Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 10-05-83TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR REGULAR MEETING September 26, 1983 7:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approved as submitted. PUBLIC CONCERNS None. CONSENT CALENDAR REPORTS NO. 1 10-5-83 7:35 P.M., CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AI#SLIE, PUCKETT, WEIL, WHITE, SHARP FOR MEETING HELD September 12, 1983 (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 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. Approval of Resolution No. 2114 for Use Permit 83-17 Magic Carpet Ambulette Approved, 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 83-3 An action initiated by the City Council amending the Zoning Ordinance (No. 157, as amended) regarding development projects designed for office uses in the C-1, C-2, CG, M and PC-Commercial Districts. Approved, 5-0 with the following amendments: 1. delete finding (a) concerning demand for retail space; 2. require all non-retail businesses to obtain a use permits. Planning Commission Action Agenda September 26, 1983 Page 2 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 83-2 Applicant: Richard Pierce Location: Property located at the southeasterly corner of Warren Avenue and Holt Avenue Request: Amend the Tustin Area General Plan from Single-Family Residential to Multi-Family Residential. Approved 5-0. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS: 1. Old Business None. 2. New Business 1. Extension of Use Permit 81-29 Towncenter Project A one-year extension to Oecember 7, 1984, approved 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS: 1. Acquisition of Reader Board Report received and filed. 2. Santa Fe Land Improvement Company Specific Plan Directed staff to require a specific plan to be prepared for all properties bounded by the Newport (55) Freeway, the Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way, Valencia Avenue, and Red Hill Avenue. 3. Departmental Status Report Report received and filed. 4. Report on Council Actions - September 19, 1983 Report received and filed. COMMISSION CONCERNS: ADJOURNMENT: In memory of Joel Irides, member of Tustin Unified School Board to next regular meeting on October 10, 1983 TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR REGULAR MEETING September 26, 1983 7:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 7:30 P.M., CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL AINSLIE, PUCKE1-F, WEIL, WHITE, SHARP APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MEETING HELD September 12, 1983 PUBLIC CONCERNS (limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda) IF YOU WISH TO SPEAJ( 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 Resolution No. 2114 for Use Permit 83-17 Magic Carpet Ambulette PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 83-3 An action initiated by the City Council amending the Zoning Ordinance (No. 157, as amended) regarding development projects designed for office uses in the C-1, C-2, CG, M and PC-Commercial Districts. Presentation: Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 83-2 Applicant: Location: Request: Richard Pierce Property located at the southeasterly corner of Warren Avenue and Holt Avenue Amend the Tustin Area General Plan from Single-Family Residential to Multi-Family Residential. Presentation: Edward Knight, Associate Planner Planning Commission Agenda September 26, 1983 Page 2 ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS: 1. Old Business None. 2. New Business 1. Extension of Use Permit 81-29 Towncenter Project Presentation: 'Edward Knight, Associate Planner STAFF CONCERNS: 1. Acquisition of Reader Board Presentation: Donald Lamm, Director of Community Development 2. Santa Fe Land Improvement Company Specific Plan Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain 3.~ Departmental Status Report Presentation: Donald Lamm, Director of Community Development 4. Report on Council Actions - September 19, 1983 Presentation: Donald Lamm, Director of Community Development COMMISSION CONCERNS: ADJOURNMENT: To next regular meeting on October 10, 1983 MI#~S ~ A ~GU~ ~I#G OF HE ~AJINIIJG ~ISSI~ OF HE CI~ ~ ~STIN, ~IFORNIA September 12, 1983 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Sharp at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by White and the Invocation was given by Commissioner Puckett. ROI,.L CALL Commissioners Present: Commi ssi oners Absent: A1 so present: James B. Sharp, Chairman Ronald White, Chairman Pro Tem Mark Ainslie Charles Puckett Kathy Well None Donald O. Lamm, Director of Community Development Alan Warren, Senior Planner Ed Knight, Associate Planner Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner Jeff Davis, Assistant Planner James G. Lowe, Deputy City Attorney Janet Rester, Recording Secretary MINUTES It was meved by Puckett, seconded by White, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held August 22, 1983. Motion carried, S ayes to 0 noes. PUBLIC CONCERNS None. CO#SENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Resolution No. 2113 for Use Permit 83-16 Pacific Coast Builders It was moved by Well, seconded by White, adoption of Resolution No. 2113 with typographical corrections as noted by Con~nissioner Well. Motion carried, 5 ayes to 0 noes. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. USE PERMIT 83-17 - RESOLUTION NO. 2111 Applicant: Location: Request: Magic Carpet Ambulette 1001Edinger Authorization to use a portion of the property at 1001 Edinger for the storage of Dial-A-Ride vehicles during non-service hours in the Industrial (M) District Assistant Planner Davis presented staff's report and recommendations as contained in the report dated September 12, 1983. A brief slide presentation was viewed by Commission. The public hearing was opened by Chairman Sharp at 7:36 p.m. The following spoke in favor of Use Permit 83-14: Tom Pelk, Magic Carpet Ambulette, reported that all conditions presented in the staff report were agreeable to the applicant. There being no other speakers on the matter, the public hearing was closed at 7:48 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 1983 Page 2 After a brief discussion/question-and-answer period, it was moved by Well, seconded by White, to approve Use Permit 83-17 with conditions as presented in the staff report dated September 12, 1983 with the exception of deleting condition #2 pertaining to perimeter landscaping. The motion carried, 5 ayes to 0 noes. 2. USE PERMIT 83-19 - RESOLUTION NO. 2115 Applicant: Location: Request: Tustana Animal Hospital on behalf of Grand Avenue Pet Hospital 1192 Laguna Road Authorization to install a pole sign of 48 square feet per face at 1192 Laguna Road Associate Planner Chamberlain presented staff's report and recommendations as contained in the report dated September 12, 1983. A brief slide presentation was viewed by Commission members. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 7:51 p.m. The following persons spoke in favor of the matter: David Crowley, Erwin Sign Company, questioned if the conditions of approval as stated in the staff report were required by Code. The Associate Planner responded that they were. Chairman Sharp closed the public hearing at 7:54 p.m. Following a brief question-and-answer period, it was moved by Puck- ett, seconded by Ainslie, to adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTON NO. 2115 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMblISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING USE PERMIT NO. 83-19, FOR A POLE SIGN AT 1192 LAGUNA ROAD Motion carried, 5 ayes to 0 noes. AJ)#IMISll~TIV£I~AI~RS: 1. Old Business None. 2. New Business Extension of Variance 82-9 (Office Building) Robert V. and Maralys K. Wills 175 "C" Street Director of Community Development Lam presented staff's report and negative recommendation as contained in the report dated September 12, 1983. Following a brief question-and-answer period, the Comission recognized Robert V. Wills, applicant, who spoke in favor of the extension and responded to Commission questions. It was moved by White, seconded by Sharp, to extend Variance 82-9 for a period of one year. Motion carried, 4 ayes to 1 noes, Puckett opposed. 2. Consideration of Draft Environmental Impact Report Newport Avenue Extension Associate Planner Knight presented staff's report and recommendations as contained in the the report dated September 12, 1983. Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 1983 Page 3 Chairman Sharp questioned the procedure that would be followed if the Council certified the EIR. Associate Planner Knight explained that the City would re-apply to the Public Utilities Commission, who, he felt would most likely table the request until resolution of the bullet train issue. If the Public Utilities Commission were to approve th~ application, and Newport Avenue were to be extended, it would be necessary to redesign the route for the bullet train. Chairman Sharp asked why the issue of the Newport Extension has resurfaced. Associate Planner Knight stated that the Environmental Impact Report had been completed and sent out to concerned agencies for the required 45-day review and some type of action was required. Chairman Sharp asked if the Commission could reco,~iiend against certification of the the EIR. The Associate Planner responded that they could. Commissioner Weil stated that having the extension in place would force the bullet train to deal with the crossing as opposed to having the City bear the cost of trying to deal with the bullet train. She also explained that during construction of the Red Hill underpass, an alternate route would be necessary and extending Newport Avenue may provide that alternative. Commissioner White asked if the intent of the recon~endation was to certifiy adequacy of the EIR or of the project. Associate Planner Knight responded that no specific project was involved and the recommendation dealt only with the EIR. Commissioner White also questioned a statement in the document claiming the extension would alleviate traffic in the western part of the City, but that the traffic diagram did not complete support this claim. Associate Planner Knight explained that traffic problems would be improved but traffic from the Costa Mesa Freeway would be added into the system. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Ainslie, to recommend certification of Draft EIR 83-1 to the City Council. Motion carried 5 ayes to 0 noes. STAFF CONCERNS: 1. DETERMINATION OF USE Drive-Thru Restaurants in C-1 Zone Senior Planner Warren presented staff's report dated September 12, 1983. After a brief discussion period, it was moved by Well, seconded by White, to determine as follows: "Drive-thru restaurant service windows are authorizedin the C-2 District subject to use permit approval." Motion carried, 5 ayes to 0 noes. 2. DEPARTMENTAL PROJECT STATUS - WEEK OF AUGUST 29, 1983 Director of Community Development Lamm presented the Departmental Status Report dated September 12, 1983, and responded to Commission questions. Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 1985 Page 4 3. REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - SEPTEMBER 12, 1983 The report dated August 22, 1983, of Council actions at its meeting of September 12, 1983, was received and filed by unanimous informal consent. At the suggestion of the Director of Community Development the Commission decided to conduct a WORKSHOP SESSION TO STUDY CODE AMENDMENTS RELATIVE TO DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS IN THE MULTIPLE-FAMILY ZONES COI~ISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner White expressed a desire to establish a priority for studying the parking issue at the workshop session. Commissioner Wetl thanked the City for the Employees Annual Picnic and asked the Director about the status of the reader board. The Director responded that st~ff was attempting to find a practical and inexpensive solution. AD,IOURI~NT: AT 9:10 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting on September 26, 1983. Janet Hester Recording Secretary James B. Sharp, Chairman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 RESOLUTION NO. 2114 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, GRANTING A USE PERMIT (83-17) FOR THE USE OF A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1001EDINGER AVENUE FOR THE STORAGE OF DIAL-A-RIDE VEHICLES AND THE USE OF A TEMPORARY OFFICE TRAILER The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: That a proper application, (Use permit 83-17), has been filed by Magic Carpet Ambulette to permit the storage of twenty (20) Dial-A-Ride vans on a portion of the property at 1001Edinger Avenue. Additionally, the applicant requested that a temporary office trailer be permitted on the site. B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. That this proposed project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced by the following findings: 1. The proposed use complies with the Tustin Area Plan and the Tustin Zoning Ordinance for industrial uses, 2. The location of the property, bounded on the west by the 55 Freeway, to the north by the Orange County Flood Control Channel and Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad tracks, and on all other sides by industrial uses, mitigates negative impacts of a vehicle storage area (i.e., traffic and noise). 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. 28 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 Resolution No. _114 September 26, 1983 Page 2 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. G. Final development plans shall require the review and approval of the Community Development Department. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Use Permit 83-17 authorizing the storage of twenty (20) Dial-A-Ride vehicles (vans) and an office trailer on a portion of the site located at 1001Edinger Avenue, subject to the following conditions: That slats be installed along the perimeter chain link fence, with the exception of any gates. Use Permit 83-17 shall expire on December 31, 1984 and shall not be renewed as submitted. For continuation of the storage use, complete improvement of the lot, will be required, including but not limited to; the paving of all parking, areas, construction of a permanent office. structure and the installation of all necessary public improvements. 3. That the repair of vehicles on the site is prohibited. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Tustin held on the day of , 1983. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester Recording Secretary 28 Report to the Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING NO. I SEPTEMBER 26, 1983 SU~ECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 83-3 Office Uses in the Commercial and Industrial Zones PROPOSAL: Amend various sections of the C-1, C-2, C-G, M and PC-Commercial Zone Districts to require use permits for construction of buildings with greater than fifty percent of the overall floor area or any portion of the ground floor area to be used for office purposes BACKGROUND The City Council adopted an interim urgency ordinance on November 15, 1982 requiring a conditional use permit for any office use locating in the Commercial, Industrial or PC-Commercial zones. This action was prompted by an accelerating consumption of prime retail commercial property for development of professional office buildings. Market demands at the time resulted in several speculative office structures being constructed in the C-1 and C-2 zones which have traditionally been planned for retail commercial. Since offices are permitted land uses in the Commercial districts, the City was powerless to review such projects without the discretionary authority of a use permit. The originally approved moratorium was extended an additional eight months following a period of lapse. The current extension will expire on December 4, 1983. A City Council and Planning Commission joint study session was conducted on May 16, 1983. The body agreed that amendments to the Zoning Ordinance were in order to protect the remaining viable commercial retail property. ANALYSIS Pending comprehensive amendments to the City Zoning Ordinance, staff prepared the attached resolution providing recommendations to temporarily remedy the problem. The difficulty in preparing such recommendations is that of drafting limitations on new office buildings without penalizing existing office structures and retail shopping centers. To have simply required a use permit for office uses in the Commercial zones would have also applied to any office locating within an existing shopping center. To require use permits for every travel agency, income tax office, etc., would be highly restrictive and not meet the intent of Council's direction. Since the Council's intent in adopting the interim urgency ordinance (moratorium) was to simply require discretionary review of new office building construction, staff's recommended amendments attempt to reinforce that policy. ~ Community Development Department J Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 83-3 September 26, 1983 Page 2 The Commercial and Industrial zone districts are proposed to be amended by requiring a use permit for the following type new building construction: "...Development or construction of new building structures where more than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office uses." Essentially, this statement will only require Planning Commission review and not necessarily denial of a proposed building. The Commission will then be afforded the opportunity to review the merits of the project and its compatiblity with community goals. To further provide the Commission with criteria to follow when reviewing such an application, the following findings are also proposed: "Either or both of the following findings shall be made by the Planning Commission prior to approving a conditional use permit for construction of a building where mere than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office uses. a. A demand does not exist at the present time for retail uses on the subject project. Development or construction of an office building would be more compatible with surrounding uses in the area than permitted retail uses on the subject property." While concerns still remain regarding the adequacy of office use parking standards, height and architectural guidelines, these issues will hopefully be addressed in the comprehensive zoning ordinance amendments. RECOIIqENDATZON That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2117 thereby recommending approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 83-3 by the City Council. Director of Community Development DDL:jh Attachments: Resolution No. 2117 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2117 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 9: LAND USE OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE, ESTABLISHING THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND USE CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS DESIGNED FOR OFFICE USE IN C-1, C-2, C-G, M AND PC-COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, KNOWN AS ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 83-3 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That an interim urgency ordinance was adopted on November 15, lg82 by the City Council to allow the Community Development Department and Planning Commission the opportunity to analyze and recommend to the Council, review of new office building construction in the Commercial, Industrial and Planned Community-Commerci'al districts. That pursuant to Section 9295(f) of the Tustin City Code, when considering an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (Article 9: Land Use of the Tustin City Code), the Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing, report findings thereof, and make a recommendation to the City Council. Ce That a Public Hearing was duly called, noticed and held considering various amendments to the C-1, C-2, C-G, M and PC-Commercial districts establishing the requirement for a conditional use permit and use criteria for development projects designed for office use, II. The. Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council the following amendments to the Tustin City Code: Section 9232 "RETAIL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-1)" of the Tustin City Code, sub-paragraph "a. Permitted uses" introductory statement is hereby amended to read as follows: a. Permitted Uses The following uses, or unlisted uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are resolved to be similar, will only be allowed in those Retail Commercial District buildings specifically approved for occupancy by the respective land use category. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Resolution No. 2li7 Page 2 Section 9232b "Conditionally Permitted Uses" of the Tustin City Code, is hereby amended to include the following: (p) Development or construction of new building structures where more than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office uses. Section 9232 "RETAIL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-1)" of the Tustin City Code, is hereby amended to include the following: d. Use Criteria - Office Development Office developments within the Retail Commercial District (C-1) shall conform to retail commercial use parking standards for the first floor area unless otherwise specifically exempted pursuant to the approved conditional use permit. Either or both of the following findings shall be made by the Planning Commission prior to approving a conditional use permit for construction of a building where greater than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office use: (a) A demand does not exist at the present time for retail uses on the subject property. (b) Development or construction of an office building would be more compatible with surrounding uses in the area than permitted retail commercial uses on the subject property. 3. Development or construction of buildings restricted to a mixture of uses in which the retail commercial floor area exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the total building floor area is exempt from office development use criteria. 28 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 Resolution No. 2117 Page 3 4. Section 9233 "CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-2)" of the Tustin City Code, sub-paragraph "a. Permitted Uses" introductory statement is hereby amended to read as follows: e a. Permitted Uses The following uses, or unlisted uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are resolved to be similar, will only be allowed in the Central Commercial District. Section 9233a2 of the Tusttn City Code is hereby deleted in its entirety. Section 9233c "Conditionally Permitted Uses" of the Tustin City Code is hereby amended to include the following: (u) Development or construction of new building structures where more than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office uses. Section 9233 "CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-2) of the Tustin City Code is hereby amended to include the following: e. Use Criteria - Office Development Office developments within the Central Commercial District (C-2) shall conform to retail commercial use parking standards for the first floor area unless otherwise specifically exempted pursuant to the approved conditional use permit. Either or both of the following findings shall be made by the Planning Commission prior to approving a conditional use permit for construction of a building where greater than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office use: 27 28 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Resolution No. 2117 Page 4 (b) A demand does not exist at the present time for retail uses on the subject property. Development or construction of an office building would be more compatible with surrounding uses in the area than permitted retail commercial uses on the subject property. 3. Development or construction of buildings restricted to a mixture of uses in which the retail commercial floor area exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the total building floor area area exempt from office development use criteria. Section 9235 "COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT (CG)" of the Tustin City Code, sub-paragraph "b. Permitted Uses" introductory statement is hereby amended to read as follows: b. Permitted. Uses The following uses, or unlisted uses which, in the opnion of the Planning Commission, are resolved to be similar will only be allowed in the Commercial General District. Section 923561. of the Tustin City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18 19 2O 9.1 23 24 25 10. 1. Any use authorized in the Central Commerical District (C-2) unless otherwise listed as a conditionally permitted use in this zone district. Section 9235c "Conditionally Permitted Uses" of the Tustin City Code is hereby amended to include the following: (cc) Development or construction of new building structures where more than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office uses. 26 _ 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 2117 Page 5 11. Section 9235 "COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT (CG)" of the Tustin City Code is hereby amended to include the following: g. Use Criteria - Office Development Office developments within the Commercial General District (CG) shall conform to retail commercial use parking standards for the first floor area unless otherwise specifically exempted pursuant to the approved conditional use permit. Either or both of the following findings shall be made by the Planning Commission prior to approving a conditional use permit for construction of a building where greater than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area, or any portion of the ground floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office use: (a) A demand does not exist at the present time for retail uses on the subject property. (b) Development or construction of an office building would be more compatible with surrounding uses in the area than permitted retail commercial uses on the subject property. Development or construction of buildings restricted to a mixture of uses in which the retail commercial floor area exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the total building floor area area exempt from office development use criteria. 12. Section 9242b "Conditionally Permitted Uses" of the Tustin Code is hereby amended to include the following: (f) Development or construction of new building structures where more than fifty percent (50%) of the total floor area is designated for occupancy by professional or general office uses. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Resolution No. 2117 Page 6 13. Section 9244el. "PLANNED COMMUNITY DSITRICT (PC) PROCEDURES" of the Tustin City Code is hereby amended to include the following: "Said Development Plan shall be subject to the processing of a conditional use permit if included within the plan are .areas designated for profesional or general office uses. Prior to approving a conditional use permit for construction of a building designated for professional or general office use, the Planning Commission shall make either or both of the following findings: (a) A demand does not exist at the present time for retail uses on the subject property. (b) Development or construction of an office building would be more compatible with surrounding uses in the area than retail commercial uses on the subject property. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Tustin held on the day of , 1983. James B. Sharp, Chairman -- ~7~-6~Hester Recording Secretary 28 Report to the Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING NO. 2 SEPTEmbER 26, 1983 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 83-2 APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: BACKGROUND Richard Pierce Holt Avenue at Warren Avenue, 14452, 11472, 14492 Holt Avenue Amend Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan from Single-Family Residential to Residential Multiple-Family The subject site is the first three lots south of Warren Avenue, bounded by Holt Avenue on the west and the Flood Control channel on the east. Each lot has a home on it, and is currently zoned E-4. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) recently approved annexation of the site to the City of Tustin. All of the property owners agreed to the annexation and it was processed through LAFCO by their representative, Richard Pierce. Under the Tustin Area General Plan, the current land use designation for these lots is Residential-Single Family. Even though the lots are part of a City specific plan, as long as they were under County jurisdiction, the plan was not binding, therefore, the Residential Single-Family designation remained. Now that the lots have been annexed to the City, they are required to be in conformance with the approved Specific Plan. DISCUSSION Specific Plan No. 6 tied eight lots and seven property owners together with a common circulation system, density, architectural type and style, and setbacks. The approved density for the plan is a minimum of one unit for each 3,000 square feet, which represents a density suitable for the development of multiple-family units. The specific type of housing unit is a townhome, defined as a multiple family unit with a private attached garage and that each unit would be located on an individual lot of record. Five of the eight lots were in the City at the time the Specific Plan was enacted. They have a land use designation of Residential Multiple-Family and an R-3 (3000) zoning, in conformance with the Specific Plan. The remaining three lots are now in the City and are requesting this land use designation change in order to conform with the Specific Plan. Community Development Department General Plan Amendment No. 83-2 September 26, 1983 Page 2 Subsequent to this action, a request for zone change and use permit will be required before construction can commence. CONCLUSIONS 1. The land use designation change to Residential Multiple-Family will bring the subject three properties into conformance with Specific Plan No. 6. With this land use change, all eight properties within the Specifc Plan area will have the same designation. 2. The subject land use change will allow the applicant to apply for zoning that is in compliance with the Specific Plan and subject properties within the Specific Plan area. 3. The proposed change would be in the public interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the surrounding property owners. REC(M~ENDATION That the Planning Commission, by the adoption of Resolution No. 2116, recommend to the City Council, adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 83-2. Associate Planner EMK:jh Attachments: Resolution No. 2116 Area Map General Plan Map Exhibit "A" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2116 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TME CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE-FAMILY RELATIVE TO THE EASTERLY SIDE OF HOLT AVENUE, SOUTNERLY OF WARREN AVENUE, AND WESTERLY OF THE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: Ae 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. That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of the State of California, a public hearing was duly advertised and held on September 26, 1983 on the application of the property owners within the area, as initiated by Richard Pierce, to consider General Plan Amendment 83-2 to reclassify the properties to Residential Multiple-Family use. C. That a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the requested change and is hereby approved. De That the change in classification would be in the public interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the surrounding property owners. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 83-2, amending the Land Use Element to reclassify the properties easterly of Holt Avenue, southerly of Warren Avenue and westerly of the flood control channel to Residential Multiple-Family use with the following conditions. A. That any proposal for residential development shall be in conformance with Specific Plan No. 6. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 2116 September 26, 1983 Page 2 B. That existing structures on the properties not be converted to multiple-family use and that they be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of any multiple-family dwelling unit. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Tustin held on the day of , 1983. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester Recording Secretary Em~BIT A SPECIFIC PLAN K)LT A/~ WAldEN NO.. 81-52 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I; Objectives II. Statistical Data III. Notes IV. Definitions' V. GenerailDevelopment Standards A. Permitted Uses and Architectural Criteria B. Site Requirements C. Setbacks 9. Building Heights E. Landscaping F. Parking Requirements G. Fences and Walls H. Storages and Refuse Collection Areas I. Circulation Criteria II. III. OBJECTIVES A. 'B. Preserve and protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the area by encouraging the orderly development of the subject property. Plan for a consistent neighborhood development which conforms with the General Plan for the City of Tustin and goals of the community. Develop standards that will be uniformly applied to all lots within the specific plan area, regardless of ownership. S-FATISTICAL DATA The specific plan area is bounded by Warren Avenue to the north; the North Tustin Channel to the south, Holt Avenue to the west, and the E1 Modena Channel to the east. The total acreage for the site is approximately five (5) acres. NOTES Within the specific plan area, the continued use of the land as a single family structure, as defined as a Residential Estate District (E-4), Tustin Cit7 Code Section 9222 [a, thereto shall be permitted. No building permits shall be allowed for any prgject which does not conform tO the general development standards of this. plan. Where conflicts between these general development standards and other zoning regulations exist, the provisions of the specific plan shall prevail. Review of any proposed project shall be by Use Permit, as outlined in Tustin City Code Section-9291, 9293, 9294, 9296. Within the specific plan. area, water services will be provided by Tustin Water Works, sewerage facilities by the County Sanitation District No. 7, electrical services by Southern California Edison, and gas services by Southern California Gas. l~ese service facilities are provided along Holt Avenue. Drainage plans shall be reviewed by the Building Official and conform to the requirements of the Orange County Flood Control District. Excess public land may be incorporated into the project without necessity for plan amendment. Upon application for a use permit for development, CC&R's shall be submitted for review and approval that permit the incorporation of subsequent development projects within the plan area. IV. DEFINITIONS 1. Waere applicable, defiml~i°ns conr~tned in Tus~ Cit~ Code Sec~io~ 9297 ~ 11 be u~ilized f~r these specific plan regulmtions. Tuw,,houses: For t~ purposes of ~-M~m specific plan, m towahouse shall be defined as ~ mltiple f~m~ ly dwelling with a private ~t~ached ~.wag~ and ~her~ ~h..ll be mo ~re than c~e dwelling uni~ cn an~ lo~. A. Private Ope~ space: Uncovered patio are~__s f~r the exclusive use of the owners c~ tenants of the dwelling. Open Space: Landscaping; lawn area, ncz-co-,~rcial outdoor recreatio~l facilities incidenZal ~o the r~iden~ial develo.r,m~u~:, walkw~s, or nec~_~y fire-fighting equi~c and ~.~talla~ious. Ce Each dwelling ,,.tt sh~ll be guarani=ed righ~ of use to c~m~ly o~,~ed and m-4n~ained open s~m~. Said ~n o~en space shall be designed so as to be useable a.~ suitable for recreational purposes and/or as a v~lsu~l amm~y. A. Per. Itted Use~ aud Archite~turmi Criteria 1. This specific p~-_ is ~or the develo~nt of r~sidential uses, .wi~h the permissible tTpe of building being a ~w,~,~oms dwelling as defined in Sec~io~ IV, No. 2. 2. The .g.~..w. land area per dwelling ,,-t~ ~11 be 3,000 squar~ feet. Proposed projects ar~ encouraged ~o u~ilize mn m~re *h.n tWO tO three ,,ntis per building, bu~ in no case shall any develoFm~.n~ proposal have m~re ~h~. four d~elling units per b~ilding. 4. Exterior Design: A~ Roofs - D.--;~,~pt roof form should be a oonventional gable with m~.~.w., use of shed or flaZ ella.s-uts. Eaves should n~c be chipped. B. Roofing - A heavF textured ~grk material, such sm wood shake, single ~r thick l~tt com~osi~ic~ ~btngle. Ce Exterior Materials and Colors - A ccmbtr~tion of horizoatal wood siding with mintmal 11_$~ of plaster ele.~n~s is encouraged. tones will be used for the basic building exterior, color. B~ildings may ~e tr~nm~d wi~h contrasting pain~ and s~_-ins. De Design Details - The following details are encouraged for incorporation into the building elevation. Doors and windows should be trimmed, with the use of multiple paned windows. Fascia and barge board should be emphasized as a design element. Fireplace chimneys should be sheared in horizontal siding and trimmed. Site Requirements A minimum of 40~ private and common open space shall be provided for each proposed project. C. Setbacks De 1. Setback from Holt Avenue - 20 feet. 2. Setback from Warren Avenue - 15 feet. 3. Side Yard - Side yard setback shall be a minimum of five feet. 4. Rear Yard - Rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 15 feet, setback from the E1 Modena Flood Control Channel and North Tustin Channel shall be a minimum of 15 feet. $. Architectural features may project as follows: Roof overhang, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director may project six (6) feet into the twenty (20) feet setback area and three (3) feet into a fifteen (1S) foot setback area. Build,rig Het~h:s''I Unless otherwise specified in this plan, all building he4ghts shall not exceed two ~tories or 35 feet. E. Landscaping General Statements. a. Landscaping shall consist of an effective combination of street trees, trees, ground cover, and shrubbery, provided with suitable irrigation. b. Any undeveloped areas will be maintained in a weed free condition. c. Where feasible, preserving and maintaining existing mature trees will be a priority. 2. Holt Avenue Landscape Treatment 'A minimum five foot landscape setback from property lines to fences or walls shall be planted with trees, shrubs and ground cover. Fences shall be periodically off-set at a greater depth for aesthetic purposes. 3. Common Ownership Areas ae Such portions of the site shall be adequately landscaped with trees or ground cover to provide both visual amenity and variety. Landscape Maintenance Property owners, individually and collectively through an association shall be responsible for the maintenance of private and common open space and landscaped areas. be Lawn and ground covers are to be kept trimmed and/or moved regularly. All plantings in planting areas are to be kept free of weeds and debris. All plantings are to be kept in a healthy and growing condition. Fertilization, cultivation, and tree pruning are to be a.part of regular maintenance. Irrigation will be provided and adequately maintained to provide an effective system of irrigation for plantings and .trees throughout all areas. Stakes, guys and ties on trees will be checked regularly for correct function. Ties will be adjusted to avoid creating abrasions or girdling to the stems. .. F. Parking Requirements Each dwelling unit shall provide a minimum of two parking spaces per unit, one o~ which shall be an enclosed attached garage. If a carport is utilized for the second space, it shall also be attached to the unit. If a minimum.nineteen (19) foot drive apron is provided per unit, no additional guest parking is required. In lieu of the drive approach, one-half parking space per dwelling unit for guest parking shall be provided'. 3. Parking Space Dimensions a. Enclosed spaces shall be a. minimum of t~)n by twenty feet. b. Open spaces shall be a minimum of 9 x G. Fences and Walls All fences facing Holt Avenue, Warren Avenue, and the North Tustin Channel shall match the materials and colors of the building exteriors. They shall be limited to enclosing the private patio area, and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. 2. A solid masonry wall six feet eight inches (6'-8") in height shall be constructed along 'the E1 Modena Channel frontage. H. Storage and Refuse Collection Areas All outdoor storage areas and refuse collection areas shall be enclosed and visually screened so that materials stored within these areas shall not be visible from access streets and adjacent property. [. Circulation Criteria l"ne number of access points to Holt Aveue shall be limited to two locations, with one additional access allowed to Warren Avenue, per Exhibit B. Precise locations for access poin~ shall be approved by the City Engineer. Circulation within the specific plan area shall be a private street with a minimum width of twenty-four (24) feet with a nineteen (lg) feet drive approach, and twenty-seven (27) feet with m shorter drive approach, per Exhibit B. Drive approaches shall be a minimum of five feet and a maximum of seven feet. To allow for parking in the drive approach, a minimum length of nt.neteen feet is required. 4. No on-site parking spaces shall be designed that will require a vehicle to beck onto Holt Avenue or Warren Avenue. I I I I EXHIBIT B Report to the Planning Commission NEW BUSINESS NO. 1 SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: BACKGROUND SEPT)EMi)ER 26, 1983 Extension for Use Permit 81-29 (Tustln Town Center) Tustin Main Associates Newport Avenue between Main Street and E1Camino Real Use Permit 81-29 was initially approved by the Planning Agency on December 7, 1981. A year later, the applicants requested and were granted a one-year extension to December 7, 1983. All past staff reports are enclosed for Commission review. DISCUSSION The applicant, Tustin Main Associates, is requesting an additional one-year extension for Use Permit 81-29, until December ?, 1984. They state that the soft condition of the office market has a major impact on the ability to start the project. Tustin Main Associates's representative, Greg Butcher, has indicated that some leases have been secured, but not enough to commence construction. They want to secure more major office leases before committing to start the project. Mr. Butcher, or a representative of Tustin Main Associates, will be at the Commission meeting to address concerns and review the progress on the project. RECO~E#DATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission grant Use Permit 81-29 a one-year extension to December 7, 1984. Associate Planner EMK:Jh Community Development Department Tustin Main Associates, Ltd. August 17, 1983 Mr. Edward M. Knight Associate Planner City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 RE: Tustin Town Center Extension of Use Permit 81-29 Dear Ed: Although we are making good progress in the marketing phase of Tustin Town Center, the soft condition of the office market continues to have a major impact on our ability to start the project. In this regard, the issue of our Use Permit 81-29, which expires December 7, 1983, is an important con- cern to us, and we would like to formally request a one-year extension to December 7, 1984. Your assistance in processing this matter and the City's favorable consideration and continued support are greatly appreciated. Gs~go~. Butcher 3401 W. Sunflower Avenue, Suite 250 · Santa Ana, California 92704 · (714) 966-3099 DATE: December 7, 1981 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING Inter-Corn FROM: SUBJECT: Honorable Chairman and Planning Agency Members Community Development Department Use Permit 81-29 (Tusttn Town Center Project) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of Use Permit 81-29, by the adoption of Resolution No. 2004. BACKGROUND: Use Permit 81-29 was filed to authorize the construction of a mixed use development consisting of offices, financial, commercial retail, restaurants and a motion picture theatre. The site is zoned Planned Comunity - Commercial (PC-C) and has a General Plan designation of commercial. It is located within the City's redevelopment area. The project was originally heard on October 5, 1981 as a workshop for EIR 81-2. This meeting was advertised in the local newspaper, but was not a public hearing. The first public hearing was held on October 21, 1981 for the Use Permit and EIR. The EIR was certified by the City Council at this meeting. In addition, a workshop was held on October 27, 1981 to discuss the Use Permit proposal. DISCUSSION: The October 27th workshop identified three areas of concern regarding the proposed project, which include: 1. Was the traffic report an accurate estimation for future traffic in!~act, and will there be a traffic i~act whether or not the project is developed? 2. The height of the structures, along with the architects concept of utilizing terraces and stepbacks instead of a lower, unbroken solid structure. 3. Market studies that have been completed by the applicant which supports the mix and space footage of the proposed uses. The traffic report was first reviewed by the Engineering Department in August, I981, as part of the screen check for DEIR 81-2. Comments and concerns from this review were incorporated into the Draft EIR. Planning Agency Report/U.P.8~-29 Page 2 Included with this staff report is an information memo from the Engineering Department reviewing the traffic and circulation'section of the EIR. The review concentrated on trip generation forecast and trip distributions. The conclusion of the memo states that the analysis of the traffic impact for the proposed uses was done in conformance with historical data prepared by various agencies and reflects a realistic estimation for traffic impacts. That traffic on city streets will most likely continue to increase with or without this development. This is due to the fact that the con~nunity streets have and will continue to carry traffic passing through our con.unity. In regard to both height and market analysis, the architect and applicant will be presenting information on both these items at the December 7th hearing. Staff has not received any additional information on either of these items, and refers to remarks in the October 21st staff report. The staff report includes this memo, the memo from the Engineering Department, a letter from the Chamber of Con~erce and Stanford Burrows, a petition from the Tustin Gardens elderly housing, and the October 21st staff report. EMK/mi 11/30/81 DATE: FROM: SUBJECT: 24, 1981 Inter-Com BC8 LEDE~)ECKER, DIRECTCR C~ PUBLIC WC~KS/CITY ~gGINEER TOa%] CE~r~ DRAF~ E.I.R. This memo is an infor,~tional report to review Section 3.2, Traffic and Circulation of the draft E.I.R. for Tustin Town Center. This review will concentrate cn the trip generation forecast and distributions. Two primary concerns have been raised regarding traffic on this project. First, that the total number of vehicle trips per day generated by this project was under-estimated and second, that the total est/~ated traffic (9,300 APT) w~uld utilize all the capacity of Newport Ave. and result in a severe i~pact to the ~,,unity. In order to further clarify s~,= of the terms utilized within the draft, the following definitions are offered: 1. Average Daily Traffic is ~,munly referred to as A.D.T. This is the total v~hicular count for both directions on any street for a 24 hour ~eriod. Trip End is the estimated traffic to be generated by a propped project, where a trip is a one-way vehicular mov~nt either entering or leaving a generated land use. Each vehicular ~ovement or trip, will contain two trip ends, one at its origin and one at the trip destination. 3. Rate is the number of trip ends per 1,000 square feet of building. Trip Distribution is a' process where the total traffic is assigned to different street patterns based upon the areas to which they would be traveling, either to or frcm the generated land use; i.e., office ~rkers would normally originate frcm residential areas and retail trips would generate fr~m the entire uam,unity. AM and PM Peak Hours. These are the morning and late afternoon periods experiencing the heaviest traffic volumes. In most cases, the PM peak is usually the heaviest volume because of overlapping ~,a,~tsr and retail trips. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) is a numerical value representing the percent of the available green time actually being utilized by street traffic. 7. Level of Service (L.O.S.) is based upon the numerical value of the I.C.U. The National Highway Capacity Manual defines six service levels as follows: TC~q C~£~ DRAFT E.I.R. NfT~q~BER 24, 1981 PAGE TWO a) Level of Service "A" is a I.C.U. numerical value less than 0.60 and represents free flow with no congestion. b) Level of Service "B" is a I.C.U. numerical value between 0.61-0.70. c) Level of Service "C" is a I.C.U. numerical value between 0.71-0.80. d) Level of Service "D" is a I.C.U. numerical value between 0.81-0.90. e) Level of Service "E" is a I.C.U. nun~rical value between 0.91-1.00 f) Level of Service "F" is a I.C.U. numerical value over 1.00 and represents a forced flow condition with significant congestion. The trip generation forecast within this E.I.R. was based upon historical data prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Caltrans and other historical data for theater usage as cc~piled by the consultant. Not all of the land uses within the project will produce trips during the AM and PM peak hours. Much of the total traffic generation will be distributed throughout the day and evening hours because of the varied retail, banking, restaurant and theater uses. Following is a breakdown of trips as related to land use on the proposed site: Retail Restaurant (Less Overlap) Banking/Financial Office ~neater (Less Overlap) Other 1,680 2,340 3,780 330 20 TO~AL 9,300 As previously discussed, trip distribution spreads the project traffic through several u~L,,~nity streets depending upon the origins and destinations of the traffic. The following is a recap of existing 1980 A.D.T. 's and additional A.D.T. 's generated by the Town Center Project: Newport Ave. north of Main St. PROJECT 1980 RELA~'~D A.D.T. A.D.T. 23,050 930 % INCREASE 4.0 Newport Ave. between Main St. and San Juan St. 25,650 1,195 4.7 Newport Ave. bet%.---cn San Juan St. and E1 Camino Real/Laguna 22,550 1,095 4.9 Newport Ave. between E1 CaminoReal and I-5 Freeway 26,700 2,670 10.0 Main St. west of E1 Camino Real 9,350 695 7.4 Main St. between E1 C~nino Real and Prospect Ave. 8,500 900 10.6 Main St. between Prospect Ave. and Newport Ave. 8,800 1,195 13.6 T(I~q CEN.'~ DRAFT E.I.R. NOJ~BER 24, 1981 P~f~E THREE Main St. easterly of Newport Ave. PRO3ECT 1980 F~'~ ATED A.D.T. A.D.T. 4,700 465 Prospect Ave. northerly of Main St. 4,100 795 19.4 E1 C~ino Real northerly of Main St. 7,650 500 6.5 E1 Camino Real between Main St. and Sixth St. 9,350 1,330 14.2 E1 Camino Real between Sixth St. and NewpOk-t Ave. 7,550 585 7.7 Laguna Rd. eaSterly of Newport Ave. 8,650 355 4.1 This recap will hopefully show that any single street does not carry the entire burden of the prcgosed 9,300 trips to and frcm the development and that they are distributed to several streets within the ~,i,~nity. These streets listed above, with the exception of Prospect Ave., are all arterial highways and are designed to carry the following traffic: STg~T (CLASSIFICATICN) Newport Ave. (Primary) Main St. (Secondary) E1 Camino Real (Secondary) Laguna Rd. (Secondary) 4 with mu=dians 4 4 4 DESIGN~u CAPAC -'l"f 1,800 Vehicles/Lane/Hour 1,500 Vehicles/Lane/Hour 1,500 Vehicles/Lane/Hour 1,500 Vehicles/Lane/Hour Prospect Avenue is presently a local street with a design capacity of 10,000 A.D.T.; however, it is planned to be upgraded to a se¢~;dary arterial status in the future. The intersection capacities based upon the BM peak hours (worst condition) were reviewed during the screend~eck of the E.I.R. and it was requested that additional information be provided for the E1 Camino Real and Main St. intersection to maintain a higher level of service. This concern was addressed appropriately in the draft E.I.R. through the removal of on-street parking in the vicinity of the intersection. Ail remaining intersections ~]culate to an acceptable level of service range. Traffic on the city streets will most likely continue to increase with or without this development. Our c~,,,unity streets have and will continue to carry traffic passing through our c~,,,unity much in the ssm~ manner that our residents utilize our neighboring cu,,,~nities street systems. Cnce the city streets have reached a design capacity, traffic passing through the =u,,'~/nity will most likely search for roads of lesser congestion. B(~ LED~)ECKER DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WO~S/ CIT~ ENGINEER cc: Bill Huston Mike Brotemarkle HAMBER ,OF COMMERCE November 4, 1981 The Honorable James Sharp, Mayor City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 Dear Mayor Sharp: Please be informed that at the regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Tustin Chamber of Commerce on November 4, the Political Action Committee recommended, and the Board adopted unanimously, a position of support for the Tustin Towne Center on Newport Avenue. between Main Street and E1 Camino Real. The rational'e for this decision was as follows: (a) The center will create 1,733 n~w jobs'for the City of Tustin; (b) It will bring shopping, theaters, banking, and restaurants to within walking distance of three senior citizens' developments; (c} It will create over $680,000 per year in tax revenues; and (d) It will stimulate business in the surrounding area as well. This position is consistent with the Chamber's philosophy that what is good for business is good for the total Tustin conmunity. Sincerely, MAURICE A. ROSS, Ed.D. President sj 399 F_.i Camino Real, Tustin, California 92680 (714) 544-5341 Novem0er 2, 1981 Mayor James B. Sharp Tustin City Council 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92580 Dear Mayor Sharp and Council Members: We are fourteen-year residents of Tustin and expect to continue living here for me=y more years as our children abtend Tustin schools. We welcome development of the Newport and Main Street area known as Tustin Town Center only if it is accomplished under the following conditions: 1. All structures conform to.a three story height limitation. ~rhis would ensure consistency with other commercial development in Tustin, reduce traffic congestion from the six story proposal, and not dominate the nearby Tustln Civic Center. 2. The architectural characteristics shall be similar to the 'Dustin Civic Center and Library. We recommend extending these restrictions to all future commercial and residential development to ensure that Tustin will continue to be a beautiful and desirable place to reside. Sincerely yours, Tus=in planning Agency City of Tus=in 300 Cen=ennial Way Tus=in, Cal£fo~nia 91680 Oc=ober 26, 1981 We, ~he undersigned ruiden=s of Tus=in Gard~_~a, have Pro~es, ~ ~ Ci~ .of ~s=~ S~ff ~ ~d O~b~ 21, 1981 Tumtr. i.n P.!.~--~.nc~ Agency' City of Tus~in 300 Cen=tnnial Way Tus=in, California 92680 O~:ober. 26, 1981 We, tam undersigned residents of Tus=in Gardens, have =eviewed ~he Tua~tn Town Con=er Pro~ec~:, as proposed by c~lifoTnia Pacific P~per~iel, an~ ~o City of Tun~- scarf Report'. da~Jd. O~-.~ber 21, 1981, 66) '7O) '72) ?2) ?~) ?4) ?$) ?6) '78) 79) 9O) 01) 9:2) 84) ~?) 96) 97) 98) 99) 100) 101) 102) lO3) 104) 105) 106) 107) 108) 109' 110' 111 112' 113 114 115 116 117 118 ' 119 120 To Honorable Members of the Tustin P]annfng Agency: He, the undersigned, being tenants of Tustin Gardens, 275 East Sixth Street, ~ understand the imp]icatlons of the Tustln Town Center Project, and are entirely supportive of the deve]opment as proposed. Signature Date ~,¢/ .,:, ~_ F,." / I 23. 24. DATE: October 21, ~981 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING FOR USE PER- MIT inter-Corn FROM: SUBJECT: Honorable Chairman and Planning Agency Members Community Development Department Use Permit 81-29 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of Use Permit 81-29, by the adoption of Resolution No. 2004. Applicant: Cal Pacific Properties Location: Newport Avenue, between Main Street and I1 Camino Real Zoning: Planned Community-Commercial (PC-C) General Plan Designation: Commercial BACKGROUND: Use Permit 81-29 was filed to authorize the construction of a mixed use devel- opment consisting of offices, financial, commercial retail, restaurants and a motion picture theatre. In a Planned Community District, a Development Plan must be approved by use permit prior to construction. The project site is approximately eleven (11) acres fronting on Newport Avenue between Main Street and E1 Camino Real (formerly Laguna Road). The majority of the site is currently used for the storage of large trucks and old farm equip- ment, along with a few sheet metal warehouses and old packing houses. The remainder of.the site is vacant. The original use of the land was a packing house for oranges, and a railroad line for shipping. Existing land uses surrounding the project site include the Civic Center across Main Street to the north, commercial across Newport Avenue to the east, commer- cial across E1 Camtno Real to the south, and multi-family residential and some commercial immediately to the west. The site is located in the City's redevelopment area, nearby to the Old Town Tustin area. DISCUSSION: The project is proposed to be developed in five (5) phases over a five year period. The first four phases are contained in Site I, located north of Sixth Street, between Main and Sixth Street. Site II encompasses the fifth phase and is located south of Sixth Street, between E1Camino Real and Sixth Street. The specific square footage breakdown includes: Use Permit 81-29 Page 2 Site I Site II Office 285,450 30,180 315,630 81% Restaurant 13,000 8,375 21,375 6 Retai 1 20,000 20,000 5 Fi nanci al 15,000 15,000 4 Theatre 16,500 16,500 4 ~ 901~ ~ 10% 389,005 100% The proposed project will result in the development of 315,630 square feet of office and 72,875 square feet of retail commercial mix. In addition, a four level parking structure, of which one level will be subterranean, will be con- structed and a plaza for parking. Staff's major concern in evaluating the impact of the proposed land uses is that the project will help solidify the area by meeting the goals of the General Plan for a communiity identity in the downtown. The General Plan identifies three areas of concern, which include: "To obtain a distinguishable community identity related to commu- nity pride and cohesiveness of political, Social and economic fac- tors''; "To revitalize the economic health of the Town Center Area"; "The economic base and reputation of the community will be based upon the quantity and quality of professional office space and commercial centers." As proposed, the inclusion of a multi-screen theatre and restaurants will make the area suitable for evening activities along with the daytime use. This is an important factor, inasmuch as this intensity of daily use will serve as a consolidating factor for the downtown. Within this area will be included the Community Center, the multi-screen theatre, and a live dinner playhouse, along with a variety of restaurants. Most of the community will use the area, and it is anticipated that due to this level of activity, the area will gain a distinguishable community identity and serve as a focal point. To aid in insuring that the land uses are built as proposed, staff recom- mends a condition that any deviations from the proposed land uses will require an amended use permit before the agency. This condition does not give total assurance that the project will be built as proposed, but gives written record of the importance the agency places in these uses. Height: The proposed building heights for the development include: a. Building A, four story structure, 75 feet tall (79 from street grade). b. Buildings B and C, six sto~ structures, 101 feet tall {105 from street- grade). c. Building Y, a one sto~y restaurant. d. Building Z, a two story office. Use Permit 81-29 Page 3 The above heights include a fourteen foot high mechanical enclosure. It should be noted that the visual height i~act of the mechanical enclosure is significantly less' than the building itself. As proposed, though, the two six sto~ structures would be the tallest in the city. The applicant is proposing to utilize a wood trellis and landscaping at the street level to soften the i~act, and to jog the building heights to reduce the overall impact. In addition, the architect is attesting to reduce the overall height by redesign. The Planning Community District requirements do not specifically call out a maximum height, but instead has the applicant propose the height and number of stories as part of the use permit process. Due to the fact that the project area is located in the central business district, is served by major arterials, and is not nearby to residential districts, staff feels this is a suitable location for a tall structure. In an effort to gain a grasp on this proposal and possible future proposals, staff suggests that a height limitation be i~osed. That Building A, a four story structure, not exceed 75 feet from street grade, including mechanical equipment. Build- ings B and C, six story structures, shall be constructed under one hundred feet from street grade, including mechanical equipment. Buildings Y and Z are not a concern, as the tallest structure is two stories. Fire. The Orange County Fire Department has indicated that they have equipment now that is capable of handling a fire in a six sto~ structure in Tustin. In addition, Buildings A, B and C will be required to install high rise fire safe~ specifications as outlined in the Fire Code. Setbacks. Main Street is designated as a prima~ arterial (50 foot R.O.W.) developed to a 40 foot R.O.W. standard. The applicant will have to main- tain a fifteen foot setback from the ultimate right-of-way, giving a twenty-five foot setback until the street is widened. Newport~Avenue requires a 50 foot dedication and an additional twelve feet for a bike trail, for a total of sixty-two feet. The applicant will have to maintain an average of fifteen, with no setback going below ten feet. .Parking Requirements. The total parking impact for the project, including the theatre, is 1,749 cars. The applicant will be supplying 1,347 spaces, a hypothetical shortage of 402 spaces. The applicant is proposing that due to the staggered hours of operation between the theatre and office, the parking spaces could be traded off. Staff has evaluated this proposal and submits the following comments. Without the daytime use of the theatre, the parking i~act to the project is 1,247 spaces, and sufficient parking is supplied. Weekend matinees will not create an t~act. If weekday matinees were restricted, no parking i~act will be realized. Staff is reluctant to'totally restrict matinees during the weekdays due to the fact that many multi-screen theatres have special weekday matinees for seniors and matinees during the summer for school children. Staff could Use Pe~tt 81-29 Page 4 consider a weekday matinee useage due to the fact that: [) less people attend matinees, 2) the proposed theatre is community oriented and creates more foot traffic for matinees, 3) a drop-off is provided, and 4) no mati- nee will begin before 1:30 p.m. Staff recommends that weekday matinees be allowed on a trial basis and periodically evaluated. That weekday matinees could be revoked at any time that a parking impact is realized, and could only be allowed by petition from the theatre manager. The final site plan, elevations, including colors and materials, and the final landscape plan will have to be submitted to the agency for review and approval. 7. Parking will most likely be prohibited along both sides of Sixth Street and the southerly side of Main Street. A detailed pavement striping plan should be provided along Main Street to justify driveway locations with respect to existing driveways and street openings on the northerly side of Main Street. 9. No raised median type islands will be allowed within the public right-of- way. lO. Site I will require a filing of either a parcel or tract map to consolidate the individual parcels of land. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The project is substantially in conformance with the requirements of the 'Planned Community District. 2. The project is in conformance with the stated goals of the Tusttn Area General Plan. 3. The project represents a positive contribution to the ongoing revitaliza- tion of the downtown area. 4. Any mitigating measures as outlined in the Focus EIR will be incorporated into the final site design. The submitted Development Plan is substantially in conformance with City of Tustin development policies, but will require minor modifications in the site design. 6. Public improvements will be required along the Sixth Street, Newport Avenue, and Main Street frontage. At this time, staff has received four verbal responses to the proposed project. Three have been in favor of the project. One was in favor of the theatre, but was concerned regarding the height of the project. Use Permit 81-29 Page 5 SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: A summary of the specific conditions related to the Town Center Project include: Per the Development Plan, restaurant uses encompass six percent, retail , commercial five percent, financial four percent, and a motion picture thea- tre four percent. Any deviations from these percentages shall require an amendment to the Use Permit 81-29. Per the Development Plan, Building A, a four story structure, shall not exceed 75 feet from street grade, including mechanical equipment. Build- ings B and C, six story structures, shall be under one hundred feet from street grade, including the mechanical equipment. Weekday matinees in the multi-screen theatre shall be periodically evalu- ated for parking impact. Upon the finding of a parking impact due to the theatre's useage, weekday matinees shall be terminated and allowed only under petition from the theatre manager or owner. 4. No weekday matinees shall begin before 1:30 p.m. 5. The high rise fire safety specifications shall be incorporated into any building in excess of fifty-five feet. EMK/llh 1 4 B 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Planning I. The A. B. C. D. E. F. G. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MULTIPHASE COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND OFFICE COMPLEX LOCATED ON NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN MAIN STREET AND EL CAMINO REAL Agency of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: Planning Agency finds and determines as follows: That a proper application (Use Permit No. 81-29) has been filed on behalf of Cal Pacific Properties to develop a multi-phase project consisting of commercial, retail, financial, and pro- fessional office space complete with restaurant facilities and a movie theater providing parking facilities at-grade, underground and a parking structure located on the property on the westerly side of Newport Avenue between Main Street southerly to E1Camino Real. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced by the following findings: 1. The development as proposed is in conformance with the Tus- tin Area Plan. 2. The development as proposed is in conformance with the standards of the Planned Community/Commercial district. That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use applied for will not be injurious or detrimental to the proper- ty and improvements in the neightborhood of the subject proper- ty, nor to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, and should be granted. Proposed development shall be in accordance with the develop- ment policies adopted by the City Council, Uniform Building Codes as administered by the Building Official, the Uniform Fire Code as administered by the Orange County Fire Marshal, and street improvement requirements as administered by the City Engineer. That a Focus Environmental Impact Report was prepared and was certified by the City Council on October 21, 1981. Final development plans shall require the review and approval of the Community Development Department. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 II. The Planning Agency hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 81-29 to authorize the development of a multi-phase project con- sisting of co,.,ercial, retail, financial and professional office space, complete with restaurant facilities and a movie theater, subject to the following conditions: 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 is not limited to: curbs and gutters, sidewalks, drive aprons, and street pavement. B. Site I shall require the filing of either a parcel or tract map to consolidate the individual parcels of land. C. A final grading plan shall be required for review and approval. D. A final landscape plan shall be required for review and approv- al. E. Street dedications or an irrevocable offer of dedication shall be required along the following streets as indicated: 1. Ten feet on Main Street (bringing the street to a 50 foot centerline). Nineteen feet on Newport Avenue (bringing the street to a 62 foot centerline). Fo The structural setback shall be fifteen feet from ultimate right-of-way on Main Street. The structural setback along New- port Avenue shall be an average of fifteen feet, with a minimum setback of ten feet. G. A detailed pavement striping plan should be provided along Main Street for driveway locations and along E1Camino Real. Public improvements along E1 Camtno Real shall be coordinated with the Redevelopment Agency project for the reconstruction of E1Camino Real. At the time building permits are issued, County Sanitation Dis- trict connection fees and East Orange County Water District fees shall be required. J. All mitigating measures as outlined in Focus £IR 81-2 shall be incorporated into the Development Plan. K. The trash enclosure locations are to be reviewed and approved by the City's franchise refuse service. That any structure exceeding fifty-five feet shall be con- structed in conformance with the high rise fire safety stan- dards as required by the Orange County Fire Marshal. 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 M. A master sign plan, reviewed and approved by the Planning Agen- cy, will be requi~ed prior 1:o any sign permit issuance. Prior to grading permit fssuance, the final sfte plan, eleva- tions, COlOrS and materials shall be submitted to the Agency for review and approval. Per the approved Development Plan, land uses include: eleven percent retail commercial and/or restaurant, four percent financial and four percent motion picture theater. Any deviations from these percentages shall require an amendment to Use Permit 81-29. P. Per the approved Development Plan: Building A, four stories, shall not exceed seventy-five feet from street grade, including mechanical enclosure. Buildings B and C, five stories, shall be sixty-eight feet six inches, with a variation of twelve inches per floor. Weekday matinees shall be permitted, but shall be periodically evaluated for parking impact. Upon the finding that a parking impact is caused from matinee useage, weekday matinees shal.1 be terminated and allowed only under petition from the theater manager or owner and approved by the Community Development Director. R. No weekday matinee shall begin before 1:30 p.m. S. All roof equipment and vents must be screened from view. PASSED AND.ADOPTED a~t~a re~lar meeting of the Tustin Planning Agency, held on the _~ day of ~,~.~¢~, 1981. ATTE ST: Maria' Ivory Recording Secretary James B. Sharp Chairman 28 STATE OF CALIFC~%NIA ) COUNT~ OF OP~aXV~E ) CITY OF ~JSTIN ) I, ~hRY AS~ CHAmbERLAIN, the undersigned, hereb~ certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Plmnn~ug ~enc¥ of the City of Tustin, California; that the foregoing Resoluticm was duly passed ..ssd adopted aS a regu%ar meetJ.~: Associate Planner Tusttn Planning Agency R3 ,c. .~ i RS ~ MHP R3 il_' Il -~ Ill...,'" .f Report to the Planning Commission STAFF CONCERNS NO. I SEPTEMBER 26, 1983 SUBJECT: Acquisition of Reader Board Oral presentation to be given by Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development. /ih Community Development Department Report to the Planning Commission STAFF CONCERNS NO. 2 SEPTEMBER 26, 1983 SUBJECT: Santa Fe Land Improvement Company Specific Plan BACKGROUND On August 19, 1983 site plans and elevations were submitted for a preliminary staff review by the Santa Fe Land Improvement Company. The proposed project is a research and development building of 78,000 square feet at the northeasterly corner of Valencia and Del Amc. The property is zoned Industrial (M) which is a part of 55 acres of undeveloped property owned by the Santa Fe Land Improvement Company. After completion of the review, it came to the attention of staff that as of this date no plans or environmental studies have been prepared for these 55 acres. In the past, owners of large industrial properties in the City have been approved for development either under a master plan or specific plan to assure that the areas would be developed in an orderly manner {examples: Irvine Company Planned Community Regulations, Signal Landmark on Red Hill). At present, our M District does not require use permits for large developments, only parking and site plan approval by the Planning Commission with no benefit of a public hearing. DISCUSSION State Law authorizes cities with complete general plans to prepare and adopt specific plans (Government Code Sections 65450 et. seq.). These plans have developed as a bridge between the local general plan and individual development proposals. Whether written by the developer or by the local government, they contain both planning policies and regulations. They often combine zoning regulations, capital improvement programs, detailed development standards, and other regulatory schemes into one document which can be tailored to meet the needs of the specific area. Local planning agencies may designate areas within their jurisdiction as ones for which a specific plan is "necessary or convenient" (Government Code Section 65451). Some communities use their general plans or municipal codes to identify these areas, often undeveloped or transitional areas where greater detail will eventually be necessary to implement the general plan. Some communitities require that all underdeveloped areas above a certain acreage have a specific plan. (Tustin has six (6) specific plans on file.) A specific plan contains the regulations, conditions, programs, and legislation necessary to implement each of the nine mandated elements of the general plan. It offers a unique opportunity to combine zoning regulations, capital improvement programs, detailed site development standards, and other regulatory schemes into one document tailored to the needs of the particular area. In this Community Development Department Santa Fe Land Improvemen ~o. Specific Plan September 26, 1983 Page 2 case, it would be the industrial area south of Edinger Avenue as shown on the attached map. A developer's uncertainty about whether a project will be approved is also lessened, since a local legislative body must set its priorities for appropriate land uses when the specific plan is designed. Because the location and size of capital facilities and public improvements have already been decided, a developer knows from the outset how to design a project to take the greatest advantage of the area. As with general plans, the planning comission must hold a public hearing before they can recommend to the legislative body on the adoption of the proposed specific plan. The adoption or amendment of a specific plan constitutes a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), therefore EIR's are usually required because of the detailed development patterns and complex potential effects associated with a specific plan. A specific plan and an EIR on a specific plan overlap extensively therefore they must address many of the same concerns and the process for preparing them is nearly identical. For this same reason, environmental assessment must be an integral part of preparing or revising a plan. It is important to understand how to finance specific plans, since preparation may be costly. Recent amendments to the specific plan laws and CEQA laws allow cities to charge developers who are seeking government approvals. In this particular case, staff recommends that a consultant be retained to prepare the necessary documents subject to mutual satisfaction of both the City and land owners. In the process of retaining a consultant, the landowner would enter into a contract with the city to reimburse the consultant upon completion of the documents. SU~RY Local planning agencies have the power to designate areas within their jurisdiction as ones for which a specific plan is necessary to assure orderly development. Staff is concerned about the orderly development of the remaining 55 acres owned by the Santa Fe Land Improvement Company located in the City's industrial area. Since no policies, standards or environmental studies have been prepared for this area, and the property owner is considering development in the near future, it would be appropriate at this time to initiate preparation of a specific plan for the above-mentioned area. RECOHMENDATION Concur with staff's recommendation that a specific plan of development be required for development of remaining vacant land owned by the Santa Fe Land Improvement Company. ~P1 anner MAC:ih Attachments: Map 28 ..J Departmental Status Report STAFF CONCERNS NO. 3 September 26, 1983 DEPARTMENTAL PROJECT STATUS - WEEK OF AUGUST 12, 1983 This report is intended to inform the Council and Commission of Community Development Department projects and their processing or construction status. Should any member of the Council or Commission desire further information, please contact me at your convenience. Modified preliminary plans have been submitted for a neighborhood shopping center at the intersection of McFadden Avenue and Newport Avenue. Staff has been working with the applicant to improve the site plan. This project will be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a future public hearing. The proposed research and development center at Valencia Avenue and Bell Avenue should be ready for presentation at the Co,m~ission's first meeting in October. Preliminary review of the Congregation B'Nai Israel synagog at 655 S. "B" Street has been completed by staff. This proposal will require Commission consideration of a use permit request when formally submitted. 4. Condominium conversion plans for 1971Ren Circle have been submitted for second phase plan check. 5. McDonald's Restaurant Tot Lot plans have completed first phase plan check. 6. An office addition of 1,900 square feet to 2712 Dow is in preliminary review. Donald D. Lamm Director of Community Development DDL:AGW:jh Community Development Department Report to the ~~ Planning Commission STAFF CONCERNS NO. 4 SEPTEMBER 26, 1983 SUBJECT: Report on Council Actions - September 19, 1983 Oral presentation to be given by Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development. Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - September 19, 1983 Planning Commission Action Agenda - September 12, 1983 Community Development Department ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR ~ETING TUSTI# CITY COUNCIL S~er 19, 1983 7:00 P.M. 7:01 I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ALL PRESENT II. ROLL CALL III. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS PEESENTED TO CHARLES 1. PROCLAMATION COMMENDING CHARLES THAYER AS POLICE CHIEF OF THE THAYER YEAR PROCLAI4ATION TO BE 2. PROCLAMATION OF OCTOBER AS "ESCROW MONTH" MAILED PRESENTED TO dEANETTE 3. PROCLAMATION OF OCTOBER AS "UNITED WAY MONTH" OPPENHEZI~R OF UNITED WAY HELEN EZ)GAR IV, PUBLIC CONCERNS ASi~ED FOR A TOWN HALL )~ETING W~TH POLICE TO ALERT WOI~N ON WAYS TO PROTECT THE)ISELVES FROM VIOLENT CRIlwES. THE ~ER OF I~GARET OPTEBER IN OP. ANGE WHO WAS PROMINENT IN TUSTIN AFFAIRS PROI~TED THIS BEQUEST. LIMOA WIU. IAMS, 14914 REW~ORT, ASKED ABOUT CONDITIONS AT THE ~IFORNIA A~A~llBTS. STAFF RESPONDED THAT THERE WOULD BE A REPORT FOR THE OCTOBER 5TH COUNCIL I~ETING. RICHARD PIERCE REQUESTED THAT THE COUNCIL HEAR REDEVELOPI~NT AGENCY A~'TION NO. 6 AT THIS lIME. RECESSED TO REDEVELOPWENT AGENCY AT 7:16 P.M. RECONVENED AT 8:13 P.M. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUED TO OCT. 5 1. APPROVAL OF 1983-84 BUDGET Continue to Oct. 5, 1983, as recommended by the City Manager. CONTINUED TO OCT. 5 2. REVENUE SHARING FUNDS Continue to Oct. 5, 1983, as recommended by the City Manager. CONTINUED TO OCT. 5 WITH 3. STAFF TO INVESTIGATE HOW MUCH SWITCHING IS 00NE AT THIS INTERSECTION RESOLUTION NO. 83-68 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, CERTIFYING DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) 83-1 AND AMENDMENTS AS FINAL EIR 83-1 {NEWPORT AVENUE EXTENSION) Adoption of Resolution No. 83-68 as recommended by the Com- munity Development Depar~ent. MOVED SUPPOET OF PLANNING 4. APPEAL OF USE PERMIT 83-16 - TUSTIN CONDOMINIUMS, PACIFIC COAST COMMISSION ACTION PLUS APPtI- BUILDERS {Southerly terminus of Newport Avenue) CANT TO WORK WITH ADJACENT OWNER Pleasure of the Council. REGARDING MOVING GARAGE AND P~RflAPS REPLACING BLOCK WALL WITH WAOUGHT IRON FENCE. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVED 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 6, 1983 APPROVED 2. RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL in the amount of $99,882.49 APPROVAL OF DEMANDS in the amount of $298,090.88 CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 1 9-19-83 ''APPROVED STAFF RECOt~NDAT~Ot/ APPROVED STAFF' R£COI~#DATIO# ADOPTED RE:SOLUTIO# NO. 83-70 ADOPTED RESOLUTZO# NO. 83-67 APPROVED RE~OVAL OF TREE WITH #0 REPLACEI~ENT APPROVED S'Tm RECOI~"NDATZO#, SN. TA~qELLI ABSTAINED VII. VIII. ADOPTED OIU)XNANCE #0. 894 APPROVED STAFF R£COIMiE'.NDATI ON IX. DENIAL OF APPLICATION TO FILE LATE CLAIM OF AUTO CLUB/TIMMONS; DATE OF LOSS: 10-1-82; DATE FILED: 8-18-83; and CLAIM NO. 83-18 Deny the Application to File Late Claim as recommended by the City Attorney. FEDERAL AID URBAN PROJECTS, 1983-84 THROUGH 1987-88 Approve the submission of the Newport Avenue traffic signal interconnect and modification project for the 1983-84 through 1987-88 Federal Aid Urban (F.A.U.) Program and direct staff to submit this project to the Orange County Transportation Commission (O.C.T.C.) for inclusion in the p ogram as recom- mended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. RESOLUTION NO. 83-70 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, APPROVING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 83-2 Adoption of Resolution No. 83-70 and authorize the Major to sign the application for same on behalf of the City as recom- mended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. RESOLUTION NO. 83-67 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS HOLT-WARREN ANNEXATION NO. 133 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN Adoption of Resolution No. 83-67 as recommended by the Com- munity Development Department. HOMEOWNER REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVAL (171i Amherst Rd.) Deny request as recommended by the Maintenance Superintend- ent. REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVAL (On San Juan St., adjacent to 13751 Red Hill Ave.) Approve the removal of six Eucalyptus trees along San Juan St., adjacent to 13751 Red Hill Avenue and replacement with approved 15 gallon size trees as recommended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 894 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES FOR AUCTIONEERS AND AUCTIONS OLD BUSINESS CITY FACILIl~/ POLICY 1. Adopt the revised schedule of Facility Fees which increases non-profit non-resident group rates to the level of private resident fees. 2. Institute a Park Reservation Fee to offset processing costs for pemits and reservations. 3. Institute an Outdoor Sound Amplification Pemit Fee to offset processing costs for permits. 4. Institute an Alcoholic Beverage Permit Fee for outdoor areas and require clean up deposits. CIl~f COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 2 9-19-83 · 5. Require that groups and individuals serving alcohol provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance for $500,000 Combined Single Limit or purchase an OCCRMA Liability Policy through the City. - 6. Institute a Tennis Court Reservation Fee to offset costs associated with processing requests. APPROPRIATED $5,OO0 FOR 2. CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS DECOPa~TIONS ON EL CJUNINO AND Pleasure of the Council. A FEW OTHER ~OR INTERSECTIONS OPPOSE 'MI&JOR RECON$'TRUCT 3. I-B/SR55 INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE ALTERIL~TIVE' AND Pleasure of the Council. SUPPORT 'DESIGN VARIATION PtAN 4 - MOOIFIED' CONTINUED TI) OCT. 5 4. STATUS REPORT ON SMOKE DETECTORS Recommended to continue to October 5, 1983. X. NEW BUSINESS HIGHEST PRIORII~ WOULD BE 1. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITY PROJECTS (F.Y. 1983-84) NO. 5 (SIDEWALK CO#STRDCTION ON Pleasure of the Council. SOUTHERLY SIDE OF NISS4)N RD) XI. RATIF IEI) CO)q#ISSION ACTIONS RECEIVED AND FILED REPORTS 1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - September 12, 1983 Actions of the Planning Commission are final unless appealed. 2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STATUS REPORT Receive and file. OP~AL REPORT GIVEN BY THE 3. BULLET TRAIN CITY MANAGER. CONGENSUS TI) SEND An oral report ~11 be given by the City Manager. MAILGRAM IN SUPPORT OF DANNE]4EYER'S AI~NDI~NT ~ REPORTED XII. OTHER BUSINESS IAT HUSTON, NAULT AND HE E#T TI) NEW YORK ~ El)J[ SUCCES~UL IN ACQUIRING 'A' BOND PJ~TING STAFF TO REVIEW PROVIDING TRUCK PARKING IN THE CITY. STAFF TO CONTACT THE COUNTY AIRPORT ABOUT LOW FLYING COLOR PLANES STAFF TO SEWO I.[I'ERS TO SCHOOL BOARD CANDIDATES REGARDING CAMPAIGN SIGNS STAFF TO INVESTIGATE NORTH "8" AND NOUNTAIN VIEW STREETS REGARDING PARKING AND OTHER VIOLATIONS ON THOSE STREETS AS REQUESTED BY AGNES BACON AND MARGARET BYRD. HOESTEREY REQUESTED LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR AB 1545 WHICH WOULD PROTECT CITIES RIGHTS UNDER THE REDEVELOPI~NT LAW. HOESTEREY REQUESiI[D EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR LEGAL PATTERS FOLLOWING THE EETIMG. HOESTEREY REPORTED LOW FLYING ELICOPTERS AT 3 A.M. OVER PEPPERTREE SUBDIVISION. CONTACT MARINE CORPS. HUSTON TO 9:55 XlII. ADJOURNMENT ~.ITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA - To the Redevelopment Agency to finalize the meeting, thence to an Executive Session for legal matters, thence to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on September 20, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. to adopt a resolution authorizing the sale of Water Bonds to the successful bidder and thence to the next Adjourned Regular Meeting on Wednesday, October 5, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. Page 3 9-19-83 CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES PUBLIC CONCERNS TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA FOR REGULAR MEETING September 12, 1983 7:30 p,m. 7:30 P.M., CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AINSLIE, PUCKEl-~, WIEIL, WHITE, SHARP FOR MEETING HELD August 22, 1983 Approved 5-0 (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 ll~E SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD None 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 Resolution for Use Permit 83-16 Pacific Coast Builders It was moved by Wetl, seconded by White, adoption of Resolution No. 2113 with typographical corrections as noted by Commissioner White. )4otton carried, 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. USE PERMIT 83-17 Applicant: Location: Request: Magic Carpet Ambulette 1001Edinger Authorization to use a portion of the property at 1001Edinger for the storage of Dial-A-Ride vehicles during non-service hours in the Industrial (M) District. Moved byWetl, seconded byWhite, to approve Use Permit83-17 with conditions as presented in the staff report dated Sep~er 12, 1983 with the exception of condition t2 pertaining to perimeter landscaping. The motion carried 5-0. Planning Commission Action Agenda September 12, 1983 Page 2 Applicant: Location: Request: USE PERMIT 83-19 Tustana Animal Hospital on behalf of Grand Avenue Pet Hospital 1192 Laguna Road Authorization to install a pole sign of 48 square feet per face at 1192 Laguna Road. Moved by Puckett, seconded by Atnslte, to adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTON NO. 2115 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLA~JNII~ COf~ISSIOB OF THE CIl~ OF TUSTIN, APPROVING USE PER)~IT NO. 83-19, FOR A POLE SIGN AT 1192 LAGUNA ROAD Carried 5-0. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS: 1. Old Business None 2.. New Business 1. Extension of Variance 82-9 Robert V. and Maralys K. Wills 175 "C" Street Moved by White, seconded by Sharp, to extend Variance 82-9 for a period of one year. Motion carried, 4-1, Puckett opposed. 2. Consideration of Draft Environmental Impact Report Newport Avenue Extension Moved by Puckett, seconded by Atnslie, to recommend certification of Draft EIR 83-1 to the City Council. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS: 1. Determination of Use Drive-thru restaurants in C-1 Zone Moved by Well, seconded by White, the following: 'Drive-thru restaurant service windows are authorized in the C-2 District subject to use permit approval.' Motion carried, 5-0