family unit shall be permitted at any time. Said unit shall be accessed from main entrance of unit at g all times. ]0 0.' One additional open guest parking space shall be provided on the subject property adjacent to the proposed free standing garage 1] and with adequate driveway access and surfacing subject to approval of location by the Director of Community Development. P. Proposed enclosed garages shall be used for parking of 13 vehicles. No storage shall be permitted in garages unless said storage is designed as accessory and unobstructing to required 14 garage parking spaces. 15 Q. The existing and proposed access driveway shall not be used for parking but maintained free and clear for access to the rear 16 unit. 17 R. The applicant shall sign and return an Agreement to Conditions Imposed form as required by the Director of Community 18 Development. 19 20 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 23 Chairman 26 Penni Foley Secretary ITEM NO. 3 ,,. Planning Cc)remission DATE: JULY 27, 1987 SUBJECT:- ZONE CHANGE 87-1, 87-2 AND GENERAL PLAN AHENOHENT 87-1 APPLICANT: CITY OF TUSTI:N 300 CENTENNIAL WAY TUSTIN, CAL[FORNTA 92680 ENV [ROIOIENTAL STATUS: ZONE CHANGE 87-1: CATAGORICALLY EXEMPT CLASS 5 GENERAL PLAN AI~ENDHENT 87-1 AND ZONE CHANGE 87-2: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN Fl:LED [N CONFORJqANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENV[ROI~IENTAL QUALITY ACT LOCATION: PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE NEST SIDE OF NENPORT AVENUE BETWEEN THE [-5 FREEWAY AND H[TCHELL AVENUE AND ON THE EAST STDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETNEEN HAIN & SAN JUAN STREETS RECOHMENDED ACTION: It ts recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the following: a.) Resolution No. 2413 recommending that City Council approve General Plan Amendment 87-1. b.) Resolution No. 2414 recommending Zone Change 87-2. c.) Resolution No. 2412 recommending Zone Change 87-1. d.) Resolution No. 2411 establishing guidelines for review of Conditional Use Permit applications and proposed Development Plans. BACKGROUND: On June 29, 1987 the Planning Commission held a public workshop to discuss proposed Zone Change 87-1, 87-2 and General Plan Amendment 87-1. Staff presented a report containing information on the events which led up to the initiation of the project and a proposed course of action. The June 29th staff report is attached for all related background information. At the workshop, Mr. Robert Laird of Cerritos expressed concern over the proposed I-5 Freeway widening and how it would affect his property. Recent freeway widening data was obtained from the Los Angeles Caltrans office and is attached.to this report as Exhibit I. Additional conversations with Clarence Community Development Department Planning Commission Report July 27, 1987 Zone Change 87-1, 87-2/General Plan Amendment 87-1 Page two O'Hara of Caltrans on .July 8th would indicate that Caltrans may be suggestqng design changes along, the stretch of freeway widening adjacent to Mr. Laird's property._ Those changes would not likely result iX the need for additional right-of-way but could eliminate the Newport Avenue ramp and widening for the ramp itself. All other verbal and written comments on the proposed Zone Change 87-1 and 87-2 supported rezoning as proposed. Since completion of the staff report and publication of public heaping notice on this matter, no further inquiry has been made opposing the proposed Zone Changes and General Plan Amendment project. ANALYSIS: Both project areas involve rezoning to PC-C (Planned Community Commercial) District. The PC-C District requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit and development plan by the Planning Commission prior to any new development. In most cases, development plans include comprehensive strategies for improvement of properties in the PC-C District. In order to emphasize the concerns of access and visibility, staff is also recommending adoption of Guidelines to be used in reviewing Conditional Use Permit applications and for development plans in the PC-C District: These guidelines will require consideration of access, visibility and land use issues prior to approval of a Conditional Use Permit adopting ~f any development plan. Therefore, ensuring proper consideration of surrounding properties prior to development. As mentioned in the attached staff report, rezoning of the area south of the 1-5 Freeway will also require a General Plan Amendment which redesignates the land use from MF (Multi Family) and C (Commercial) to the PC (Planned Community) District. This amendment will ensure conformance between the Zoning Map and General Plan Map as required by state law. The properties at Newport Avenue and Main Street are already designated for commercial land use on the General Plan Map. ~ CONCLUSION: Through the implementation of Zone Change 87-1, 87-2, General Plan Amendmen~ 87-1 and the Development Plan Guidelines, staff can facilitate more comprehensive, cohesive development of the properties involved. Should this project be adopted, all future development of parcels will require prior approval of the Planning Commission by issuance of a Use Permit. This Use Permit process will also require adoption of a development plan for any PC-C zoned properties. community Development Department Planning Commission Report July' 27, 1987 Zone Change~7-1, 87-2/General Plan Amendment 87-1. Page three This project is recommended by staff based upon a detailed analysis of -the issues involved. Wi~h proper consideration of the issues,'staff recommends adoption_ of Zone Changes 87-1, 87-2, General Plan Amendment 87-1 and the Development Plan Guidelines for PC-C zoned properties. Christine Shingl Director of Community Development LCP:pef Attachments: Exhibit 1 June 22, 1987, Staff Report Resolution Numbers 2411, 2412, 2413 and 2414 Community DeveloPment Depanmem J EXHIBIT I PROPOSED I-5 FREEWAY WIDENING** **PRELIMINARY PLAN AS OF JULY 1, 1987, SUBJECT TO CHANGE Planning Commission DATE: dUNE 22, 1987 SUBdEGT: ZONE CllANOE 87-1, 87-2 AND GENERAL PLAN AI~NDHENT 87'1 APPLTCANT: CZ'FY OF' TUSTZN 300 C£NTENNTAL HAY TUSTTN.~ CALZFORN~A 92680 ENYZROm4£NTAL STATUS: ZONE: CHANGE: 87-I: CATAGOR]:CALLY EXERPT CLASS $ GENERAL PLAN AIqENOIq£XT 87-1, AHD ZONE CHANG£ 87-2: A NEGATZYF. DECLARATZOli HAS BEEN F~LED TN CONFORI~,NC~ ~IZTH THE CALZFORNTA ENYZROlgqENTAL QUALZTY ACT LOCAT]:OII: .PROPERTZES LOCATED ON THE #EST STD£ OF NEvPORT AY£NU£ BETYE£N THE: ~-6 FREEHAY AND HZTCH£LL AYE:HUE: AND ON THE: EAST STOl: OF I~qIPORT AVENUE BLrTTIF. EN lqAZN & SAN ,1UAN STREETS ~COI~4END£D ACTZON: Tt tS recommended that the Planntng-Co~;,,lsston dtrect staff to aclver'ctse a publlc hearing ~or Zone Changes 87-:~, 87-2 and General Plan Amendment, 87-1. BACKGROUND: On Apr11 20, ~987 the ¢tty Counctl passed an Urgency Ordinance (Fio. 983) which approved a moratorium, on processing, tssuance of butldtng permtts or approvals of ~ny kind for development pro~lect$ tn the areas along Ne~por~ Avenue as Illustrated on Map ! and 2 to Attachmen~ 1. The sub,Jeer moratorium was In effect for 46 days (per section 65858 of the Caltforflta Government Code) and was subsequently extended for ~en (10) months and ftfteen (15) days on dune 1, 1987. The moratorium v~s enacted for the' purposes of conducting a' zontng s~u~ly on the properS¶es tn the moratorium areas. A revtev of the events vhtch star~ed ~hts process and the development constr, atnt$ on ~he propertfes tnvolved t$ tncluded tn Attachment I tO thts report providing further Information and c~arlftca~lon of the tssues tnvolvecl. Staff have completed the zontng study of the properties tncluded tn the moratorium area and have drafted appropriate amendments ~o the General P~an and Zontng OPcltnance for the Commission's revtev and comments. ' summary o~ the recommended approaches ts as follows: East Stale of ~rt: Avenue i~el:~een 14atn Street and San ~luan (Zone Chancre 87-L J: Community Development Department ~lanntng- Commission Report ~.one Change 87-! and 87-2 and General Plan Amendment 87-1 ~lune 22, 1987 Page ~o · All etght (8) p'arcels ~re.currently tn the South Central Redevelopment Area and are zoned for commercial use (See Map No. I tn the attached staff report). Each lot has a c0mmerctal land IJse designation, tn the General Plan. As proposed, the zone change would ~nvolve rezontng of all etght (8) parcels from CG and CG-PUO to Planned Con, aunity Commercial (PC-C). The zone change would not alter the types of uses allowed by the current zoning on the property, however staff recommends that the Co,,,,,l sst on consider guidelines for development of Planned Community Commercial properties (See item number 3 tn this report). Use of the Planned Community Commercial dtstrtct as opposed to CG and CG-PUD w111 allow certain development flextbtltttes such as parktng, set back and hetght requirements which are tailored to .meet the needs of each development area. .This would be done through approval of a development plan whtch required'prior to initiation of any project tn the Planned Community Commercial 01strict. This development plan ts approved by the Planning Co~nlssion through a Use Permit. 2.. tleststde of orr 'Avenue Betueen the Z-5 F_~:a and l~ltchell Avenue ~Thts area tncludes eleven (11) parcels located In the Sou.th- Central Redevelopment Area (See Map Number 2 In the attached staff report). Of these, stx (6) are zoned C-1: Retail Commercial and the remaining ftve (5) parcels are zoned R-3: I~ultJLfanflly Residential.. The proposed project would rezone eleven (11) parcels to Planned Community Commercial. This would allow Uses currently authorized on the six (6)*C-1 zoned parcels, however, the five (5*) R-3 zonedtots would be rezoned to commercial. As wtth the area previously discussed, incremental development of parcels in this area would render other properties undevelopable for commercial use. This ts due to the current lot configurations which create irregular lots wtth mtntmum visibility and access. '~Uth the Pla'nned Communtty'Commerct~.l zoning designation, .the use of development plans can help to'reduce these pcoblems as · .opposed to ustng a standard C-1 or CG zone which would allow thcremental development. M~ltt-famtly structures on the existing R-3 zoned lots would be considere~ exlsttng, non-confornflng uses. Under current provisions of the Ctty's Zoning Code, extsttng uses and structures would be permitted to rematn untt construction of more than 50[ of the assessed value is necessary or tf the use on the property is vacated for a period of over six (6) months. Should either of these events occur, the property would have to be converted to a co~,ercial use in conformance with the Planned Co,,.~ntty district. The remaining stx (6) ;-1 lots are currently used for commercial purposes. Community DeveloPment Department lanntng Commission Report ,one Change 87-! and 87~2 and General Pla~ Amendment 87-! " June 22, 1987 Page three The ftve (5) C-! zoned lots are currently designated C: Commercial on the Seneral Plan Land Use'Map. However the extsttng R-3 Zoned lots are designated MF: Multi-family. A General Plan Amendment would be required to re-designate all properties In the study area to the Planned Community Co~a,erctal (PCC) land use designation prior to any zone change on the subject properties. 3. Planned C~muntty Commercial Development Guidelines and Revlew Criteria: The project areas both contatn stmtlar visibility and access problems. In order to assure comprehensive development of all parcels to thetr fullest potential, staff recommends that the Planntng Commission conslder adoptton of development gutdellnes for properties tn these areas as well as all other Planned Community Commercial lots. The proposed guidelines Incorporate the following objectives for deveibpment plans In the Planned Community Commercial district: Consolidate.on of lots shall be Incorporated wherever feasible; Development of stngle' parcels at the expense of'limiting future potential development of other parcels In the same dtstrtct and whtch are adjacent to the area betng considered, shall be discouraged; 3. The tntent of the development plan shall be to allow maxtmum 'visibility and accessibility of all parcels tn the same dtstrtct which are adjacent to 'the property being considered; and 4. Development Plans proposed f~r Planned Community Commercial properties should Incorporate uses tn which contribute to'the general fund wherever possible. COM{:LtISXO#: Staff considers the tssues of 11mired access and visibility of parcels In the study areas .(refer to Attachment ~) to be a paramount constde~.~tton tn addressing this project. Staff can facilitate comprehensive developmeht of the properties considered w(th the recommended Zone Changes, General Plan Amendment and adoptton of development guidelines while meettng the Intentions of the South. Central Redevelopment Plan. Communi:y DevetoDment Department / 1 anntng Commtsston Report one Change 87-! and 87-2 and. General Plan Amendment 87-1 3une 22, 1987 Page' four Guidelines to be u§ed ;n reviewing pro~ects in'the Planned Community Con~nercial Dtsttct are tncorpora'ted into the attached draft Re~olution No. 2411. Draft resolutions for Zone Change 87-1 , 87-2, and General Plan Amendment 87-! are. also attached for review. LCP:CAS:~s:pef Attachments: Hay 21, 1987 Staff Report Resolution No. 2411 Resolution No. 2412 · Resolution*No'. 2413 ~ Resolution No. 2414 Corn rnunity Developrnen~ Depanmen~ ~ ~' ~' ATTA61~MENT NO. I TO: #ZLLIAN A. HUSTON, CTTY HANAG£R FROM: COI~IUNZTY DEVELOP~IENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: EXltqlSZON OF HORATORIUN ORD%HANCE - NEHI)QRT AYENUE. RECOI$1ENDED ACTZON: M.0. That Urgency 0rdtnance No. 986 have f~rst reading by tttle only. M.O. That Urgency 0rdtnance*No. 986 be Introduced. M,0. Tha~ Urgency 0rdtnance No. 986 have second readfng by tttle only. M.O. That Urgency 0rdlnance No. 986 be passed and adopted. BACXGROUND: The Tusttn. City Counctl adopted an tntertm ordinance (No. 983) on Apr11 20, 1987. Th~s ordinance placed a moratorium on the processing, tssuance of permlts or approvals of any ktnd for development projects of properties located on the east stde of* Newport Avenue between Hath 'Street and San Juan and on the west stde of Newport Avenue between the Z-5 freeway and Mttchell Avenue. Attached Is a copy of the Aprtl 20, 1987 Staff report whtch discusses the background and zontn9 tssues related to the tnlttatton of the moratorium. The subject moratorium was established for the purpose of permtttfng completfon of Zone changes and a General Plan amendment whtch wtll re-zone the.study areas to PC-Planned Community Commercial. Thfs ts expected to encourage comprehensfve development of the properties tn the study areas and avotd Incremental development of properties whtch have a detrimental effect on the area. The moratorium prevfously adopted Is effectfve for 45 days from the date of adoptfon and may be extended by the Cfty Counctl for ten (Z0) months and ftf~een (15) days. A subsequent extensfon of one year may also be granted wfth the approval of the Ctty Counctl. Section 65858 requires that a report be prepared and made available to the publtc ten (10) days prior to the public hearing for the c0nstderatfon of extending any moratorium adopted by an 1nterfm ordinance. This report contatns the zonlng related 1ssues' and a proposed course of actton for tnfttatton of a zone change and General Plan amendment for the stady area. Extension of Moratortum Ordinance - Newport Avenue page two WORK PROGRAPI: As discussed in the attached staff report of April 20, 1987, each of the study areas have considerable development potential . However, some lots have minimum visibility and access to Newport Avenue. Should any of the lots which directly face Newport Avenue be developed individually, the possibility of development of the rear lots in each area is highly unlikely. The proposed zone change to PC-Plan6ed Community Commercial would reouire some form of lot consolidation and a development plan. This development plan would address visibility and access issues in addition to site, architectural, and landscaping requirements and would be approved by the issuance of a Use Permit. At this time, Staff has. completed the following steps towards the preparation of zoning ordinance amendments. 1. Base maps prepared. 2. Survey of land use and zoning. 3. ~reparatton of maps showing zoning/land use and condition of property. 4.. Initial analysis of proposed zone change and General Plan amendments. The base maps and analysis results Will help staff to prepare the final zoning documents for presentation to the City Council and Planning Commission. The following is a proposed processing schedule for the current work program: D&TE ACTIVITY June 1, 1987 Public Hearing held by City Council to consider extension of the moratorium on the Newport Avenue study areas. June 1, - June 22, 1987 Staff to complete analysis of study area. Preparation of zone changes and General Plan amendment. June 22, 1987 Preliminary workshop with Planning Commission and residents to review Staff report and recommended approach. July 13, 1987 Public Hearing held by Plan. ntng Commission for adoption of zone changes and General Plan amendment, July 20, 1987 Public Hearing held by City Council/Redevelopment Agency, for considerati, on of.zo.n.e changes and Genera~ Plan' amendment (First Kea~ng~. Moratorium 0rdlnance Ho. g83: Zoning Study Page three · ACT]VI'fY Au§ust3, lg87 Second read~ng of zone changes and Genera] Plan amendment. September. 2, lg87 Zone chan~es and General Plan amendment eCfect/morator~um tarm~nated. This tenat~ve schedule allows for approximately 3 months of processing tfme. Minor alterations of thts schedule may occur tf the scope of the project changes· . Although the moratorium is not expected to be tn effect for ten months and ftfteen (IS) .days, the tenattve schedule may change ~f unforeseen d~fflculttes arise, the scope of the project ~s changed or the current ~ork load tn the Community Development Department changes significantly. However, the ~oning changes and General Plan amendment can be expected to be in effect ~n ~ss than the allowed ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days. Upon adoption of ezone changes-and General Plan amendment, the moratorium ~ould xptre.. · D~rector Communtt~ Development Department Attachments: STAEF REPORT OROI~ANC£ NO. 986 EX~ZBZT A EXHZBZT B : .ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 4-20-87 Inter- Com TO:. WILLIAN A. ltUSTO#, CIT~ NANAGER FI:iOM: COI~4U#ITI' DEYELOP~E]fl' DEPARTI~NT S~.)BJECT: PROPO~'ED MORATORIUN$ ON TIlE F_A~RLY SIDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETI~EEN SAN JUAN AND MAIll ~'TREET AND ON THE WES'I'ERLY SIDE OF #EWPORT. AVENUE BETWEEN 1-5 FREEWAY AND MITC}IELL AVENUE I~COI~E)iDATIOII: M.O. That Urgency Ordinance No. g83 have first reading by title only. R.O. That Urgency Ordinance No. 983' be introduced. lt.O. That Urgency Ordinance No. 983 have second reading by title only. ~ O. That Urgency Ordinance No. 983 be passed and adopted. .CI~OUND AND ANALYSIS: The Community Development Department has recently been approached by se'veral parties .about development of property at the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and Main Street and property along the west' side of Newport Avenue between Ritchell Avenue and the I-5 freeway. These are properties that staff feel have development potential. However, it is our position that limited access and traffic issues along Newport Avenue necessitate that the properties in each study area be developed as comprehensive, cohesive projects. These study areas and the issues involved are discussed separately below. 1. EAST SIDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BE"TI~EEN MAIN STREET AND SAN JUAN ': Each of the corner sites has considerable development potential. Each of the sites within' this study area are zoned CG-Commercial General or CG-PUD-Commercial General-Planned Unit Development. The three lots on the north would provide a development site of 1.48 acres if combined. The southerly site comprises eight lots which total 1.11 acres if combined. See Map I for clarification. Current zoning would allow incremental development of each of the eight lots within the study area. Although some sites have optimum visibility and accessibility, the most easterly lots are not visible or accessible from Newport Avenue. Should incremental development occur, all access, and street visibility of the easterly lots will be limited to Andrews Street or San Juan, thereby creating a situation that makes it highly unlikely that these sites would be developed as commercial propoerty despite their current zoni n9. ,ty Council Repor~ April 20, 1987 San Juan and Main Street Morltorium Page no Recognizing the important l=cation of the subject properties across from Tustin Plaza and as. entry to the Civic Center and Old Town, the City should take whatever steps necessary to ensure consolidated development of the subject properties. In order to encourage coh6sive development of the area, initiation of a zone change on all eight sites is recommended. This zone change could rezone all eight sites to PC-Commercial whtch requires a development plan and Use Permit prior to construction. Similar uses already authorized In the CG zone would be allowed in the PC zone. However, flexibility in mixed uses, parking and setback'requirements and site design' would be available. 2. WESTSIDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN ll4E I-$ FREEWAY AND MITCHELL AVENUE This area is comprised of eleven lots in an area approximately 3.98 acres in size. Six lots within the study area, which have access directly onto ~- Newport Avenue, are: zoned C-1 Retail Commercial. The remaining five lots are zoned R-3-Multtple Family Residential. See Map 2 for details. Some lots (Alta Dena. Dais, vacant Texaco site and the Headache Treatment Center) which face Newport Avenue have optimum visibility and accessibility. However, the three lots on the north east corner have very limited access due to their irregular 'configuration. The 1 remaining properties are accessed from either "C" Street or "B" Street and currently contain non-conforming multiple family housing units. These units were annexed into Tustin from the County of Orange and do not meet current parking, open space, architectural-and density requirements of the zoning district. Incremental development of all or a portion of the properties will have an affect upon the development of the properties as a whole. As in the case . of the previously discussed study area, incremental development ~ould occur under the current zoning. However, incremental developent of certain lots, such as the vacant Texaco site would greatly reduce the possibilities for development of the three lots to the north. In order to encourage- comprehensive development of the area, staff is currently studying the-feasibility of a zone change on all eleven parcels. This zone change could involve rezontng all eleven sites to Planned Community which requires a development plan and Use Permit prior to construction. ~ Counctl, Report ~prtl 20, 1987 San Juan and Hatn Street Morttortum Page three ' Department sta~ are continually contacted by Interested partles ~ho ~sh to develop a]~ or a part o~ ~e study areas. ~n order ~o encourage comprehensJve deYe~opmen= o~ ~he study areas, s=a~¢ Nou~d recommend tha~ ~he Counct~ adop= =n tnter~m urgency ordinance that Nou~d ~mpose a =orltortum on the processing, approval or tssuance of any buJldlng permtts or dlscrettona~ actlons ~Jthln the study areas unttl a zone change can be enacted. ~Dlrector of Commun' ,S:LCP:pef Attachments: I~ap 1 I~ap 2 Urgency Ordinance ~1o. g83 Andrews :St. S~J't Juan East side of Newport Avenue between San Juan and Main St. '; CC, Comuercial C~ne~al (no Use Permit Required) CG-PUD Co..,,erci.~t General-Planned Unit Development (Use Permit Required) C-1 R-$ C-1 Mitchell Ave West side of Newport Avenue between Mitchell and I-S FWY. C-1 Retail Comnercial Zone R-3 .M~ltiple F~tily Residen- tial Zone ORDINANCE NO. 983 2. AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TUSTIN, 2 CALIFORNIA, DECLARING A MORATORIUM ON PROCESSING, ISSUANCE OF PERMITS OR APPROVALS OF ANY KIND FOR 4 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OF PROPE.RTIES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN SAN JOAN 5 AND MAIN STREET AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BE~EEN THE I-5 FREEWAY AND MITCHELL AVENUE 6 7 The City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does ordaln as follows: 8 I,' The City Council finds and determines as follows: 9 A. The Community Development Oepartme.nt is currently in the process of studying the feasibility of a Zone Change to require a 10 development plan and Conditional Use Permit for development of properties on the easterly side of' Newport Avenue between San 11 Juan and Main Street as shown, on Exhibits A and B attached hereto. 12 B. Certain 'lots within the area have limited accessibility which ]3 precludes quality development compatible With a major arterial roadway. 14 C. Incremental development of the parcels and absence of a 15 comprehensive development plan is injurious to the public health, safety and welfare. 10 O. The Community Development Department is conducting and will 1T continue to conduct a study of the need for an ordinance to redesignate the zoning designation on the properties as shown on 1R £xhtbtts A and B attached hereto. 19 II. The City Council hereby declares a moratorium on the processing, issuance of permits or approvals of any kind for 2() development projects shown on Exhibits A and B pending completion of · the study and report of the Planning Commission and Community ') Development Department and action thereon by the City Council. The 21 moratorium declared hereby shall extend for a period of 45 days from the date of adoption of this ordinance, unless duly extended or ~ termi hated. 2G Ordinance Ho. 98~ - 2 Page two III. This ordinance is adopted to protect the' public health, safety and 5 welfare and is adopted as an urgency measure by a four-fifth (4/5) vote' pursuant to the' provisions of Section 65858 of the California 6 Government Code and shall take effect immediately. The urgency is based on the fact that the City Council hereby finds that the ? construction of projects on the subject property prior to completion Of the study would have an adverse effect on other development and 8 uses and.upon l~he proper planning of the City of Tustin. 0 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Tustin held on the day of , 1987. 10 12 13 14 15 Richard B.. Edgar, Mayor 16 17 10 Mary £. Wynn, .City 2O Attachments: Exhibit A 21 Exhibit B (O~dinance No. 983) ====================== i~.::::::::::::::: ::::::~ Iw ,.. · [ j ..... i::::: J I :::::::::: ::::::: ~HHE i- ..:.:...:.. ~::::4, j ~""="'.--'"-':: ::::::: ::~ I ,., J I --~-,.,...~..=....-~.., · , _,.~ ,, ~ ,,. J~":-'::::J:--s~Dz ~ NORTH NOT TO SCALE (Ordinance No.. 983) ............. :~;'"!HHH!HH!~"~['~ ::::::::::::::::::::::: · ::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::~ ~ ::::::::::::~ '%'~,.~ (~ ::::::~:::~; Q ~ ~ ........ ::::::::::::.~ .tdITCH~LL ~VKNU~ .~: 0 RTH NOT TO SCALE 1 ORDINANCE NO. 986 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY CdUNCIL OF TUSTIR,. 5 CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ON PROCESSING, ISSUANCE 'OF PERMITSOR APPROVALS OF ANY KIND FOR '6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OF PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE O~ NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN SAN JUAN. 7 AND MAIN STREET AND ON ll~E WEST SIDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN THE I-$ FREEWAY AND MITCHELL AVENUE AS ~ PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED 'BY ORDINANCE NO. 983. 10 The City Council of the City of Tustin, CalifOrnia, does ordain as follows: 11 I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: 12 A. The Community Development Department ls currently in the process of studying the feasibility of a zone change to require a ]3 development plan and Conditional Use Permit for development of properties on the easterly side of Newport Avenue between San 14 Juan and Main Street a6d on the westerly side of Newport Avenue between the I-$ freeway and Mitchell Avenue as shown on Exhibits 15 A and B attached hereto. 16 B. Certain lots within the area have limited accessibility which precludes quality development compatible with a major arterial 17 roadway. 18 C. Incremental development of the parcels and absence of a comprehensive development plan is injurious' to the public lO health, safety and welfare. '20 D. The Community Development Department is conducting and will continue to conduct a study of the need for an Ordinance to redestgnate the zoning designation on the properties as shown on 2I Exhibits A and B attached hereto. ~- II. The City 'Council hereby extends the declared moratorium on the processing, issuance of permits or approvals of any kind for 23 development projects shown on Exhibits A and B pending completion of the study and report of the Planning Commission and Community 24' Development Department and action thereon by the City Council. The moratorium declared hereby shall extend for a period of up to ten 2.5 (10) months and fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption of this Ordinance, unless duly extended or terminated. 26 27 28 1 Ordinance No. 986 Page t~o '6 III. This Ordinance ts adopted to protect the public health, safety and 7 welfare and Is adopted as an urgency measure by a four-fifth (4/5) vote pursuant to the provisions of Section 65858 of the California ~ ~overnment Code and shall ~ake effect immediately. The urgency ts based on the fact that the City Council hereby finds that the 9 construction of projects on the subject property prior to completlon of the study would have an adverse effect on other development, and 1_0 uses and upon the proper planning of the City of Tusttn and to the public's general health, safety and ~elfare. 1! PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of 1.2 Tusttn held on the day of , 1987. 1-4 15 i Richard B. Edgar, Mayor 18 .., Mary E. Wynn; Ctty 23 Attachments: Exhibit A Exhibit B 2~' 25 26 27 · (0rdinance No. 986) --STUDY AREA NOT TO SCALE AREA ~ NOR'Eli NOT ~0 SCALE ENVIRON"'C. NTAL CHECKLIST CITY OF TUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 A. BACKGROUND 1. Project sponsor/project proponent CITY OF TUSTIN Address and phone number 300 CENTENNIAL WAY TUSTIN, CA 92680 544-~0 Contact LAURA PICKUP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER 2. head Agency CITY OF TUSTIN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 3. Person c0mp]etin9 checklist LAURA PICKUP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Name of project GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-1 2. Brief description of project proposal LAND USE DESIGNATION CHANGE ON PROPERTIES IN THE COMMERICIAL (C) LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THE MULTI-FAMILY (MF) DESIGNATION TO PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (PCC) FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN THE 1-5 FREEWAY AND MITCHELL AVENUE IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN. (THIS PROJECT IS CONCURRENT WITH ZONE CHANGE NO. 87-2 FOR THE SAME STUDY AREA.) SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe 1. Earth. Witl the proposal result in: a, Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic s~bstructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface re{ief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth- quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h.Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? [. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to - the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Environmental Checklist ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Yes Maybe 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c.Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier tp the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset, Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances .... (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 1 1. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air ~raffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Yes Maybe 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b, Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health?) b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation · of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation: Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opporttJnities-? 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sus- taining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _¢nwlrnnrn nf l hc c. Eliqf ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT AND DISCUSSION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project Could Not have a significant effect on the environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. ~ .Mind that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ~,re will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration Will Be repared. [] I find the proposed project May have a significant effect on,t, he envirop~en ar~-c~ an Environ- mental lmpact Report is required.juNE 18, 1987 ~~',~~,~.~' ~ [] Date ~t'gnJture r. AUt~,"P%CKU! AS"~IATE PLANNER t / For CHRISTINE SUINSL~ ~, ])IRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, CITY OF TUSTIN COMMENTS FOR INITIAL STUDY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 87-1 AND ZONE CHANGE 87-2 In discussing the environmental impacts of the proposed projects, all comments on the initial study questions were answered "NO" except for Section No. 8 regarding Land Use. The project is proposed to change the Land Use and Zoning designations on the Zoning and General Plan maps to Planned Community Commercial. Although a change in the actual land use will not immediately occur with this project,..it will make it possible for the land use to be change to commercial at some point in the future. The General Plan and Zone Change project will not have any environmental impacts until the properties are developed in accordance with the General Plan and Zone Change being proposed. At the time a project is being proposed for development, the environmental impacts of the development will be assessed at that time. This will include an initial study and follow-up environmental documents as necessary for the project proposed. In addition, a majority of the parcels considered in this project are already zoned used and designated in the General Plan for commercial use. This creates a situation whereby no environmental impacts are expected to occur unless an expansion or introduction of ~w land use occurs in the future. These impacts will be considered at the time that ~roject is proposed. The change from a residential to commercial land use and zoning designation would allow the existing residential apartments to continue their current use without complication. The apartments on the residential property will become existing, non-conforming land uses and will be allowed to continue until over 50% of the value of the structures needs to be replaced or if the use on the property is vacated for a period over six months in duration. Should either of these instances occur, the use on the property will have to be brought into a commercial use which conforms to the zoning. In terms of a future project and its impacts, the traffic, land use and architectural com- patibility issues will be addressed by the zoning requirements. Any proposed project for the area must be approved through a Conditional Use Permit. This will require approval by the Planning Commission in a public hearing format. This will require notification of the surrounding property owners and they will be notified for their comment. Any possible impact of a future development project would be identified and discussed for mitigation that time. It is difficult to assess future environmental impact without a specific development plan, however, a seperate environmental assessment will be made at the time the project is pro- posed. The zoning and general plan change will require lot consolidation and reduction traffic, accessibility and visual impacts of any proposed project. Therefore, any ute impacts and the requirements to reduce any future traffic, visibility and architect- ural compatibility problems will be handeled at the time that a project is processed. EXHIBIT A ® @ ~i!~ ...... ......... .~l ~CH~£ £ ~ V~N U£ NORTH NOT TO SCALE RESOLUTION NO. 2411 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS ON PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. In order to protect the public health, safety and welfare, the Planning Commission should consider the following guidelines when reviewing Conditional Use Permit applications and proposed development plans on properties located in the City of Tustin's Planned Community Commercial District: 1. Consolidation of lots shall be encouraged wherever feasible to ensure that contiguous properties with the same zoning designation are considered in a comprehensive rather than in an incremental manner. 2. Review of Conditional Use Permit applications and development plans for parcels in the Planned Community Commercial District shall consider impacts on adjacent properties, and properties in the vicinity, in that the Planned Community Commercial district intends to promote the following goals and objectives: a. The best use of property within the Planned Community Commercial district is development approaching maximum development potential; b. To promote a consistent quality of development throughout the Planned Community Commercial district; c. To provide compatible land uses which do not interfere or create health, safety or moral problems for an adjacent use; d. To ensure efficient parcel sizes and configurations for development plans approved in the Planned Community Commercial district; e. To require development plans which incorporate a combination of standards and incentives which will stimulate quality development; f. To promote lot consolidation in order to minimize traffic congestion through use of combined access points for development projects; Resolution No. 2411 page two g. To ensure that development projects in the Planned Community Commercial District promote maximum visibility and accessibility of all parcels in the same district. Impacts to properties adjacent to and in the vicinity of property being considered should be reviewed in that incremental development of properties in the Planned Community Commercial District may render contiguous properties undevelopable for commercial use. h. Ensure that projects proposed for properties within the Planned Community Commercial District incorporate, wherever possible, uses which generate general fund revenue to the City in conformance within the land use element of the General Plan which is to promote an economically balanced community. B. That the establishment of these guidelines is necessary to protect the property and improvements in the neighborhoods surrounding or located in the Planned Community Commercial Districts and the general welfare of the City of Tustin. C. These guidelines are in accordance with the South Central and Town Center Redevelopment Plans. D. Should a development plan for a project within the Planned Commercial district fail to meet any of the aforementioned guidelines, this shall provide a basis for Planning Commission denial of the Use Permit required for approval of the development plan. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 Charles E. Puckett, Chairman Penni Foley, Recording Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 2412 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING ZONE CHANGE 87-1 TO REZONE PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF 4 NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN MAIN STREET AND SAN JUAN FROM (CG) COMMERCIAL GENERAL AND CG-PUD 5 COMMERCIAL GENERAL-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO (PC-C) PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 6 7 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: 8 I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: 9 A. City Council requested initiation of a City of Tustin Zone l0 Change from CG'and CG-PUD to PC-Commercial for all properties in the project area as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and 1] incorporated herein by reference. 12 B. That a public hearing duly called, noticed and held on said application. ]3 C. That a zone change should be granted for the following reasons: 14 1. The commercial land use designation is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan. 15 2.. The intent of the PC-C zone is to allow diversification of 16 development while maintaining continunity in architecture and compatibility of land use. Also the intent of the zone 17 is to provide consolidation of parcels in an effort to discourage incremental development and to encourage 18 reduction of vehicular access points onto Newport Avenue. 19 3. Individual project continunity and compatibility within the PC-C district will be insured by requiring Conditional Use 20 Permits prior to development. 2! 4. Certain lots within the area have limited accessibility which precludes quality development compatible with a major 2~ arterial roadway. ~3 5. Incremental development of the parcels and absence of a comprehensive development plan is injurious to the public 24 health, safety and welfare based upon findings in Sections I.C. 1, 2, 3 and 4 of this resolution. Resolution No. 2412 page two 2 4 II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 87-1 from (CG) Commercial General and 5 (CG-PUD) Commercial General-Planned Unit DeVelopment to Planned Community Commercial (PC-C) for the properties in the project area 0 shown on Exhibit A attached hereto. ? 8 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 10 Charles E. Puckett~ Chairman Penni Foley, Recording Secretary 18 · . ' EXHIBIT 'A' (RESOLUTION NQ.~ 2412) ' RE-ZONING NO. $7~1, ALL PARCELS FROM CG AND CC-PUD TO PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (PC-C) ~-'::~! -- ~ A~Sc'm) s~ zone. CSA~S' NO~TI-I sCALE: 1"=200' RESOLUTION NO. 2413 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-1) FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF''B' STREET SOUTH OF THE I-5 FREEWAY FROM (M-F) MULTI-FAMILY AND (C) COMMERCIAL TO (PCC) PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. Section 65356.1 of the Government Code of the State of California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General Plan. B. That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of the State of California, a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on the application of the City of Tustin to reclassify the land use of properties shown on Exhibit A attached hereto an incorporated herein by reference. C. That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with th~ requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is hereby recommended for adoption. D. That a change in classification would be in the ~ublic interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the surrounding property owners in that this amendment will permit implementation of a zone designation that will promote comprehensive and compatible development in the area by requiring an approved development plan prior to issuance of new construction permits. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that General Plan Amendment 87-1 be adopted, amending the Land Use Element for the area as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto from (MF) Multi-Family and (C) Commercial to {PCC) Planned Community Commercial. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 Charles E. Puckett, Chairman Penni Foley, Recording Secretary EXHIBIT 'A' (P. ESOLUTION NO. 24!3) "RE-DESIGNATION OFGENERAL PLAN MAP LANDUSE .DESIGNATION FROM MULTI-FAMILY (MF) AND COMMERCIAL (C) ~-TO PLANNE~ COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (PC-C) AR~-A AFFECTED BY LAND USE ~ '~ DESIGNATION CHANGE. NORTM SCALE; 1/16"-10' 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2414 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING ZONE CHANGE 87-2 TO REZONE PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN THE I-5 FREEWAY AND MITCHELL AVENUE FROM MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) AND RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-1) TO PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (PC-C) The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as ? follows: 8 I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. The City Council requested initiation of a zone change from Retail Commercial (C-1) and Multiple Family Residential (R-3) to 10 Planned Community Commercial (PC-C) for all properties located in the project area shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and 1] incorporated herein by reference. B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. C. That a zone change should be granted for the following reasons: 1. A General Plan Amendment (No. 87-1) has been processed concurrently with this zone change to redesignate properties shown on Exhibit "A" from Multi-Family (MF) and Commercial (C) to Planned Community Commercial (PCC) on the General ]O Plan Land Use Map. As required by State Law, General Plan and Zone designation must be consistent with each other. ]? The Zone change approved by this resolution maintains general plan to zoning consistancy. 2. The intent of the PC-C zone is to allow diversification of development while maintaining conttnunity in architecture and compatibility of land use. Also the intent of the zone 20 is to provide consolidation of parcels in an effort to discourage incremental development and to encourage reduction of vehicular access points onto Newport Avenue. 3. Individual project continunity and compatibility within the PC-C district will be insured by requiring Conditional Use Permits prior to development. Resolution No. 2414 Page two 4. Certain lots within the area have limited accessibility which precludes quality development compatible with a major arterial roadway. 5. Incremental development of the parcels and absence of a comprehensive development plan is injurious to the public health, safety and welfare based upon findings in I.C. 1, 2, 3 and 4 of this resolution. D. A Negative Declaration has been filed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 87-2 from Multiple Family Residential (R-3) and Retail Commercial (C-1) to Planned Community Commercial (PC-C) for the property in the projected area shown on Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 Charles E. Puckett, Chairman Penni Foley, Recording Secretary EXHIBIT ~A~ (RESOLUTION NO. 2414) KE-ZONE NO. 87-2 FROM ¢-1 AND 1t-3 TO PLANNED ::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::: · h::: ® ,- AREA AFFECTKD BY ZONE CHANGE NORTI4 S~E: .._11~6"~10' ITEM NO. 4 Planning Commission DATE: ~ULY 27, 1987 SUBdECT: USE PERIq~T 87-14 AND VARIANCE 87-04 APPLICANT: MR. DON GRE~NKE ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL LOCATION: 13918 - 13922 NENPORT AVENUE AND 1016 - 1022 BONITA AVENUE, PARCELS ARE CONTIGUOUS ZONING: C-1 RETAIL COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ~L~S BEEN PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALII~F ACT. REQUEST: USE PERIqIT B7-14 TO AUll4ORIZE A SELF-SERVICE CARD-LOCK COMMERCIAL FUEL FACILITY AT lllE SUBJECT ADDRESS AND TO INSTALL AN EIGHT (B) FOOT BLOCK WALL AT THE SUBJECT ADDRESS; AND VARIANCE B7-04 TO AUllJORIZE THE PLACEMENT OF A SIGN AND A FREESTANDING CONTROL BUILDING WITHIN REQUIRED SETBACK ACCESS RECOMMENDATION: Zt ~s recommended that the Planning Commission: ~.) approve Use Permit 87-~4 by adopting Resolution No. 2420; and 2.) approve Yar~ance No. 87-04 by ~dopt~n9 Resolution No. 242~. SLq~ARY: For approximately the last 57 years, Southern Counties 0~1 has operated a commercial fuel pumping facility and a bulk oil storage operation on the properties located on the northeast corner of E1 Camino Real and Newport Avenue. The site also houses office space for the Tustin operation. At this time Southern Counties is in the process of relocating its offices and bulk oil operation to a larger industrial site. However, the company wishes to retain the self-service, commercial fuel dispensing pumps in the immediate vicinity and has purchased the site formerly occupied by Rasmussen'$ Saddlery for this purpose. : Pursuant to various sections of the Zonin~ Ordinance, a Conditional Use Permit 's required for service stations or gasoline dispursing operations. ,.ddittonally, since the project is within the Town Cen%er Redevelopment Project L ~,rea, a formal design review process is also mandated. Finally, in conjunction with the proposed project the following discretionary actions by the Planning Commission are also necessary: ' Communit~ Developmen~ Department Planning Commission Report Use Permit 87-14/Variance 87-04 July 27, 1987 Page two 1. The project site plan indicates an eight (8) foot block wall along ~he easterly property line. A Conditional Use Permit is required for any wall above 6'8" in height. 2. The free-standing control building is located within the required sideyard setback. A Variance to setback requirements must be approved prior to construction of the structure as shown. 3. The project identification sign is shown within the required highway ~etback area. A Variance to setback requirements must be approved prior to construction of the sign as shown. The project, as advertised, also included a request to vary with setback requirements by allowing encroachment of overhead canopies in the front and side yard setbacks. HOWever, after discussions between staff and the applicant, this portion of the application was withdrawn. For purposes of presenting a comprehensive view of the proposed development, each of the issues noted will be addressed within the body of this transmittal. However, separate formal~ actions by the Commission will be required on each component. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: ~eneral - Submitted development plans propose construction and operation of a 24 hour self-service, card-lock, fuel pumping facility to be located on the southeast corner of Newport Avenue'and Bonita Avenue on a long and narrow 0.31 acre site in the C-1 Retail Commercial Zoning District. The subject site is bounded on the east by a residential structure, on the south by a retail shopping center across Bonita, to the north by an abandoned service station, and to the west across Newport Avenue by commercial uses within the Tustin Plaza Project. The type of facility proposed will be totally self-serving and be unattended by Company personnel. With this system customers insert a credit card in~o service pumps, receive the product, and immediately leave the site. The facility will service both standard automobiles as well as commercial trucks which may be as large as 50-70 feet in length. Site improvements proposed on the subject property will include two pump islands, a 10 foot landscaping strip along the street frontage of Newport and Bonita, a 120 square foot control building at the southeast corner of the property, an eight (8) foot block wall along the easterly property line, a 100 foot landscape buffer in front of the wall, and a freestanding business identification sign in the required street yard setback. Consistent with current guidelines for self-serving service-stations, three standard sized parking spaces are also proposed 'adjacent to the easterly property line. Community DeveloPment Department ~lanntng Commission Report Jse Permit 87-14/Variance 87-04 July 27, 1987 Page three Conditional Use ~ermit.87-14 is a request to authorize the subject use and the proposed eight (8) foot wall. Variance 8?-04 would authorizeplacement of the proposed sign and control building within required setback areas. Circulation and Access: - Given the configuration of the site and constraints posed by a median island on Newport Avenue, a one-way circulation pattern is proposed. Vehicular movements will be restricted to entering the site from Newport Avenue and exiting onto Bonita. Pump islands have been moved as far north as possible and the proposed control building has been moved to the southeast to accommodate stacking of vehicles, particularly larger trucks. While the proposed circulation pattern is the best alternative available given existing constraints, there may still be potential impediments to free flowing traffic on Bonita. In the event that an exiting truck would not be able to complete~a maneuver in to the appropriate traffic lane, traffic turning onto Bonita from Newport Avenue could be obstructed. While there has been expressed concern about truck movements onto Bonita and along Newport Avenue. These concern can be addressed in the following manner. Kirst, traffic counts onto Bonita are relatively low. While precise counts are not available, the residential nature of local streets, and the lack of a traffic signal generally result in lower vehicular trips. Secondly, Qs ~equired by City ordinance and recommended by the Public Works Department, additional right-of-way and improvement will be required on the southeast corner of Bonita and Newport Avenue. This improvement will'result in a smoother turning radius and will allow greater visibility to drivers turning onto Bonita. Finally, the applicant has indicated that only 30% of vehicles served are large trucks. Additionally, it is anticipated that within approximately one year, trucks will no longer be serviced at the subject locations. Instead, these vehicles will be serviced at the larger industrial location the applicant intends to purchase. Therefore, with the physical conditions of traffic counts and the new curb and radius in mind, and a recommended condition of approval that the site only serves trucks for a period of not more than 12 months, staff recommends approval of the requested use and temporary circulation recommended. : It should be noted that the applicant is not in favor of dedicating additional right-of-way at the corner of Newport and Bonita. However, the Planning Commission does not have discretion in this matter and any waiver of right-of-way requirements can only be approved by the City Council. Community DeveloPmem Departmem Planning Commission Report July 27, 1987 Use Permit 87-14/Variance 87-04 Page four Landscaping - The Newpqrt Avenue frontage has been provided with a ten (10) fbot landscape area that is very compatible with the Primrose projeat immediately to the north. A combination of sod and accent shrubs Using an earthen berm or mounding technique has been provided along the arterial. Additionally, landscape buffer between the project and the adjacent residential zone is also proposed. While the landscape concept plan is acceptable, trees have not been provided in sizes consistent with recently prepared landscaping standards. For example, all street frontage trees (Carrotwoods) are shown to be 15 gallon size as opposed to required 24" box. Additionally, these trees are to be on-site and not within the public right-of-way. All eucalyptus trees are shown as 15 gallon size in lieu of the standard 24" box. Staff would suggest that proposed trees adjacent to entry points on the project be 24" box, with the remaining, treew 15 gallon size. It is also suggested that the 15 gallon eucalyptus are acceptable along the eastern property line as this-size tends to grow much faster than larger, older trees. Eight Foot Block Wall - The site plan shows an eight {8) foot masonry block wall along the eastern property line. Pursuant to the Zoning code a 6'8" wall is the maximum height allowed for this required wall. However, pursuant to the Zoning Code with approval of a Conditional Use a block wall may exceed 6'8" in height. The proposed eight (8) foot wall will provide a visual and sound buffer between the proposed use and adjacent residential uses to the east. Staff's main concern is the aesthetic quality of an eight (8) foot structure spanning over the entire length of the property..To improve the visual quality of the site it is recommended that the block will be textured, colored and stuccoed inclUding the use of revels in a pattern similar to walls on the Tustin Plaza project. Free-standtn9 Control Building - The unattended control building shown near the southeast corner of the property is proposed to be is setback 5'8" from the easterly property line. The C-1 District requires a minimum 10' setback at this location. Although it is possible to shift the structure westerly so that a variance would not be required, such movement would impact thQ vehicle circulation pattern on the site. Legal support for the granting of th~ variance is based upon the subject property's size and shape being long and narrow and the special circumstances of a public alley being immediately adjecent to the property. Free-standtn~ Business Identification Sign - Applicant proposes to install a 32 square foot monument sign for business identification within the 15 foot arterial highway setback area. A variance is required since a free-standing sign is by definition a structure and structures are not permitted within setback areas. In apprving previous signs in the area, however, this applicable section of the Zoning Code was inadvertently overlooked and several signs have been authorized in setback areas. Upon future revisions to the Sign Code, this area will be clarified and standardized. In the meantime,.ap~licants that wish to place signs in street setback areas must first obtain a variance. Community Development Depanmen~ Planning Commission Report July 27, 1987 Use Permit 87-14/Variance 87-04 Page five Since it can be argued that denial of the Variance request would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the general vicinity under similar circumstances, approval of Variance 87-04 as it pertains to the sign can be supported. Such action is consistent wit~ Section 9471 of the Sign Code which establishes criteria for granting of sign variances. Architectural Design - To 'be compatible with the surrounding, area, the applicant propses the use of stucco and spanish tile on the control buildi6g. To ensure compatibility on the site, staff is recommending that the same finish material be used on the block walT. Staff would also recommend the use of revels along the block wall, trash enclosure and control building in a pattern similar to the Tustin Plaza Project. It is recommended that the stucco finish be the same as applied to Tustin Plaza: a plaster and trowel finish. Final colors and revel details should be subject to review and approval of the Director of Community Development. Although to date staff have not reviewed colors, copy, or configuration of the propsed sign. It is recommended that the sign be compatible in design and color with the balance of the project subject to final review and approval of the Director of Community Development. CONCLUSION: Based on information presented in this transmittal and conditions Jf approval contained in Resolution 2420 and 2421 it is concluded that of Use Permit 87-14 and Variance 87-04 be approved. Director of Community Development JSD:pef Attachments: 'Resolution No. 2420 Resolution No. 2421 Community Devetopmen[ Department NEGA.'iVE DECLARA1 .ON CITY OF TUSTIN 300 CENTENNIAL WAY, TUSTIN, CA.' 92680 Project Title: USE PERMTT 87-14/ VARTA~CE87-04 _ File No. UP87-14/V87-04 Project Location: 13918-13922 Newport and 1016-t022 Bonita Avenue *Project Description: Construction and operation of a self service commercial fuel 'facility. Project Proponent: Southern Counties Oil Company Contact Person:jeffrey S. Davis Telephone: 714_544_8890 [xt. 256 The Community Development Department has conducted an initial study for the above project in accordance with the City of Tustin's procedures regarding implementation of the California [nvir'onmental Quality Act, and on the basis of that study hereby find: DThat there, is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. That potential significant affects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that would avoid or mitigate the affects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said revisions are attached to and hereby made a part of this Negative Declaration. Therefore, the preparation of an Envtron~ntal Impact Report is not required. The initial stu~ which provides the basis for this ~termination is on file at the Community Development Department, Ci~ of Tustin. The public is invited to coment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the revi~ period, which begins with the public notice of a Negative Declaration and extends for seven ~lendar days. Upon review by the Community.Development Director, this reyiew period m~ be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:30 p.m. on July 20, 1987 CITY OF TUSTIN Community Development Department ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY FORM (F_~I~I~ of all W m~d "mayb~ answer~ are required I, ~ ~ill t~ ~1 ~lt im 'in g~i~ic $ ~ ~i~, ~i~ ~ m~ifi~im of ~ ~ g~l~ic or p~simi f~? ~iis, either ~ or off t~ site? ~, ~ ~ in silt~i~, d~iti~ or ~ or ~ ~ t~ b~ of ~e ~ or ~ ~, inl~ ~ I~e? .... Yes Ma/be No light ~ gl~e? X u~ of ~ ~? ct. P~ks c~ other r~c~e~tio~al facilities? e. ~int~ of p~lic f~iliti~, i~t~i~ f. Oth~ g~m~i s~i~? ~. Will t~ p~l ~lt im a. ~ of ~tial a~nts of ~el or ~Y? i~ ~ of ~e~, or r~uim t~ ~el~ of ~ ~r~ of ~? ~illti~: Will t~ p~l ~lt in a n~ ~ foll~i~ milities c. W~? f. ~lid ~ ~ d~l? 17. ~ ~1~ Will t~ pr~l m~lt im ~1~ ~ard (~cl~i~ m~ml b. E~m of p~le ~ ~t~tial ~lth ~? t~ p~lic~ or will t~ p~o~l ~lt in t~ ~i~ of ~ a~etically offm~e site ' to p~lic vi~? ID, R~i~ Will t~ pr~l ~lt in m · - i~t ~ ~e q~li~ or q~ti~ of ~bti~ 20. ~i~ R~___= h~ic ~1~1 site? On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the pried project COCILD NOT have a slgnific:m~' effect on the e~wironment, and o NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. J--'J I Hnd that c~lthoucjh the pra~ project' c~uld' have a sicjnificc~t effect an the environment, them will not be a significant effect in this case becc~se the mitigation m_~__,re~ dm~ribed on on ui;~.~ed sheet have been added to the pmiect. A NEGATIVE D~ATION WILL. ~ PROARt. I find the ~rc~ased project MAY have a slgnificc~t effect on the environ- merit, ond an E~qVIRONMIDqTAL- IMPACT RID~GRT is ' ATTACHMENT "A" Explanation, of 7'yes" and "maybe" responses to attached Initial Study Form. II 1.b. - Soil will be displayed during the course of construction and installation of underground fuel tanks. Displacement of soil will not result in a significant impact to the environment in that provisions of the Uniform Building Code, and rules enforced by other regulatory agencies pertaining to the subject project will be required. Additionally a complete soils report to be prepared by a registered engineer is required. II 4.a. - As a requirement of the project substantial landscaping will be provided. This will result in a positive change in plant materials in the area. II 8 - Additional lighting will be necessary for the site. However, as a condition of approval all lights are to be situated so as not to shine directly on to adjacent properties. Additionally an eight foot block wall and a landscape buffer will seperate the project from adjacent residential sites. These conditions will mitigate any impact. II 10.a. - Given that the use of the property will house to a gasoline dispensing facility there is the potential for release of gasoline which is classified as a hazardous substance. However, via the permit processing only equipment authorized by Federal, State, County and/or City regulations will be installed. Doubled walled tanks are required as are vapor recovery systems. Compliance with all applicable regulations will mitigate impacts. · 7.a and b - Same response as for II 10.a. RESOLUTION NO. 2420 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING USE PERMIT 87-14 AUTHORIZING A 24 HOUR SELF-SERVICE COMMERCIAL 4 FUEL PUMPING OPERATION AND AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH BLOCK WALL ON THE PROPERTIES KNOWN AS 5 '13918-13922 NEWPORT AND 1016-1022 'BONITA AVENUE. 6 ? The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as fol ~ows: 8 I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: 9 A. That a proper application, (Use Permit No. 87-14) has been filed 10 on behalf of Southern Counties Oil Company for authorization to operate a 24 hour self service commercial fuel facility and to 11 construct an eight foot block wall on the properties known as 13918-13922 Newport and 1016-1022 Bonita Avenue. 12 B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said 13 application. 14 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 15 general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced by the following ]~ findings: 17 1. That the uses applied for are consistent with the land use element of the Tustin Area General Plan as it pertains to 18 commercial uses in areas given the General Plan Designation of Commercial. Ig 2. That the uses applied for are consistent with the C-1 zoning 20 regulations as they pertain to service stations in that a Conditional Use Permit is required prior to operation of 2! such use and that Section 9271 (i) 3 of the Municipal code authorizes walls in excess of 6'8" in height upon securing 22 of a Conditional Use Permit. 22 3. That measures to buffer the subject use from adjacent residential areas have been considered and are included 24 herein by reference. Such measures include but are not limited to, an eight foot block wall along the eastern 25 property line and installation of sufficient landscaping materials. 4. That the architectural treatment of all structures will be 27 consistent with the surrounding area. Resolution No. 2420 1 Page two D. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use 3 applied for will not be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, 4 nor to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, and should be granted. E. Proposed development shall be in accordance with the development O policies adopted by the City Council, Uniform Building Codes as administered by the Building Official, Fire Code as administered ? by the Orange County Fire Marshal and street improvement requirements as administered by the City Engineer. $ F. That a Negative Declaration in conformance with the California 9 Environmental Quality Act has been prepared and hereby is approved. 10 11 II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 87-14 to authorize a 24 hour self service commercial fuel facility ]2 and construct an eight foot block wall at the properties known as 13918-13922 Newport and 1016-1022 Bonita subject to the following ~3 conditions: 14 1. The proposed project shall substantially comply with submitted site plans for the project date stamped July 7, 1987 and on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified or 15 as_ modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this exhibit. ]G 2. The final site plan 'shall be standardized and reflect all 17 appropriate City standard drawing numbers. The developer shall construct all missing or damaged street improvements to said 18 development per the City of Tustin "Minimum Design Standards of Public Works" and "Street Improvement Standards". This work i9 shall consist of, but is not limited to, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, drive apron, and street pavement. 20 3. Unless othewise specified, conditions contained in this exhibit 21 shall be complied with prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community 22 Development Department. 23 4. Compliance with all conditions of Resolution 2421 herein incorporated by reference. 25 5. Final plans must show vehicular movement patterns; one way traffic movement for trucks is required. 26 6. A traffic engineering analysis .shall be furnished to the Public Works Department verifying ability for large truck movement and 27 'that adequate on-site stacking space is available. Resolution No. 2420 Page three 7. Research and analysis of existing pavement on Bonita and the public alley immediately adjacent to the southern property boundary shall be conducted concerning the load bearing capacity of said surfaces. Such information shall be provided by the developer to the City Engineer for review and approval. If deemed necessary by the City Engineer affected areas on Bonita and the alley shall be improved by the developer to accommodate large trucks. 8. Dedication and improvement of street right-of-way for a 22' X 22' corner cutoff at the corner of Newport and Bonita. 9. Submission of street improvement plans is required. Plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall show existing and proposed improvements which shall include, but not limited to: a) Removal existing driveway approaches and replace with curb, gutter and sidewalk. b) Removal and replace damaged or sunken curb and gutter. c) Construct full width sidewalk.~ d) Construct 35' radius curb return with handicapped access ramp. e) Replace pavement in alley and on Bonita to carry truck loadings if required. f) Utility relocations -- Edison, water, telephone, street lighting, etc. g) Driveways to have maximum width of 35' per City Standard No. 1088. h) Reconstruction'of median in Newport depending on traffic operational characteristics on this site. i) Payment of East Orange County Water District fees will be required prior to the building permit being issued. j) Payment of the required fees for the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program will be required at the time a building permit is issued. k) Construct the improvements outline herein prior to Certificate of Occupancy. 10. A "NO RIGHT TURN" sign should be installed at the egress point onto Bonita subject to approval of Public Works and Community Development as to location and design. 11. Show on site plan all existing fire hydrants within 200 feet of the property. 12. Approval stamp from the Health Department must be on construction plans prior to submission to Orange County Fire Department and prior to issuance of building permits. Resolution No. 2420 ~ Page four 13. A complete sign plan including details of free standing monument sign and location and detail of price signs is required. Address is to be shown on site and should be shown on sign plans. Business identification signs shall be consistent in design and color to other structures on site. 14. At building plan check, construction plans, structural calculations, and title 24 energy calculations must be submitted. Requirements of the Uniform Building Codes, State Handicap and Energy Requirements must be complied with as approved by the Building Official. 15. At building plan check, provide technical detail and plans for all utility installations including telephone, gas, water and electricity. 16. At building plan check submittal of final grading and specifications consistent with the site plan and landscaping plans and prepared by a registered engineer for approval of · the Community Development Department. 17. Submittal of a precise soils engineering report provided by a soils engineerwithin the previous twelve {12) months. 118. Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Orange County Fire Chief including required fireflow; installation, where required, of fire hydrants subject to approval of the Fire Department, City of Tustin Public Works Department and compliance with all requirements pertaining to construction. 19. All exterior colors to be used are subject to a review and approval of the Director of the Community Development Department. All exterior treatments must be coordinated with regard to color, materials and detailing. Revels similar to details used on the Tustin Plaza Project {13700 Block Newport Ave.) shall be shown on final elevations. Also, finish materials on the block wall, trash enclosure, and the control buildings shall be plastered and have a trowel finish. 20. Submit detail for all on-site walls. Show type of wall cap and type of color, exterior materials (which must be consistent with main building materials), and decorative treatment of all exposed walls. All walls should be finished on both sides with an architectural treatment compatible with main buildings. 21. Directional signs shall be provided on the site to direct vehicles to the proper access, parking and loading areas. Sizes, design.and location of such signs shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. Resolution No. 2420 1 Page five 2 22. A six foot high chain linked fence shall be installed around 3 the site prior to construction stages. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for grading and 4 construction vehicles. 23. The proposed trash enclosure shall .have solid metal self-closing and self-latching gates. 24. All mechanical and electrical fixtures and equipment shall be adequately and decoratively screened. The screen shall be ? considered as an element of the overall design of the project and must blend with the architectural design of buildings. $ All telephone and electrical boxes must be indicated on the building plans and must be completely screened and located in 9 the interior of the building. Electrical transformers must be located toward the interior of the site maintaining a 10 sufficient distance from frontage of the project and provides sufficient acoustical insulation if placed adjacent to ]1 residential uses to the east. ~ 25. Indicate lighting scheme for project, note locations of all ]31 exterior lights and types of fixtures, lights to be installed on building shall have a decorative design. No lights shall be permitted which may create any glare or have a negative 14 impact on adjoining properties. The location and types of lighting shall be subject to the approval of the Director of ]5 the Community D~velopment Department. ]6 26. Earth mounding is essential and must be provided to applicable heights whenever it is possible in conjunction with the ]7 submitted landscaping plan. Earth mounding should be particularly provided along Newport frontage as shown on 18 submitted plan. ]9 27. Future submittal shall substantially conform to the submitted landscaping concept plan on file with the Department of 20 Community Development, as herein and modified or as modified by the Director of Community Development pursuant to the 21 City's Design Review procedures. 22 28. A completely detailed landscape and irrigation plan must be submitted with whatever scale necessary to depict adequately 23 what is occurring. Provide summary table applying indexing identification to plant materials in their actual location. 24 The plan and table must list botanical and common names, sizes, spacing, actual location and quantity of the plant 25 materials proposed. 26 Show planting and berming details, soil preparation, staking, etc. The irrigation plan shall indicate location and control 27 of backflow prevention devices, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing and coverage. Details for all equipment must be 28 provided.. Resolution No. 2420 Page six 2 Show all property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plan, public right-of-way areas, sidewalks widths, parkway areas, and wall locations. The Department of Community Development may request minor substitutions of plant materials 5 or request additional sizing or quanity materials during plan check. G 29. All newly planted trees shall be staked according to City ? standards. 30. Shrubs shall be a minimum of 5 gallon size and shall be spaced a minimum of 5 feet on center when intended as screen 9! planning. 10 31. Ground cover shall be planted between 8 to 12 inches on center. 32. All plant materials shall be installed in a healthy vigorous condition typical to the species. 33. All landscaping shall be enclosed by a minimum 6 inch high concrete curb. 34. Maintain landscaping in a neat and healthy condition, this will include but not be limited to triming, mowing, weeding~ removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering, or replacement of diseased or dead plants. 35. In irrigation areas, controller should be enclosed in lockable 17 housing. Design irrigation systems to provide sufficient coverage and reduce water overspray on buildings and 18 sidewalks. 19. 36. Service for large trucks, those in excess of 30 feet in 20~ length, at this location shall be permanently discontinued one (1) year from date of approval of Use Permit 87-14. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 Charles E. Puckett, 25 Chairman ~nni Foley,. 27 Recording Secretary 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2421 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING VARIANCE APPLICATION 87-04 AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF A BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION SIGN IN A 15' HIGHWAY SETBACK AREA AND AUTHORIZING A FREE-STANDING BUILDING WITHIN THE REQUIR£D SIDEYARD SETBACK~AREA FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 13918-13922 NEWPORT AND 1016-1022 BONITA AVENUE. ? The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby re~olve as $ follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application, (Variance No. 87-04) has been filed on behalf of Southern Counties Oil Company' to requesing authorization to place a business identification sign in the required 15' highway setback area and to place a free-standing 120 square foot building on the required sideyard setback area. B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. C. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced by the following 17 findings: ]8 1. The uses applied for are consistent with Commercial land use and zoning regulations imposed upon the property by the Tustin Area General Plan and the Tustin Zoning Ordinance. 20 2. That granting of a Variance for the free-standing sign will not constitute a grant of special privilages and that because of circumstances in the area, denial of the request would deprive the subject property privilages enjoyed by other properties in the immediate vicinity. These conditions meet requirements at Section 9471 of the Sign Code authorizing the Planning Commission to grant Variances. 3. That because of the long and narrow shape of the lot and because of the unusual circumstance of a mid-block public alley being adjacent to the property, sufficient grounds are present to grant a Variance all'owing a 120 square foot structure to be located within the sideyard setback area. Resolution No, 2421 Page two 2 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 Fire Marshal and street improvement requirements as administered by the City Engineer. F. A Negative Declaration in conformance with the California 10 Environmental Quality Act has been applied for and is hereby approved. ]] ]2 II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 87-04 to authorize placement of a free-standing business identification sign within the required 15' highway setback area and the construction of a 120 square foot building within the required stdeyard area at 13918-13922 Newport and 1016-1022 Bonita Avenue subject to the following condition: ]G A. Compliance with all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2420 incorporated herein by reference as conditions of approval for Variance 87-04. 17 ]8 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 20 Charles E. Puckett, Chairman Penni Foley, Recording Secretary Repor to the Planning Commission DATE: JULY 27, 1987 SUBJECT: USE PEPaqIT NO. 87-15 & VARIANCE NO. 87-03 APPLICANT: 30th STREET ARCHITECTS ON BEHALF OF RUBY'S RESTAURANT O~IER: JOHN PRESCOTT LOCATION: RUBY'S RESTAURANT 205 EL CAIqINO REAL - SE CORNER OF EL CASINO REAL AND SECOND STREET ZONING: C-2: CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ENVIRONHENTAL STATUS: PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEHPT FROH THE REQUIREHENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENYIRONHENTAL QUALITY ACT; CLASS III REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION FOR AN ON-SITE BEER AND WINE LICENSE, TYPE 41. PARKING VARIANCE TO PEPJqIT NINE-(9) INSTEAO OF THE REQUIRED 35 PARKING SPACES. RECOI~ENDATION: Approve Use Permit No. 87-15 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2418 and approve Variance No. 87-3 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2419. SUR~RY: Applicant proposes to remodel and expand an existing restaurant at 205 E1Camino Real and is requesting a Variance of the Zoning Code related to parking requirements in the C-2 (Central Commercial) District and the City's non-conforming use ordinance to permit nine (9) instead of the. required 35 parking spaces. The requested Conditional Use Permit would authorize an Alcoholic Beverage License for on-site consumption of beer and wine in conjunction with the proposed restaurant use. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of E1 Camtno Real. and Second Street. The site is in the C-2 Central Commercial Zoning District, the E1 Camino Real Specific Plan Area and the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area and is bordered by the following uses: on the east "Assistance League of Ls Tustin; on the north "Right Nay Cleaners"; on the south "Tusttn Plumbing upplies"; and on the west, across E1 Camino Real, "Tustin Meat Company". ..... Community Development Department Planning Commission Report July 27, 1987 Use Permit 87-15/Variance 87-03 Page two VARIANCE 87-03: The City Council, at a regular meeting on November 18, 1985 approved Variance No. 85-5 to allow fo~ expansion of an existing non-co~forming restaurant from 65 to 95 s~ats. The non-conforming section of the Zoning Code states that a non-conforming structure can not be expanded without complying with current provisions of the Zoning Code. Variance 85-5 required no parking for the 63 existing seats in the restaurant, 11 on-site parking spaces were required to be provided for an additional 30 seats in the restaurant based on current parking requirements in the Code.' Applicant at this time does not wish to proceed with the previously approved site plan but is instead proposing a revised site plan with a new parking lot design and outdoor dining area. The proposed remodel, however, will still also include: a) interior and exterior cosmetic improvements; b) demolition and reconstruction of the rear portion of the building; c) installation of upgraded kitchen facilities, including heating and air conditioning systems; d) resurfacing and restriping of a rear parking lot; and e) new landscaping. As revised the project would provide 103 restaurant seats to be serviced by nine (9) parking spaces at the rear of the building. Current parking requirements of the Zoning Code would require 35 parking spaces for all 103 seats. The previous Variance 85-5 required no parking for 65 seats in the restaruant (the ~umber of seats in the original restaurant). Based on the precedent set by this previous City action, staff would recommend that 65 of the restaurant seats, for the revised project be authorized without providing 22 required parking spaces and that parking be provided for the additional 38 seats at current City standards: For the balance of 38 restaurant seats, 13 parking spaces would be required. While site constraints limit the applicant's ability to provide more than nine (9) parking spaces on the subject site, the potential popularity of Ruby's Cafe would indicate that as much 'parking as possible should be provided. Staff would, therefore, suggest that at least four (4) additional parking spaces in addition to the proposed nine (9) on-site spaces be provided off-site or that the applicant reduce the number of additional seats in the restauran~ to 27 for a total of 92 seats. Authority for permitting off-site parking is provided by the E1 Camino Real Specific Plan which allows for: - Exemptions from requirements for on-site parking for either existing restaurant or new addition if private off-site spaces can be acquired within 300 feet and proof is supplied in the form of a long term lease; and - Exemptions from requirements for on-site parking for either existing restaurant or additions, if property is i~cluded in a "Parking Improvement District. Community DeveloPment' Department ~lanning Commission Report July 27, 1987 Use Permit--87-15/Variance 87-03 Page three The applicant has not bee6 successful in establishing a long term lease with adjacent property owners, but he is aware that payments can be made into the Parking improvement District in order to lease the additional 'four {4) parking spaces requested by staff. While the applicant has i~dicated an unwillingness to lease such spaces from the District, the costs for the lease of four (4) spaces would be relatively minor as shown below: Term Cost of Leasing 4 Space~ First Year · $1,200.O0/year Second Year $1,500.O0/year Third Year $1,800.O0/year Fourth Year $2,100.O0/year Fifth Year $2,400.O0/year Staff would recommend Variance 87-3 allowing 103 seats in the restaurant subject to applicant and City Council approval of a contract for the lease of (4) additional parking spaces in the City parking structure or elsewhere within 300 feet of the site. Otherwise, a maximum of only 92 seats for the restaurant would be recommended. This recommendation is consistent with Variance 85-5 in that parking for all seats beyond the previously existing 65 seats would be provided. USE PERMIT 87-15 Applicant has also applied for authorization to sell beer and wine in conjunction with the proposed restadrant remodel. Although the project location and its distance from the other outlets and sensitive uses is not a requirement for on-site alcoholic beverage consumption, the following distances fron sensitive uses are provided for information only: Distance Requirement Proposed Distance 100 feet from residential 150 feet 300 feet from other outlets 400 feet : 600 feet from schools 1,600 feet churches 800 feet hospitals .2,640 feet Staff recommends that alcoholic beverage sales establishment guidelines be incorporated into the conditions of approval for this application with two minor exceptions. Resolution No. 239§ of the Planning Commission, which set gu.idelines for review of alcoholic beverage establishments recommended that no outdoor seating or "bar type" seating be allowed. The outdoor dining area is proposed to be surrounded by a piperail fence and will be isolated with a 6'0" high block wall along the adjacent property line, screened with planters and will comply with Alcoholic Beverage Control requirements. Staff would have no major issue with the outdoor dining area provided more. adequate solid 'enclosed screening is provided. Community Developmcn~ Depar~rnen~ Planning Commission Report July 27, 1987 _ Use Permit 87-15/Variance 87-03 Page four The interior dining layout indicates a bar type setting area which, is actuaqly not a bar but a dining, counter and extension of the dining area. Beer and wine will not be exclusively served at this location. Other standard conditions recommended in the attached resolution include such items as: 1. All alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on site. 2. Authorization for -on-site sales of beer and wine/liquor sales is contingent upon the use of the subject site remaining a restaurant. At such time the restaurant use is discontinued the use permit becomes null and void. 3. All persons serving alcoholic beverages must be eighteen years of age or older and supervised by someone twenty-one years of age of older. Supervisor shall be present in same area as point of sale. 4. Hours of operation are' limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (hours are identified depending on the type of operation). Food-must be served during these hours. 5. The menu of the restaurant shall consist of foods that are prepared on the premises. 6. There shall be no pool tables or coin operated games on the premises at any time. 7. All persons selling alcoholic beverages shall be at least ~ig~teen years of age or older and shall be supervised by someone twenty-one years of age or older. The project complies with the distance requirements established by Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 87-1 and staff has incorporated the alcoholic beverage sales establishment guidelines, with minor modifications into the proposed resolution. Based upon the conformance with the distance requirements and the incorporation of the alcoholic beverage sales guidelines staff recommends approval for this request. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING The proposed architectural design of the project will have the following features: - White plastered walls with red painted wood horizontal bands. - Gray colored roof cornice, and building base. - Lighted horizontal canopy over a rear entrance. - New rounded glass block corner window. Plastic laminated and metal brushed entrance doors. - An existing business identification sign will be refurbished and will have white and red neon letters on gray background. A rear elevation, sign will have similar colors; - an outdoors dining area in the rear of restaurant. Community DeveloPment Department ~l~nning Commission Report July 27, 1987 Use Permit 87-15/¥ariance 87-03 Page five Proposed landscaping will provide color and screening to.the parking 16t.' Planting materials will be water conserving. Carrotwood tre~s will be added wherever possible. An automatic irrigation system will also be installed. Staff considers that the restaurant, remodeled as proposed will be compatible with the Old Town Area and it is likely to bring back the flavor of the famous old Ruby's. atrtzta a erassi, Christine A. Shi~gleton, // Planner Director of Community DeveYopment PM:pef Attachments: Resolution No. 2418 Resolution No. 2419 ' Site Plan Floor Plan Community Development Department (l:i$OdO~d (]=lSOdOl:id ~ · - ,t I ~ O'aSOdOl:id RESOLUTION NO. 2418 2 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 2 CITY OF TUSTIN, AUTHORIZING A BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR ON-SITE SALES AT 205 EL CAMINO 4 REAL 5 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin d~es hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: 7 A. That a proper application Use Permit 87-15 has been filed by 8 30th Street Architects on behalf of Ruby's Restaurant requesting authorization for an ABC license (type 41) to sell beer and wine 9 for on-site consumption at 205 E1Camino Real. 10 B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. 11 C. That establishment, maintenance and operation of 'the use applied 12 for will not,. under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general 13 welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced by the following findings: 1. The sale of beer and wine is for on-site consumption only. 1'5 2. That sale of beer and wine is limited to hours of operation ]0 between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and only when food concurrently sold. 17 3. The use applied for is in conformance with the Tustin 18 General Plan. 19 4. The use applied for is an allowed use in the C-2 Central Commercial District. 20 D. That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use 2] applied for will not be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject 22 property, nor to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, and should be granted. 23 E. Proposed development shall be in accordance with the development 24 poltctes adopted by the City Council, Uniform Building Codes as administered by the Building Official, Fire Code as administered 25 by the Orange County Fire Marshal, and street improvement requirements as administered by the City Engineer. 28 Resolution No. 2418 Page.two F. That this project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, Cl.ass I. 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. 87-15 to authorize the issuance of an on-site beer and wine license at 205 E1Camino Real subject to the following conditions: A. All alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on-site. B. Alcoholic beverages shall be sold during the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and only when food is concurrently sold. C. Authorization for an on-site beer and wine license is contingent upon the use remaining as a restaurant. At such time that the restaurant use is discontinued, authorization for the license will be null and void. D. All persons selling or serving only alcoholic beverages shall be twenty-one years of age or older. E. All persons serving or selling alcoholic beverages and food shall be 18 years of age or older and shall be supervised by someone twenty-one years of age or older. F. The menu of the restaurant shall consist of foods that are prepared on-site. G. There shall be no pool tables or coin operated games on the premises at any time. H. The applicant shall complete and return an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as required by the Director of Community Development. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin on this 13th day of July, 1987. Charles E. Puckett, Chairman Penni Foley Recording Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 2419 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 87-3, ALLOWING AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING RESTAURANT 4 AT 205 EL CAMINO REAL TO VARY WITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE C-2 ZONE I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application, Variance No. 87-3, was filed by 30th 7 Street Architects on behalf of Mr. Douglas Cavanaugh, requesting authorization to vary from the parking requirements of the C-2 8 zone for an existing non-conforming restaurant located at 205 E1 9 Camino Real. B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said ]0 application. 11 C. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, relative to size, shape, topography, location or 1~ surroundings, a strict application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other 12 properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification, evidenced by the following findings: 1. The use is in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and the 15 Specific Plan for the area . 16 2. The project is in conformance with the Town Center Redevelopment'Plan. 3. The subject variance ~s in accordance with previously ]8 granted Variance No. 85-5 pertaining to the original 65 seats. 4. The applicant is supplying parking per the zoning code and ~0 E1Camino Real Specific Plan for any additional seats over existing non-conforming use. 21 5. E1 Camino Real Specific Plan allows for exemptions for 22 on-site parking requirements for restaurants and new additions if property is included in a "Parking 22 Improvement District" or show proof of a parking lease agreement with adjacent property owners within 300 feet of 24 property.. 25 D. That the granting of a variance as herein provided will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and distict in 26 which the subject property is situated. 27 E. That this project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Class III). 28 Resolution No. 2419 Page two 2 4! F. That pursuant to the Town Center Redevelopment Plan, the site plan and architectural design of project which is proposed 5 within the Redevelopment area shall be approved by the Redevelopment Agency. ' G. Final development plans shall require the review and approval of ? the Community development Department $ H. 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 Codes as administered by the Orange County Fire Marshal; and street 10 improvement requirements as administered by. the City Engineer. II. The Planning Commission approves Variance No. 87-3 to permit nine (9) instead of the required 35 parking spaces pursuant to Section 9232 C from the parking requirements of C-2, subject to conditions attached hereto in Exhibit "A". PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commision of the City of Tustin on this 13th day of July, 1987. 16 18 Charles E. Puckett Chairman 21 Penni Foley 22 Secretary Exhibit A To Resolution No. 2419 1. The project shall substantially comply with submitted site plans and supplemental materials, date stamped July 7, 1987 and on file with the Community Development Department as herein modified or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Resolution. 2. Unless otherwise specified, conditions contained in- this exhibit shall be complied with subject to review and approval or the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed project: 3. Applicant shall either enter into a lease ~greement with a property owner within 300 feet of the subject property for the provisions of an additional four (4) parking spaces or enter into an agreement with the City's Parking Improvement District to lease four (4) parking spaces to be located in the Town Center Parking Structure. 4. Should the applicant fail to comply'with condition number 3 above, the number of proposed restaurant seats shall be reduced from 103 to 92 seats. 5. Final construction working drawings require signature of Alcoholic Beverage Control for conformance of outdoor seating area requirements. 6. All existing overhead utility services shall be undergrounded. 7. Provide detailed information regarding colors, materials and textures of all exterior architectural elements which surround the outdoors dining area; such as block wall, concrete paving, planters and treatment of tree wells. Also include pedestrian walkway, stairs and handicap ramp. 8. All mechanical equipment, electrical fixtures and downspouts shall be adequately and decoratively screened. Mechanical equipment shall not be seen from the outdoor dining area. 9. Indicate proposed exterior lighting for the building, parking lot and outdoor dining area. Note locations of light poles and detail of fixtures. No lights shall be permitted which may create any glare or have a negative impact on adjoining properties. The location of lighting shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Department. 10. Provide complete landscaping and irrigation plans for the project complying with all Community Development Department landscaping/irrigation standards and plan submittal requirements. 11. At building plan check, construction plans, structural calculations, and title 24 energy calculation must be submitted. Requirements of the Uniform Building Codes, State Handicap and Energy Requirements must be complied with as approved by the Building Official. Exhibit A Resolution No. 2419 Page two 12. At building plan check, provide technical detail and plans for all utility installations including cable TV, telephone, gas, water and electricity. 13. At building plan check submittal of final grading and specifications consistent with the site plan and landscaping plans and prepared by a registered engineer for approval of the Community Development Department. 14. All requirements of the Orange County Fire Department shall be met. 15. 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 Design Standards of Public Works" and "Street Improvement Standards". This work shall consist of, but not be limited to, curbs and gitters, sidewalks, driveway aprons and street improvements. 16. In the event that applicant complies with Condition number 3 instead of 4, the appropriate number of employees of the proposed restaurant shall be required to park in the proposed off-site parking spaces. 17. Signage shall also be provided on-site adjacent to parking lot and main building indicating that additional parking is available at off-site locations. Said signage shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of Community Development. PM:per ITEM NO. 6 Planning Cc)mmission DATE: ~IULY 27, 1987 SUB,IECT: AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO USE PERMIT 87-7 APPL]CANT: MARK DOTTA ON BEHALF OF THE RED HILL LUTHERAN CHURCH OWNER: RED HILL LUTHERAN CHURCH LOCATION: 13200 RED HILL AVENUE ZONING: PUBLIC AND XNSTII~ITIONAL (P & I) DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT .... REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION TO ADB 2,100 SQUARE FEET OF STORAGE SPACE IN A BASEMENT RECOI~IENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Amendment No. I to Use Permit 87-7 by'the adoption of Resolution No. 2422. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: The Red Hill Lutheran Church was annexed into the City in 1977. The church is located at 13200 Red Hill Avenue and is zoned Public and Institutional. Since the annexation to the City, several actions have been taken by the Planning Commission as the church expanded. Those actions are' summarized as follows: 1. Use Permit 79-20 authorizing a church school at the subject location. 2. Use Permit 79-28 authorizing addition of 8,500 square feet of classroom space and expanding maximum student enrollment to 400 students. 3. Use Permit 87-7 authorizing addition of 3,500 square feet of administrative office space to the existing church. - The subject site is a 4.62 acre parcel bordered by the following uses: on the ~orth and east by single family residential subdivisions; on the south by an ~range County Flood Control Channel and abandoned railroad right-of-way; and on he west across Red Hill Avenue by single family development. Community Development Department lannlng Commission Report .,~ndment No. 1/Use Permtt 87-7 July 27, 1987 Page two Amendment No. 1-to Use. Permit 87-7 proposes that 2,100 square feet be added'to the church for storage use only. Presently there are 23[ parking spaces provided on the parcel which are considered sufficiefft for all uses authorized on the site. As such, the addition will not increase parking demand on-site. Further, since the proposal is to construct a basement, discussion of architectural issues is not relevent to this application. Since the 9roposed basement will be constructed underground, the exterior elevations for the approved office area will not change. In terms of the surrounding area, the addition is relatively small, will be an incidental use, and will not be visible, ensuring compatibility with adjacent properties. WithlnO adverse impacts to adjacent properties anticipated, staff, therefore recommends approval of Amendment No. 1 to Use Permit 87-7 by the adoption, of Resolution No. 2422. JSD:pef Attachment: Resolution No. 2422 Community Development Department RESOLUTION NO. 2422 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY 3 OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. i TO USE PERMIT 87-7 AUTHORIZING 2,100 SQUARE FEET OF 4 BASEMENT STORAGE AT 13200 RED HILL AVENUE 5 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin doe~ hereby resolve as _follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: ? A. That a proper application, Amendment No. 1 to Use Permit No. 8 87-7 has been filed on behalf of the Red Hill Lutheran Church to authorize the 2,100 square foot expansion of basement storage 9 at 13200 Red Hill. 10 B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. C. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use 12~ applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or ]2 general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced by the following 14 findings: 15 1. The use applied for is in conformance with both the Tustin Zoning Code and the Tustin Area General Plan as they ]6 pertain to church and church related uses in the Public and Institutional Zoning and General Plan classifications. 2. That the addition will not change the architectural style 18 and materials of existing buildings on the site. ]9 3. That the parking currently.provided on site meets the demand for building square footage. 20 D. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use 21 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 22 granted. 23 E. Proposed development shall be in accordance with the development policies adopted by the City Council, Uniform Building Codes as 24 administered by the Building Official, Fire Code as administered 25 by the Orange County Fire Marshal and street improvement requirements as administered by the City Engineer. 20 F. Final development plans shall require the review and approval of the Community Development Department. 25 Resolution No. 2422 2 Page two 4 G. This project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Enironmental. Quality Act (Class 1, Section 5 15301e). 6 II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Amendment No. 1 to Conditional Use Permit No. 87-7 to authorize the 2,100 square foot 7 expansion of basement storage subject to the following conditions: 8 A. The project shall substantially conform with submitted site plans and elevations, date stamped June 15, 1987 on file with 9 the Department of Community /Development as herein modified or as modified by the Director of Community Development in 10 accordance with this resolution. Il B. The proposed 2,100 square foot addition shall not be used for anything except storage and that storage of materials be limited ]2 to those considered incidental to existing or approved uses on the subject site. C. Submittal of all structural plans for the proposed addition 14 including structural calculations and energy calculations necessary to comply with Title 24 requirements for the approval 15 of the Building Official. 16 D. The applicant shall sign and return an Agreement to Conditions Imposed form as required by the Director of Community 17 Development. 15 E. This Use Permit is null and void if construction does not commence within one {1) year of the 'date of approval by- the 19 Planning Commission. 20 F. Provide a sprinkler system for the entire building, including the basement per Section 802 U.B.C 21 G. Arrangement of two (2) basement exits to comply with Section ~2 3303-C U.B.C 23 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the day of , 198 25 ~Charles E. Puckett 26 Chairman 27 Penni Foley Recording Secretary Repor to the Planning Commission DATE: ~ULY 27, 1987 SUBJECT: NEON SIGN FOR SABA'S MARKET APPLICANT: BONNIE ENG£LBERG OF SABA'S MARKET 14161 NEWPORT AVENUE,'UNITS C & D TUSTIN~ CALIFORNIA 92680 ZONING: C-1 RETAIL COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11 REQUEST: TO INSTALL A FOUR (4) SQUARE FOOT CAN TYPE SXGN USING NEON TUBING DESIGN RECO~ENDED ACTION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the design of the neon sign by Minute Order. BACKGROUND: On June 29, 1987 the Planning Commission authorized installation of a mini-market and off-site beer and wine sales license for a Greek specialty market called Saba's Market. As part of their advertising campaign, the applicant has proposed to install a four (4) square foot under marquee sign {perpendicular to the building). Since the proposed sign includes the use of neon tubing, Section 9444 (i) of the Sign Code, requires appproval by the Planning Commission. ANALYSIS: As proposed, the sign includes various colors and design elements. These include: - typical sign can construction - dark green background with white "SABA'S" letters - blue neon trim around white "SABA'S' letters - red vinyl letters applied over white plexiglass for "MARKET" - a clear plexiglass cover over thle "SABA'S" portion of the sign A detailed drawing (Exhibit A) of the proposed sign is attached for further clarification of these elements. Community Developmenl Deparlmen~ ~lanning Commission Report Saba's Neon Sign July 27, 1987 Page two When considering requests for sign permits, compatibility with surroundfng structures and signs musk be considered. In this case, there 'are several sign types in %he center, including wooden, sand blasted.signs and typical can signs with opague plexiglass faces. As an alternative to the neon trim, a plexiglass face with white letters and a blue background could be used to match the sign type of Fujishio Japanese restaurant and the center monument sign. A proposed lay out of this alternative is attached (Exhibit B) for consideration. In addition to this four (4) square foot sign, Saba's Market will also be allowed to place, a sign in the center monument directory. This is a right granted to all tenants in the center and will give Saba's street visibility. CONCLUSION: Staff considers the alternative sign shown on Exhibit B to be more compatible with the shopping center while still allowing an illuminated sign for the applicant. With this alternative, compatible elements can be used and the applicant will maintain the desired lighted sign concept. Christine Shingleton Deve~pment> Director of Community LCP:pef Attachments: Exhibit A Exhibit B Sign Detail Community DeveloPment Department EXHIBIT A B .L BIHX3 Report Planning Commission DATE: JULY 27, 1987 SUBJECT: REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - July 6, 1987. 0ral presentation. pef Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - July 6, 1987 L Community Development Depariment" J ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR t~ETING OF THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL ~ JULY 6, 1987 ~ 7:00 P.M. 7:00 I. CALL TO ORDER ALL PRESENT II. ROLL CALL III. PROCLAMATION PRESENTED TO ROYLEEN 1. "PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH" - JULY, 1987 WHITE IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING APPROVED STAFF 1. TUSTIN LANDSCAPE & LIGHTING DISTRICT - RESOLUTION NO. 87-78 RECOMI~NDATION USING (Continued from June 15, 1987) ALTERNATE "A" AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 87-78 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY' NO. 87-78 OF TUST[N, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF ADDITIONAL TERRITORY TO AN EXISTING DISTRICT AND CONFIRMING THE ANNUAL 1987-88 FISCAL YEAR LEVY OF ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND SERVICING OF PUBLIC LIGHTING FACILITIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TERRITORY INCLUDED IN THE TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT Recommendation: That the City Council: 1) Open the continued public hearing and take testimony of property owners and citizens; 2) Approve the revised Engineer's Report dated June, 1987; and 3) Adopt Resolution No. 87-78. OESSA SCHROEDER V. PUBLIC INPUT REQUESTED RELEASE OF A~NEXATION 139 AND 140 PROTEST PETITIONS AS VALIDATED OR REJECTED BY THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS AND THE CITY ATTORNEY. THEY SHODLD BE AVAILABLE BY THE END OF THE WEEK. ELENE KAPP, 10031 DEERHAVEN, REQUESTED THAT ITEM 6 BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR. JOSEPH HERZIG REQUESTED CONSENT CALENDAR NO. 3 BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR. ITEMS 5 AND 6 WERE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR BY THE COUNCIL. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVED 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 15, 1987, REGULAR MEETING JUNE 22, 1987, ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING JUNE 29, 1987, SPECIAL MEETING APPROVED .2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,768,240.15 RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $311,866.08 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 3. RESOLUTION NO. 87-75 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY NO. 87-75 AND PARAGRAPH OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS ~ 2 ~ND 5 BE CHANGED FROM Adopt Resolution No. 87-75 as recommended by the Finance Depart- !/~RS TO 5 YEARS. JOSEPH ment with the consent of the City Attorney. '.IG WAS ASSURED THAT NONE ~ ~E RECORDS BEING DESTROYED HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANNEXATIONS 139 AND 140. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page I 7-6-87 A~ 'TED RESOLUTION 4. RESOLUTION NO. 87-77 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.OF THE CITY 7-77 OF TUSTIN ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (SLURRY SEAL PROJECT, 1986-87 FISCAL YEAR) Adopt Resolution No. 87-77; and assuming no claims/stop payment notices are filed, 30 days after date of recordation of Notice of Completion, authorize payment of final 10% retention amount ($1Z,320.00 - Doug Martin Contracting Co., Inc.) as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. APPROVED STAFF 5. APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR EIR COnSULTAnT SERVICES - SAN DIEGO PIPE- RECOMmeNDATION AND KENNEDY LINE EXPANSION/RELOCATION HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THE Approve the contract with LSA Associates, Inc., to provide EIR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND IF consultant services for subject project in an amount not to THE EIR ADDRESSED THESE exceed $38,000; and authorize the City Manager to execute same MATTERS as recommended by the Community Development Department. ADOPTED RESOLUTION 6. RESOLUTION NO. 87-76 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY NO. 87-76. ELENE KAPP OF TUSTIN FINDING THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR 87-1) WOULD LIKE THE ROAD PREPARED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE NORTH/SOUTH ROAD PROJECT IS RECOG- REALIGNED AND A 20' BERM. NIZEO AS ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE AND MAKING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO ADD THE COM~NTS THAT HAVE MITIGATION OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND CERTIFYING FINAL BEEN FORWARDED BUT NO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 87-1 FORMAL RESPONSE Adopt Resolution No. 87-76 as recommended by the Planning Com- mission and the Community Development Department. APPROVED STAFF 7. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH FORMA FOR RESTROOM DESIGN P"-~M~NDATION Approve Addendum No. i to the Consulting Services Agreement with FORMA for architectural services to design park restroom build- ing for the Tustin Phase I Park Site (Lot 6 of Tract 12345); and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute same as recom- mended by the Community Services Department. ADOPTED RESOLUTION 8. RESOLUTION NO. 87-79 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY NO. 87-79 OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO TRANSFER A NON- EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE FOR A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM FROM COMMUNICOM OF TUSTIN, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, TO AMERICAN CABLESYSTEM OF CALIFORNIA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION AND TO AMEND TIlE FRANCHISE FOR A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM Adopt Resolution No. 87-79 setting the matter for public hearing on July 20, 1987, as recommended by the City Attorney. VII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None. VIII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None. IX. OLD BUSINESS - None. X. NEW BUSINESS - None. XI. REPORTS RATIFIED 1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA - JUNE 29, 1987 All actions of the Planning Commission become final unless appealed by the City Council or member of the public. Recommendation: Ratify the Planning Commission Action Agenda of June 29, 1987. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 2 7-6-87 ~ '~,VED AND FILED 2. REPORT ON SLURRY SEAL PROJECT A report in response to Councilman Kelly's concerns voiced at the Special Meeting on June 29, 1987. Recommendation: Receive and file. DIRECTED STAFF TO 3. STATUS REPORT - 17592 AMAGANSET ADDRESS ALL l~rlE ALTERNATIVES SO THAT A status report on subject property witt~ a history of substandard WE WILL BE IN A POSITION conditions. TO ACT IN 30 DAYS Recommendation: Receive and file. RECEIVED AND FILED 4. NOTICE OF PROTEST HEARING - ANNEXATION NO. 141, PROSPECT/VANDENBERG Official Notice for Annexation No. 141 has been officially noticed for July 20, 1987. Recommendation: Receive and file. STAFF TO AGENDIZE FOR 5. STATUS ON ALTERNATIVE FLIGHT APPROACHES AT JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT THE NEXT ~ETING. BILL LUCAS TO CONTACT JIM Staff continues to work witi~ the Airport Noise Abatement Office to HAYES AND MAKE SOME ensure compliance with established noise regulations. RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT ~RAFT FOLLOWING Recommendation: Receive and file. , '~NED ALTITUDES _SCOTT XII. OTHER BUSINESS PRAISED THE TUSTIN I~ADOWS PARADE AND THE FIREWORKS PROGRAM AND THANKED THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS FOR THEIR INVOLVEMENT AND ASKED STAFF TO SEND A LETTER OF THANKS TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THEIR INVOLVEMENT. STAFF TO SEND A LETTER TO AQMD. THE LEAGUE IS GOING TO BE TAKING AN ACTION AND HOESTEREY WOULD LIKE THE CITY TO REVIEW THAT LETTER. KENNEDY REPORTED THAT WE LOST A HOUSE BY FIRE IN TUSTIN AND IT APPEARS AT THE MOMENT THAT IT WAS DUE TO FIREWORKS. STAFF TO SEND LETTER TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REQUESTING THEM TO EXCLUDE FIREWORKS. SHE REQUESTED THE OFFICER RECEIVE PROPER RECOGNITION. KATHY BLACKBURN, 17906 IRVINE BLVD., REQUESTED THAT THE LITTER AT THE COLUMBUS TUSTIN PARK BE CLEANED UP AND MAYBE "NO LITTERING" SIGNS BE INSTALLED. 8:39 XIII. ADJOURNMENT To the next regular meeting on Monday, July 20, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 3 7-6-87 - ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR METING OF THE TUSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY JULY 6, 1987 7:00 P.M. 8:39 1. CALL TO ORDER ALL PRESENT 2. ROLL CALL APPROVED 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 15, 1987, REGULAR MEETING Recommendation: Approve. ADOPTED 4. RESOLUTION NO. RDA 87-6 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 87-6 On March 2, 1987, the Agency authorized staff to pursue refinancing Tax Allocation Bonds and issuance of additional bonds for public projects. RESOLUTION NO. RDA 87-6 - RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOP- MENT AGENCY APPROVING CONTRACT OF PURCHASE RELATING TO TOWN CENTER AREA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1987; APPROVING OFFICIAL STATEMENT RELATING TO SAID BONDS; AND AUTHORIZING OFFICERS OF THE AGENCY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY OR ADVISABLE THEREFOR Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. RDA 87-6 as recommended by the Finance Department. 5. FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, DEMOLITION AND REMOVALS AT ~LUTION NO. 14652 PROSPECT AVENUE (COLUMBUS TUSTIN PARK EXPANSION AREA) - RESOLUTION · 87-7 NO. RDA 87-7 Subject project was authorized by the Agency on June 15, 1987, and all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the Engineering Divi- sion. RESOLUTION NO. RDA 87-7 - A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVEL- OPMENT AGENCY ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (14652 PROSPECT AVENUE) Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. RDA 87-7; and assuming no claims/ stop payment notices are filed, 30 days after date of recordation of Notice of Completion, authorize payment of final 10% retention amount ($1,175 - American Demolition) as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. NONE 6. OTHER BUSINESS RECESSED TO 7. CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION The Redevelopment Agency will recess to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 for discussion regarding eminent domain proceedings. 8. ADJOURNMENT Recessed to a Closed Session as stated above, and thence adjourned to the next Regular Meeting on July 20, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA Page i 7-6-87 ITEM NO. 9 Planning Commission DATE: 3ULY 27, 1987 SUBJECT: REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - July 20, 1987 Oral presentation. pef Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - July 20, 1987 Community Development Department ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR ~ETING OF TIlE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL JULY 20, 1987 7:00 P.M. 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ALL PRESENT II. ROLL CALL III. PUBLIC HEARINGS APPROVED STAFF 1. PROPOSED ANNEXATION NO. 141 - PROSPECT/VANDENBERG RECO~ENDATION 5-0 Recommendation: That the City Council: 1) Open the public hearing; 2) Receive and file written protests; 3) Accept public testimony and close the public hearing; and 4) Direct staff to certify the value of written protests and report back at the August 3, 1987, meeting or as soon thereafter as possible. AGENDIZED, WITH A FLEXIBLE TIMETABLE, A REPORT FROM STAFF ON AN OVERALL FIVE-YEAR ANNEXATION PLAN AND ITS IMPACT ON CURRENT CITY RESIDENTS .... READING BY 2. LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOMES - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 87-02 - .E ONLY & ORDINANCE NO. 991 .RODUCTION ORD. 991 5-0 ORDINANCE NO. 991 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN AMENDING SECTION 9223a6 OF THE TUSTIN MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOMES Recommendation: M.O. - That Ordinance No. 991 have first reading by title only. M.O. - That Ordinance No. 991 be introduced. CONTINUED TO 8-3-87 3. ZONE CHANGE 87-1 & 4. ZONE CHANGE 87-2 & GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-1 Recommendation: Continue the public hearings for Zone Changes 87-1, 87-2 and General Plan Amendment 87-1 to August 3, 1987. 1ST READING & 5. PROPOSED TRANSFER OF CABLE TV FRANCHISE - ORDINANCE NO. 992 INTRODUCTION OF ORD. 992 5-0 Public hearing on proposed transfer/amendment of Cable TV Franchise from CommuniCom to American Cablesystems of California, Inc. ORDINANCE NO. 992 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING FRANCHISE FOR A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM Recommendati'on: M.O. - That Ordinance No. 992 have first reading by title only. M.O. - That Ordinance No. 992 be introduced. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page I 7-20-87 "' IV. PUBLIC INPUT ~ £N DOW, BROADMOOR HOMES, COMPLAINED ABOUT STREET CONDITIONS FROM THE SLURRY SEAL. THE ~TER WAS REFERRED TO ll~E DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS. DAVID ARMSTRONG, 125 ORANGEWOOD LANE, OFFERED ALTERNATIVES TO THE AIR TRAFFIC & NOISE PROBLEMS FOR FLIGHTS AT JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT JOSEPH HERZIG, 1751 RAINBOW DRIVE, REITERATED REQUESTS RELAT!VE TO ANNEXATIONS 139 & 140 BILL WEBER, VICE CHAIRMAN OF NORTH TUSTIN TOMORROW, REPORTED THAT THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE NO2TH TUSTIN STUDY IS BEING FINALIZED. HE INVITED THE COUNCIL & PUBLIC TO ATTEND ll~E AUGUST 6 H~&_L ~ETING AT 7:30 PM AT HEWES SCHOOL FOR UNVEILING OF SAME. £~TIRE CONSENT V. CONSENT CALENDAR CALENDAR APPROVED 5-0 ~PROVED 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 6, 1987, REGULAR MEETING APPROVED 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $677,576.57 RATIFIED RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $148,723.75 A~OPTED 3. RESOLUTION NO. 87-80 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO PERMIT THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS 'TO CONDUCT A SPECIAL ANNEXATION ELECTION FOR TERRITORY KNOWN AS EVENINGSIDE- RAINBOW ANNEXATION NO. 139 TO BE HELD IN THE TERRITORY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION ON TUESDAY, THE 3RD OF NOVEMBER, 1987 ~TED RESOLUTION NO. 87-81 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO PERMIT THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO CONDUCT A SPECIAL ANNEXATION ELECTION FOR TERRITOR~ KNOWN AS LA COLINA- BROWNING ANNEXATION NO. 140 TO BE HELD IN TERRITORY P.ROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION ON TUESDAY, THE 3RD OF NOVEMBER, 1987 Adopt Resolution No. 87-80 and Resolution No. 87-81; and appro- priate $3,500 for conduct of subject elections as recommended by the City Clerk. ~)O~TED 4. RESOLUTION NO. 87-82 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, INFORMING THE ORANGE COUNTY ARTERIAL HIGHWAY FINANCING PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE STATUS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS Adopt Resolution No. 87-82 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. ~£JECTED 5. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 87-18; CLAIMANT: DEVON BOWMAN: DATE OF LOSS: 3/22/87; DATE FILED WITH CITY: 6/24/87 Reject subject claim for personal injuries and property damage in the amount of $5,000,000; and direct the City Clerk to give proper notice of rejection to claimant and claimant's attorney as recommended by the City Attorney. · ~ROVED STAFF 6. TRANSFER OF CONTRACT - TUSTIN AREA SENIOR CENTER FUND-RAISING I~MENDATION CAMPAIGN Approve the transfer of contract from Gary W. Phillips & Asso- ciates to The Robert B. Sharp Company, Inc., as recommended by the Community Services Department. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA .Page 2 7-20-87 ~"~TED 7. RESOLUTION NO 87-83 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-1 IMPROVEMENTS ON IRVINE BLVD., BRYAN AVE., AND BROWNING AVE. AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS Adopt Resolution No. 87-83 for street, storm drain, utility improvements, and traffic signal installations as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. ADOPTED 8. RESOLUTION NO. 87-84 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATIOH OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (ASPHALT CONCRETE REHABILITATION AND OVERLAY PROJECT, 1986-87 FY) Adopt Resolution No. 87-84; and assuming no claims or stop pay- ment notices are filed, 30 days after date of recordation of Notice of Completion, authorize payment of final 10% retention amount ($21,334.15 - R. J. Noble Company) as recommended by the Public Works Departmeqt/Engineering Division. VII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION- None. VIII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None. IX. OLD BUSINESS AFTER PRESENTATION BY 1. AIR TRAFFIC SAFETY & NOISE PROBLEMS FOR DESCENDING FLIGHTS AT JOHN ~.~IZPORT REPS & QUESTION- WAYNE AIRPORT ANSWER PERIOD W/RESIDENTS, COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF 5-0 TO REPORT BACK ON: 1) COST TO SASE, MAINTAIN & OPERATE SOUND MONITORING EQUIPMENT; 2) MECHANISM TO ENABLE CITY TO MONITOR ECORD ALTITUDE 0~; FLIGHTS OVER TUSTIN; 3) ALTERNATIVES TO REDUCE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS (SENEL); ~uND 4) POSSIBLE LITIGATION. Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council. RECEIVED & FILED 5-0 2. SUBSTANDARD PROPERTY & ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE, 17592 AHAGANSET Recommendation: Receive and file. RECEIVED & FILED 5-0 3. COLUMBUS-TUSTIN PARKSITE CONCERNS Recommendation: Receive and file. APPROVED STAFF 4. REQUEST TO REMOVE LA COLINA ROAD FROM THE COUNTY MASTER PLAN OF RECOI~MENDATION 5-0 ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor to send a letter to the Orange County Board of Supervisors requesting that the County initiate pro- ceedings to remove La Colina Road from the County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). X. NEW BUSINESS DESIGNATED EDGAR AS 1. DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE FOR LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIE~ VOTING DELEGATE; ANNUAL MEETING ' '-"-STEREY AS ALTERNATE Recommendation: Appoint Voting Delegate and Alternate. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 3 7-20-87 Ar ~ED STAFF 2. AWARD OF CONTRACT - WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS ON SECO~iD ST., THIRD R£ ;ENDATION 5-0 ST., WASS ST., ELIZABETH WAY, AND IRVINE BLVD. Relacement of deteriorated water mains at various locations. Bids for subject project were opened on July 14, 1987. The low bid is 21% below the Engineer's estimate of $248,633. Recommendation: Award the contract for subject project to Spear Pipeline Construction, Orange, in the amount of $196,014.05 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. APPROVED STAFF 3. AWARD OF CONTRACT - IMPROVEMENTS ON TUSTIN RANCH ROAD AND MYFORD RECOMMENDATION 5-0 ROAD, ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-1 Provision of street improvements and utilities. Bids for subject project were opened on July 14, 1987. The low bid is 19% under the Engineer's estimate of $2,477,723.75. Recommendation: Award the contract for subject project to Sully Miller Contracting Company, Orange, in the amount of $1,998,197.50 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. CONTINUED TO AUGUST 17 4. AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING, 5-0 Guidelines for formation of subject committee as previously proposed by Councilman Prescott. Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council. XI. REPORTS RECEIVED & FILED 5-0 1. iNVESTMENT SCHEDULE AS OF JUNE 30, 1987 Recommendation: Receive and file. SET BUDGET WORKSHOP ON 2. SETTING DATE FOR BUDGET WORKSHOP AUGUST 3 AT 5:30 PM, 5-0 Recommendation: Set a date for a City Council workshop on the preliminary 1987-88 Budget. RECEIVED & FILED 5-0 3. SOLID WASTE COLLECTION FEES Recommendation: Receive and file. CITY I~GR. NOTED XII. OTHER BUSINESS JOINT DINNER I~ETING W/PLANNING CO~4ISSION IS SCHEDULED FOR JULY 27 AT 5 PM AT TONY'S SEA LANDING, NEWPORT & ~IN CITY ATTORNEY REQUESTED CLOSED SESSION FOR LITIGATION. KF~.~_Y REPORTED BUCKLED SIDEWALKS FROM II~EE ROOTS ON NORTH "B", NORTH "C" AND "A" STREET. K 9Y REPORTED llJAT FOUR LARGE ll~UCKS WERE P/~RKED IN FRONT OF llJE CHURCH ON RED HILL S~,..aRELLI REALTY ON SATURDAY NIGHT. CITY.COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 4 7-20-87 A1 STEREY'S REQUEST, FRANK KAMM INTRODUCED HIMSELF AS THE NEW REPORTED FOR THE TUSTIN NEWS. PRESCOTT REQUESTED ll~T DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS BE INCLUDED IN CLOSED SESSION. AN AUDIENCE ~MBER WAS INFORMED THAT CONSENT CALENDA~ ITEM #6 WAS APPROVED. EDGAR NOTED THAT THE FIRST SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN EAST TUSTIN ARE NOW OPEN FOR INSPECTION. EDGAR REQUESTED STAFF TO RESPOND ON HOW COUNCIL CAN INDICATE SUPPORT FOR THE NEWPORT AVENUE, NORTH TUSTIN PLAN. £ECESSED TO CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO GOVT. CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) TO CONFER W/CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION WHICH HAS BEEN INITIATED FORMALLY AND TO WHICH THE CITY IS A PARTY. THE TITLE OF THE LITIGATION IS BLANKS VS. TUSTIN. ALSO, RECESSED TO CLOSED SESSION TO CONSIDER PERSONNEL MATTERS PURSUANT TO GOVT. CODE SECTION 54957. 10:40 PM XIII. ADJOURNMENT To a joint dinner meeting with Planning Commission on July 27, 1987, at 5:00 p.m. at Tony's Sea Landing, thence to a budget workshop on August 3, 1987, at 5:30 p.m., and thence to the next regular meeting on Monday, August 3, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 5 7-20-87 ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR r~ETING OF THE TUSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY JULY 20, 1987 10:40 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER AJ_L PRESENT 2. ROLL CALL APPROVED 5-0 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 6, 1987, REGULAR MEETING Recommendation: Approve. APPROVED 5-0 4. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS - JUNE, 1987 Recommendation: Approve Demands for the month of June, 1987, in the amount of $33,605.61. CONTINUED TO 5. SITE PLAN/DESIGN REVIEW 87-7, RUBY'S DINER, 205 EL CAMINO REAL 8-3-87 Subject matter was scheduled for the June 13 Planning Commission agenda. However, no action was taken due to lack of a quorum. Subject item has been rescheduled for the July 27 Planning Commission agenda. Recommendation: Continue discussion of subject item to August 3, 1987. RECEIVED & 6. CURRENT STATUS: 1982 TAX INCREMENT BOND FILED A status report on subject bond issue. Recommendation: Receive and file. NONE 7. OTHER BUSINESS 10:41 1~4 8. ADJOURNMENT To the next Regular Meeting on August 3, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA Page I 7-20-87