The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02 PC REPORT 2015-16 CLG ANNUAL REPORT AGENDA REPORT ITEM #2 MEETING DATE: JANUARY 24. 2017 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: 20152010 CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT ANNUAL REPORT RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission direct staff to forward the Annual Report to the State Office of Historic Preservation. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Attached for the Planning Commission's consideration is a copy of the City of Tustin's Certified Local Government (CLG) Annual Report for the reporting period between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2016. The Annual Report summarizes the City's historic preservation efforts and describes how the City met all of the minimum requirements of the CLG program during the 2015/2016 reporting period. The Annual Report will be transmitted to the State Office of Historic Preservation upon approval by the Planning Commission. Jr Elaine Dove Scott Reekstin Senior Planner Principal Planner Attachment — 2015-2016 Certified Local Government Annual Report o ui o cu (D _ 0 •� 0 0 a� � E Co o U x c E QCr3 E CU (D CZ a� m N o o� — cn o vi cu z Z Q N -a p 0 p O CO 70 0 Q)a N O o O V c Q _ a) c U QO vi > +p+ d U N o N E � N �, .0 U N M n C O OU s cB '0O U p cu N !Ep V o + a) t cvO N }' a) p U a� p _ U O C L `� tb O (DU CD O 05 I (DW O p N � a O " O E O O o f N O vi cv L E 'E "_ C, J N cn p O U W <C 0) U L N XO -a .2 c- U w Ep _ L s O � CoN p +. o c- `a c aoi a Q a� �+ V 70o a p OU � Q OU o s cu Q) o a _ Q) M cu C�3 O E Oa) � = N cam � � O Va) a� N > O +_ m E C <C V 7 U p (Q a) cv o o V p "J O V (L) o i c O c J N O '� U Co co E E — Q p o � a� aD cn . L U M i o O 0 . o ' U X cv ,� p cC i L E O o E cC `� o v Z3 c E Co N � � � o a� Y Co a� o � W +� N � yo = =' — E o o L p � Z 0) CD _ fn cv 'Q (D L' O ca 0 C cn NAY m J Q Q > UQ d (D .E m •2 O Q c c V p � oEE oo p a� • • • U s s p p L Z o a `E° U ami w a >%CO U) cv cv Z Q o ca 2 U L) J Q U >+ Q) O U) O O— � }r O U70 () OQ) � d d o O E 0 O O i � a� O a) LL O a)a) <C Q Q) N •� C .- Q) cn y a) O L a) � � �� = N to O a) (B c� p N Q p <C OU 0 Z) 0 p O O a) o - Q � L � � U (a � N N Q ° i •o L d Z-3a d Q) u cn cu Q 'v .y t L L V a) N c L E a)cu a) Q fn ++ O r O U c � O O S i O U N ( N0 i0 LL Z � � UZ n L) is N U 'm C: � V d L N a) Q ca Z p N d O Z (B O O OL O a) N OU O O N O Q O U (B S t4 +� N U 75 E o 0 Q m '� _ a) o 0 > p a� N � ate) � oc � La G1 in Ln O `O) 0) L ca a0 O U L i U a) U � (B O 0 (l) O O Q a) N ca L p (() \ >, C 3 p V }' a) > "- � +� O ca �. U <C L i > O U O z O _ y O > Q) a) o U) c U)zi d .c3 o Q Ocn c� Q a � � �, � � ❑X � � o pCU o ca (1)0 �' Z `� o ami L ° `° Q °' J i +; <C p Q1 • a O O O Z p (017, >, i O r-I Lp � U ) ❑ cn O UO a) - ZQ C - a) SV E cu � Cz � � Q coo o° a � F � ZJ Q = d J v o0)� � > °� ❑ � a �1 .O0) co , ) a) r� cu az � a p o U O D >0 Qi J Q Q r- CV d N C7 z a o W � o w o o a� � a ° o > 70 L C: � � o � >; o >+ aa)i = vi v ani 0 (D -0 o O 3 O U w o Q s 70 = ow Qp 7cu H o O = a oca Q� p = M cu _ cu L.L (1) (Q Qi N L oma o �, o = N p p O w (n o O o a) = 0 cn O Q O _ oQ vU o E 4 O �' a) a maw = a° � a o U r _ OCL oai o N _ o v E Q = o n E E a O O O = •� U S p cv CD 0 in 0U o ami v FD '� (73U O i > c cU Q C c � = a o , _ +, o o cn a� c� o CU oma iz cn _ - CD o N > a� a� a a c Cir E E c,. � n a L .� d � a>i O O O 'er EWA o L o O o f G� o }' L L ca 0U 'i 4y Q 0U O 0 0 r.: a L coy y- Ov� •� -0 a) an = 0 a) ani 3:Z 4C +0+ � _ > L > 0 V O O 3 ca 4 L 0 p 0 ca O ca ca cep 0 0 0 � pv � U C'1 U � 4 U) 0' _ U � `) Vw? cc _ � a� O O ca o O t _ (1) 4- 4 0 o Q 4-- O 4 i 3 a� _ a� N a0i tq w O �- � G1 Ate' aNi o = QvW ° o � moo = Z o � 00 Y Q cn _ c ca > cn U c� a) . V Ov 0 -0 woa L � o � � o tea) OU a) 0 w � 33 0 d2 3 ani � _ •� •� V . a a� w 04 to ri E a (1) 'a o ° .0 N O � •y Z o o d E 05 o 'LEOmMn 05 a � d d d J w � y 0 cu o �� m � •Eo Z _ cu N Fu E 3 O � _ L oE 0 QO ?, QE o O Cl) W 0 O +°'' LVL •X p - � � � � °° °° L � pN C) O rrOEQ o C. N +� o 0 0 0 0 0 —• d L N O CL O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 QTY Qr No o 0- 0EEULaNis C: +� 'y - O 70 (Q N 0 L a) L y O y '4 ca L tm Orr 0 v Q O E Eo i 0 a o 0 0 0 °r° o E O Q'0 d d V r- cu cu 0 0 0 0 0 ON � � r O cu O u) ° a N o f '> H L O L V V 0 42 .2 �cu E EL N O Q ' / N > ) U) > L p U) d a) H ~ i L L � L L •� L cu O L r /� N ami 0) C: o Qhs O o0 .o •— — _ U) — s >, N U) i cn U) m U) i a) O •� J E 'aEEE TE '� a) ° 0- c � WOami L a O c O 70 O O N O L c d — ++ L N U m a) UwUQU UOfUW U a) O •- r L ;> (fid = �- maa)) a�'i U p L 10- E 7 cu U) cu Q i r S r- _0 Q� O O �. O L O p c p d L N p Q p > cn >+ a) •7 i s O i i ° ca ++ CU > a) w a > (� a a N — a E $ 2 .E ƒ 7c c & o o « % 2 § § 0 E O 3 � c CL Q 3 3 k I ¢ @ c g ¢ 0 @ @ cu q 2 m 2 U)r 2 �o ■ c c c c c 0 � � ❑ / / / � C114 / § k k k � % 0 0 0 C $ a) a) a) k ¥ « 2 2 2 | 0 E E E E E E E k E E E m o _ CA / 0 0 0 a U U U § m 0 0 E (D > cu c .c 0- .\ w w w — w C) 2 m f c § m_ \ § % 2 G cu _0ga § = .2k cu § — � '� E 2 \ E o d £ > E q ) k E cu O \ cu I f cu: @ 0 2 tb t / 2 Jk k / \ + E ) ƒ c c § k O k 2 § d — _ a- E D D 4 § d j _0 y Q (n " � — / u § _ ■ § .� 3 0 E E E Z) ■ E @ 0- 0- » >N 7 ° 2 o / £ 2 E o § -0 ƒ s 0 0 � � \ (0 U ® § 0 » E § E c _ o k § m 2 I / m o o f ° 2 E E m � ' \ & c $ cu CU \ 2cu -0 £ / ? ) E k k k / E k 2 0 -1 U) 0 E � E » 3 ° E ± / £ 2 w & ] 3 / Q 2 [ m _ 6 cu 3t / o- � � / U) k O k q .§ _ . o cud 0 0 0 7 >N D Q Q f t - -- 04 04 » 0 0 0 C04 = E 0 CL / cn2 § 0- 2 4-- ' E E % �_ �_ u @ § / k � 222U 2 ' k u 3 2 m ® 2 @ .» O wLu § m m $ 4o � � Eww E E@ >N \ \ c U) cn � @ f \ \ q E o c Z) Z) Z) k — @ E £ @ § Z) Z) § � ® w woZ) E0- / 2 � w w S- 4--R � 0 0 U) & / k � ¥ ¥ 0 % > ® @ f k k E £ § E @ > - ff D C) < < C) � m3R D D d 04 � EE o U » @ c ± E . N tb w 2 . \ > G w . § .[ 0 r E 2 @ ) 0 c 2 r r L- q � » � \ R R O � a) L 0 Q 9 o E 6 & q c 22E U / 7 .0 § f 7 k ) / : LO 3 k o £ c o o 0 0 z k / ¥ § 4 » —% % G £ m � a) - v 0 E 0 � � ƒ c 2E m § � � 2 g § � > c 7 o 0 '§ § f 2 2 ) � ) a § E ° 006 2 ± ± t ± ± \ m § off § Go 4 Go o : U c of ® � � E : gC: C: 2 2 � � � % / CL D- k / D- C) 0W C) GkJ § E u t cu k u a) k C: -_ �� d � 9 � � o - co m » CU E J 3 � -c- C: ° � ■ 2 ƒ 22 § 2 0 0 ] CU E § \ 2 � E o J a) ® U I > _ Ln Ln O N C7 N N I..r O O L C7 O Ln Il- 0 Q O a) a) U U) (n U) O a) N o tow U) to (n aH a) T r o O (B O N (B � O N N � � H H H O Z) U d J H Q H QO 7 L -0 4- 4- 4- U •L � a) L) U) L i 4- C 4- y 0 O O O O c O O 0 N � Z) �O (U O � � � :3 O Z) L a -0 O O -C LL U LL C) C) C) Q Q C) d co C) J U H U) U N y r � N U) to E O O Ln O O 0- O 0- O ~ L- y N D Ln D N a � � U � CU L a) Ln O N i o � °�U c ` QU � E Q QQ C) O � W o � t � C: O a) C: O � to Z) U) CU U cua an O a)a Lco > � 0 a o -CZ oCUcu . L UO �0l )�L L to c c c LS J O a) a) a) .� U O (B CaC o cu c� LL U L cu E J U a LO ao 0 L LO LO c7 N N L N O N O O O O It c1r) o Q O U Q) o L 0 U) LLO cu n cu cu C cu cu (n (n (n U O a) a) ca O to W � (n ,- (n aH L N H H H J H o Z) V d J H 0 c H _ L O O O 0 0U ~ L � .V L L O 0 a) 0 cu cu CU c � C) C) C) D C)<< C) amC) � C) Una C) N y r � N ° cn � � L ^ ° U) � L L L L N O -r— -r— ° O L O O O Q O LO O LO 04L y r r D r O Ucu o � w ca LU — — co E U) `" O .L co cn U E L O I 0 0 0 0 0 I U L L LO (n � � ° �O 1 U) a) O u ° ° O d o W d I cu c L aUi W > a) d I c� L) -r- O) o CU 0) —1 (D Q � O) o cu 2 Lu0) J _ � Q' C) cu Q0 aa �aC) (D L D � a U 0 Q E E U) o L L� L L.L � LO LO LO ti ti 00 00 N O c7 N 00 O N c7 N N N O N N O O L O r r O r r o J OO cu cu cu cu cu cu cu cu U U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) O /• /� O N Z) cu O Z) Z) Z) Z) Z) Z) Z) (B O aN Qo � 'ecu O4-- L 4-- 4-- 4-- 4-- 4-- 4-- 4-- L O U O O O O O O O O O O s, a) t� ca 00 t� t� t� t� t� t� t� ca O O U U LL U U U U U U U U LL N y r � N � o EL L L L L L L U U) L L NO L L L L L L O L L O L L O O O O O L O 0 y N CV O U? CV N a � _ U `1 cu L P >, ca W O W ~ /� /��. co ✓] E E L VJ L r- c N L VJ E Q � Q L O 0 O a) +� ca p E O ca U 0O a ca p a) cn 0y � � � UU Q Q o � UU Q � � O O � "' � O G cn a) to � O cn O L i U X N O X N � m L �� d L d p W 3: d �, d d 0 W of Op6 o 0n C:) CU 0) ca 0 -C O) o o 2 L) � C � � � o � Q 0) a) O c 70 -0 O L L �! a] O � 0 � -5 O L i O J z � C� iL a>� cn >>o CU CU O Q L) a) .c cn >>o 2 > 0- C) 0U) 2d < ULL 2 > dU HUD O U) cuU U `u 0 m c a cu E N O Q w cn d 00 N � ƒ 04 d ƒ A 6 I & g A ¥ 6 + ¥ O CL E E E E E E g g g g g g cu cu cu cu cu cu 7 g / L / \ \ \ � \ � \ \ 2 \ § E E E \ E \ E E C) � + E : E2 E2 E2 Z) E2 E2 w 0 2 [ % [ E [ E ®_ [ E ®_ [ E [ E � R L) $ 22 22 4— 22 22 22 T © ® % R % R % R � % R � % R % R aD bU ± U ± U ± D U ± D U ± U ± N \ r � N ® _ | / E 2 r r r r r r r § § r 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 o o o LO LO LO / LO \ L & a Q c 2 ) t f % � o / � k % E E » � E U '5 £ uR § m E § § ¢ E ' ko \ � \ � � ° % 0 a) 0)� \ EOf � � § m 3 � � c � 0 § � G f % 2 2 E G % G m E E / / 7 E � ® h > E � / G $ / \ 3 m 4 + 2 / o ® @ U 7 ® 2 % 0 § ) \ / k f 2 G ) / 7 § f 'ƒ » f G -0 $ E U ® m m m » » o » 3: � G G k � = E � » $ 2 � � ® a) 4 � / m � 3 .- .@ � E r E u E w E > �t .@ y = E ° f E » E O \ \ / ) > 7 a) f % 3 \ / $ 2 � Eo § 7 � k Ord / 3Td � " " . � ƒ / k 3LL / 3 ƒ 43 � � � � � 2 � 0 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q \0 o m co c $ co ƒ 6 2 Z o ¥ A ¥ + + ¥ W O M — CL E E E E g CL g g g g 0 % % % % ®2 O U) \ \ \ U E E E § E o ) U) E : E : CU % E : (nt 0 / Im / / _0 a) / / -0 2 § m d § = § = § / $ .- § ° @ co © @ a -C D dLL dLL dLL b � d � N N ) � � - | LLG/ E 2 r r r rr 0 o » CA k k k k 50 ■ @ — 9 9 9 9 2 o f / \ / � k c a © : : 3 S § § 2 $ \ g o m g § d E § E ¢ » o cu § ° k k E � ' t » % ¥ 3 / (D 7 9 m E » 4 / g t § ) k � E 0 '/ ƒ L) a)2 / ) 2 2f / a)f \ % 0 § � ƒ » %f cu E » 2 2 L) 0_ » m % .I § § E E @ '- % \ 2 f / § � 7 % / 3 2 q % o f ) � U / 0 � E ƒ 0 � � � .� � k2 § .9/ a » m o 3 o $ = E » $ % § G ± $ » / 2 ± 7 � ¥ DE ± 0- 42 / 7 § E - 'E 2 -1 0 o U n � Ef k k § E 4 m « U � � ■ k m 3 ƒ c § � U c 2 kk � w � U » p o § 2 § 2 2 -0 LU . a < 2 k > 2 � & cu ° § cn .g 2 s 0 2 0E0 U § CL C: 3 \ _ 7 m CL 2 § q o o c � c / ■ -0 r % ■ © o 02 $ 0a) Q c � $ E 2 U o E 2§ � � v � c O ¥ � E A & c ■ o04 s £ � � O o o § > 2 Qw � o � � � S � ■ 22 t c o o g 2 cu a) k 2 k © 0 0- § 2 / » k § 2 w z k o _j c 0 •- c o : % 7 CL 0 g O \ @2 ® 2 0- m E 0 t 2 �§ 0 22 7 u G � 70 ' D 0 U)k § § § \ § 2 c 0 / a @ � / � � ��f \ 20 f J 2 ¥ 2 m 0 70 o \ C § / / § 2 � � CU E c § > \ © ) 2 » o u 2 / » § 0 o / -r- � � ■ § 3 ■ wf E R 2 kE 'a Ln 2 r-« 2 cn ° �k2 Q a2 � � LO U LO O c r O r O O N O �L. N N O U 00 a) O O04 L >� N D �' O cE Oca ca N 0 a) L W 2 N>O C0(BQ O O z Q UN O ` 0-o CL OV -0 (a U a) U a) ' L -0 p � O +J �_ a) � ca > 0C: 0) c 0' � � � U) 0 ca -0 -0 3: 0 �- cn O 0 � HOJ cnCU L- c � �. � � 0 cu ca �a � a� QN cu cn 0 L 0 yL. a) >, O 0 O a) C: "� L (a 0 U Oto E M E 0 cn U N T_0 0E L a)cn E O._ t L �• � � � _ U D oU cn 0 q - O ca o LL E ca 0 c a) L _0 a) cn U N a� L a� L o ca ca C ca -0 >,W a 0 L oma. �- � "- 0 � � - O �. OU L O0 E Qcn L cu N (a U -0 t a) ?� 0 Q Q L N H >, a) �a > u a) E 0 > 0 ca CD _00 0 M 0 c Q o 0 .2 ca N TLL U � L 0) > Q _0 L cn !_ L J O O � � 0 0 0 � � CU � c 70 0 O—� U � `n d Ute. � LL � to �O 0 � � � 0o � � (j � � 0 v ami cu LU � � 0 70 o � � � � a) Q� L N L � � U) 4- 70 O Q � d O cn "' 0 � � � C7 �Q, (a > O cn a) O a) N O (� O ca 0 L �O H O U) U) 0 O 0 0 H -C a) O = Q N �_ cu caro o 0 � oa� � � o Ecn �. cn ' � m � i O Fu o ° w o Q ocu 0 �Q nm a) Eda cn ca� Q O"d CU N N �. o �. O o Q cu to a) a) n 0 cn U 0 to ca � != Q !_ ca a) > .� o d2 � Q � 0QU 2 dU ca ca Q c .� U O 0 � � anQ 0 L o O Q L- 0 0 d O N > > O 0 E Q 0 cu o w JCU o LL a a cu c 0) U O O a) 0 ca o U cn c _0 U0 d 0 0 0 -0 UQ E - >, _� 00 L E U) Q o X0- 0 cU LL ° 0 0 = 0 0 Z) U c -CZ W CU > � U) U) o o .0 p 0 —>' � � cn 0a) i Q ~ (a N i ~ Q O H 0 U C) O CD 0. ca E 03 0 0 '— a) cnn-� o >, L O a) �- cn O O O O U N _ 0) a) 0) �� o, Q O Z) U L _ LU L L L N �• N v a) E }O1 p O O 'L O O O O r Sy -0 Z) L Q N U U O U C: M N ct EE -C a) cn � ca O ca L Q. a) a) CL N CU U > in U U (n p N N U O Z H U ,� O CU ct p O Ucu LhQ. ca a) O ca ca c cj cj p ctU to cn U O .— L '� U E a) a) C: >, U U — to a) -O N p a) U U � Z3 � N ate) a) Q � � •L � 'au > � ai L O Q 0 C a) c} L N p) Q U O E (B 70 U L U a) N ct O T a) O ff- C 0) N O) n (6 � > 0) >' p 0 (B O �. (B O a. Ca) N > i a) L O a)cu 0 U L U U a) a) O Q ) J N U O �, o a) L � o � oC hoc _roU � 3 o� (n }' O o � cn OUB � Qo Q� O OU O 'En0) (B -0 (B O .- L N r U i U o a) a)� o� � oo c oU oL) � � •� oaQ � Uo � nsQ o � L rcu O o � V 3 CC.� N Zcu a) Q L _ C: U) LL M a) -L E O cu OV O �p) y a) ca C aof J L O m U •L U U U _0E U � � a O n U J Q O) _ N y p O to U C L E a) L Ucn U L cn L CU L c � � O u E L N W e 0 .0 c O U J L E o Z o U O 0 cu >' O Ems ° cu z d o a o o0 o aiE C >' `- L ca �. O 00) 0 aa)) � � o � cu � �, Q o o U) L L cu ( ( to 'L nO cO ) O O CU E ONa) L 0- OpQ 2 O O L Q aj CL E CU p u) cu cu L L L `/ O Q U O O O U O (n CB L u) L -r— ca �' p 4-- O > u) O E L cn L °) a) CB Z) c O U a) cu E E Z � O U c _ t U L `� a) a) �_ a) N O O a) O 00 ❑ O u) L L CB N a� Q au'i O � � � ° p � aLO te) CB N C2 O _0 O a) _0 O O ❑ u) c7 cu cu CD O ca ca C1 U O C: L N tb � u n c� >, u 'C s to to O a) a) L a) O U a) a) N cu a) cu UO O a) ca -0 ca -0 CU Q L a) N > -0 O O > O U) > O CB �+4-- E LO u) L L L L L O n u) L u -0 -0 c �� c a) a) a) a) L C6 a) L °� L u) a) � a o G1 o �- au'i o � � Eo � � of � Q oa) -i5 CO _G1 •O L � mmE L) p C CU � U ai U CU OO cU O L) L0 L- L z °)a-0 o ❑ O > U L p) a) >, a) p 0 >, 0- (1) 0- 0 70 >'70 cm p �. UO �. c ) �. O Lo i> L6 = � a) >cu OLO ton 0O 04 O .U) � U) 04 O z � 7 o o) � cu 04 c 0 � n a oN a) J ca a) ca c o.O ca tn. L L O O O a) a) i O a) o 11 O a) o a) ,U_ } N L �. O -0 L E L a E a) M E uu) ani o a) a E 0 rn � � � a) � � > QU � � � 0 M G� /ami > /�� ❑ � /o c L- w a� .L o a o 0 U VJ ,U cu n ++ VJ (B L (nVJ — (B O c 4- .L O CU O �+ U) a) O O a) O O a) a) Y a) Im O U a) L V "� L V L a) u) �. U a L) a s � o mQ o a �' ns o asCU x V O O V J J J J W li U U) 0 o / £ 3 � » E 7 » E £ 0 7 � £ @ E .E .9 @ E E E o § ) / $ / 9 [ 2 k $ fa) 2 k -0 � & § » §k04 � L� � (1) k70 0 � % 7 �U) 2 � 2 2 @ E � ^ � � 0 � $ \ @ � 2 k u '7 E ° 5 e » 2 ■ 0 » c a3 03 » o £ -0 ■ f E a) § "/ Cf f 2 0 G m Z) U) E �3 .E E o > ® k E ¥ E » g 2 � f m ± a ° / m q 7 7 2 >N 2 2 6 N � 3 / � 0 L) iL � ) @ t U ® 2 < ®� k E 7 k CU 2 t § § § L 2 2 2 ) � « .[ % ° E - % E I g 70 � k 04 /0z 70 _ » 70 k o k S �/ cu v � $ / 0 ) Q % 70 » k 5 0 / ƒ � @ E G n ¥ 2 ® a 2 0� o \ D 2 f » % ° > § _ � ¥ u 0 cu 0 % 5 / �LO a) -r- ƒ f U £ o c E E ° 2 2 3 E » S E 70 « o q 3 » o Z) 0- o m E D-C - L a § ± / / n o % a 0 2 2 § � % k t 2 '� § > •c 23 % '- E » 2CL ƒ E 0 O \ % / E % 3 ± E J c a k 0_ tb £ q \ 2 / : / ■ 70 @ 0 E � � § 0 . � � � � E / o ' m O w .g � 2 u G z f� - 707 0 ± k % 0 ecu � 3 mo 2 E3 2 % 3 ®k ( @ 0m ® cu / § C c ° .6 @ @ U) � � � � jk ƒ 22 % � o � \ � / D- � k ma k ƒ . 7 E k k � / § 0 Cl) Cl) % % \ Z) L El » o\ � 2 33 2 0 04 q � 0 k 0 k \ d .s 2 j .% Q w & cn O » - » o = k & < % 2 ± On3 .g � « > L) I m � E ƒ LO E 0 L) 0 c a) n o $ % / 0) > 2 G £ E E CL / � / > - 2 > Q / 0 k Q 2 $ ? c f 0 0 � cu / co co 0> El / j 7 0 0n o E � 0 0 U) 0 U) /> � w o o E » G 0 Q 2 m E e 0 o m > c � � f » \ 0- 2 ¥ \ f % cu 0 » ■ — § o E 0- £ 3 @ N \ Z) CU &- &- 0 Z) o 0 . G © CL _� � � _0 © U) / 7E 2 7 E N t -r- kc 0 o » o ƒ o | 3 0 Q A / q @ C14 c 2 R 7 R § / k R .� o � $ -0 2 7 -0 O a) § CO a) > a) cu $ 2 £ > 70 E E I .$ § o E » 2 0 t o g 7 (n � k o 2 072 0 0 0 _0 m . E @ m - c .@ k \ t 2 c @ f � '- -0 o o �� % � / 2 6 02 0 2ND , — o 2 iL 06 0 d � ? $ h k � § _7 0 0 § o m � 7 o 7 % / E _ 2 0 » 0 b 2 2 \ ¥ 2 E 2 Q k% 3 E k E 0 ■ .0) / Z 2 0 0 o E f / 0 c k / 7 0 § b 0 1 0) / ) c- 0) ° @ c @ � 2 \ Im § / � / § $ � f \ X 0) § 2 G G / § -c- 0 $ / � ■ � / » � ® § m 3 0 § @ 3 c § » o » 2 2 0- 2 w Im 2 w & m M w & Q k w 2 U D w L O y y m o Q S i 0) (f) .S O > a) z 0 S (D �L+ a o > ^ IA L ^y _ L r cc v/ V a) L OO i 0 ' E ca O +O-+ S � O m Q N CL Q 0O G1 0 � E O O y O d �CO ❑ v m C O _ 4) C1 (� ++ LL O O U c uj N > a)• - V > r Q Q Q � y iF L CG U O .-. U) t N O c a aL any y E • L a� Q cc o > Q 0 O y v a) U) Cfl U) U) O L d o 0 70 CU � s (n E cu cu ca _0 o L E C � oc) c0 _0a� 3 � 0 � � � N o �_ a) o a) d " O r_ a) y cn o N cu Z y Q O (vi O c o 0 d > CO Z) ate) Q 0 — CU p N N E>L- cuC1 O S O -C QQ o C a) L i+ o (n a) s - �.+ c� cu Q ami = �"� s Oar cu E L Q U)N N >-0 L Q L) o a � �02 o o 0) a) N o 0 U cL) C C CZ o W J >, °' � >, E E a Q v cc � � s cuH O O i O v/ O C` W a) L a) C O1 >N p d � "- o ca d (D •� d OU cu CU 00 Q O >� i O C. >� O CV J N \ ++ > Q M iF Q > >, C O 0 s ca o 0) a S j o � mM � •.>-, ° � � m +� to to L 0 cy U 01 cya = a � J Q•� os ao � v _ d 0. 0 vi UM Q N +•' N 0 L- +t to L ° O CL 2 L ,cn d .v Qa. CL 0 N d O O mO d O Q m y H y � � c� s y d = mvi 'EY C 0 =_ vi 0 *'' O 0 v •y to O d CL 0 _ s H a o O 0 d CL? � m � = O = N o s H cv Q y N a 01= '� d L 0 H •� O L O o c .U ° ami ~ ° rte L r � ° H ma i L >, d V U 0 0s a >'� 0 -0 L V) '0 a' N 0 >, ° N > �' ca i �_ O ,� d O L cv s Ag L tzl1 a U O N cs > U N V G1 cs cs O04 tb ; i+ '� L N a > s L cn E U Q� Q� V Q� L Q� V i 0 �'' Q *'' o L O C M L c�D O a y'E +r E •> V 0.3 3 0 0 c� 'L o � s . a E- y E o 'er ~ L +y+ O O L (o o L E (� L t4 V) a.+ O N N_ Mp d U S 0 0 0 0 O O d '� •� >, '++ - 0 L L 01 o > .— ,> a 4, a. a o o o > o L a� 0 V N t� � � o ,C G1 oc°)ic}ax (D C: cu 0 E — � 3o � � 0 ° � C 0) N 2 O to U L cn cry � � � � •��—, .� � a� . L L • .2 . s E 0 0) > ' EL soa0 a� ° a � yM °� � °r �cE `� 00Ems (7 >, Qom U � 0Qr- �, Eo � 0E " � 3 O d Q C .y O .- Q y Q a 0 O •y 0 v ° a o a>i > o LNvU ay •mss _ 0 y y 00 - 0 L N >iO0 wa) '0 2 -5a � o EC ° � a. E 0) voy ° m � • L 0 i ca 7 0 E L 0 ++ L 70 0 ° 0) �, O cu 00• L ° OL N 'y N 01 O (1) cru z as � ,° 8 = a m w oU m a.E ° tea U 0 Ui k .@ E a .7 $'2 It f 2 2 CL § / F1 Q m 3 2 u v 7 [ � § q ) FXI ƒ Q \ > u § 0 r � c z a $ 3: - .s k N / 0 f ƒ 2 2 � U ¢ � 2 > T— V) E ƒ D 2 E 2 0 O ) q E g E cu 71 N � k • E E 3 » E \ cn / 0 % ./ / 77 0 � 2 h � 2 R M £ 2£ 2 _0 § 0 £ 2 0 cu / 0 § / § @ ® m @ 0 » cu E ° 70 E f 4-$ q \ U) ) [ » '§ » 37 2 / G 3 2 E _ f 2 \ 0) f f .2 m o 3 2 \ L) 2 / 7 -r- -r- — y £ ® o m E 2 \ / / cu � 7 & -0k 0 0 0 $ $ w U » ¥ o f o > £ E G G .g O ° ° © ® 0 ® a 2 § § k k ) \ \ k G $ 2 k 0 2 @ '� u / 2 2 CU E 2 E § S S cu 0 / 0 2 c % E a) / / / c- c m � 0 0 ° ® Z) ƒ f ƒ % ƒ > % { U) U) 2_ a 2 » » 0 3 2 c k k o m » § » U) E � ) ) ± 2 2 � k PLANNING COMMISSIONERS JI JI RESUMES Amy Kavanaugh Chief Public Affairs Officer,Taco Bell Corp. iiiilylCill?@lIli3llCll l;llUtIlli�7l.com Summary Strategic.communications professional with more than two decades of agency and in-house experience leading global technology and consumer brands. Expertise is in the area of global reputation management;executive thought leadership; digital, social and traditional media engagement and influencer relations; crisis and issues mitigation and the development of integrated PEGS communications strategies,programs and approaches that drive sales,brand equity and growth. An integral part of more than 120+high profile product launches and global service offerings,Amy and her teams have produced.award winning corporate and brand reputation, PR,cause marketing and education campaigns for leading brands and industry association including Apple, Microsoft(MSN),Netflix,The GRAMMY'S,the Motion Picture Association(MPA),Starbucks and Taco Bell Corp. A passion for working with organizations who want to do well,and do good,Amy is Executive Director of the Taco Bell Foundation, on the National Board of Trustees for the Boys and Girls Club of America,and a board member of The Discovery Cube in Santa Ana,CA. Experience Chief Public Affairs Officer at Taco Bell .Tune 2011 - Present(4 years 9 months) Responsible for all corporate and brand communications, social and traditional media influencer engagement, brand reputation management, events,community affairs and corporate social responsibility. Joined in 2011 as VP,Public Affairs and Brand Engagement and lead efforts to build and lead proactive internal and external communications and engagement campaigns to better elevate the strengths of Taco Bell's brand,heritage and culture. --Established a new approach to listening and engaging with.stakeholders via digital,social and traditional channels. --Increased communications transparency,authenticity and relevance through proactive and real-time communications. --Launched the Taco Bell Newsroom made up of nearly 40+cross functional content creators developing real and relatable brand content and story- telling. --Developed and executed breakthrough proactive engagement campaigns for the introduction of the Doritos Locos Tacos platform,Cantina Bell,Breakfast and Mobile Ordering and Payment launches, among numerous othcr initiatives. Serves as Executive Director of the Taco Bell Foundation, one of the largest teen focused 501c3s in the country, raising, donating and committing nearly S75MM to teen serving organizations since 1992,half of which since taking on that role in 2012. EVP,Starbucks Global Client Relationship Manager; Global Chair,Public Engagement at Edelman January 2005 - May 2011 (6 yours 5 months`) Pagel Served as executive vice president and Starbucks Global Client Relationship Manager(GCRM), a fully dedicated in house global leadership position,providing strategic counsel to Starbucks and related businesses (Seattle's Best, Starbucks Entertainment). Expanded the firms reach and influence from two US offices to becoming the global Agency of Record and overseeing the work of 100+professionals,in over twenty-two Edelman offices around the world. Oversaw teams providing strategic corporate and consumer branding counsel,executive thought leadership, employee engagement; social listening; traditional,social and digital media and influencer engagement, new market entry; issues and crisis mitigation; and event management across the Americas,Asia Pacific,Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Held position throughout the return of Howard Schultz as CEO to restore financial health and return to its core values during one of the most tumultuous economic times in history.In support of Schultz's transformation agenda, developed and supported initiatives such as Espresso Excellence, an unprecedented reset on the art of coffee making in all Starbucks across the country; the multi-city launch of Pike Place Roast,unveiling of MyStarbucksIdea.com, introduction of Starbucks Gold Card Loyalty program,a rolling worldwide introduction of Starbucks VIA, and the development and execution of the 40th Anniversary Campaign marking this iconic brand's return to profitability and sustainability. SVP/EVP,Edelman Digital Entertainment,Rights and Technology at Edelman 2001 - 2005 (4 years) Capitalizing on the proliferation of consumer technology,the accessibility of the web, increasing bandwidth and growing demand for entertainment content across digital channels—developed business plan, launched and managed Edelman's digital entertainment, rights and technology practice(headquartered out of Los Angeles office, with expanded practice areas in London,NYC,Seattle and DC). Clients included Starbucks Entertainment,Cinemallow,Microsoft(MSN),The Motion Picture Academy,MySpace the National Association of Broadcasters(NAB),NetElix, Recording Academy(The GRAMMY'S), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and Warner Bros.Home Video. Co-founderNice President,Marketing at OhGolly.com 1999 - 2001 (2 years) Co-founderNP,Marketing. Acquired,repositioned and launched this click and build website in 1999 to become the leading eCommerce solution for small businesses. Director,Marketing and Communications at Gemplus 1997 - 1999 (2 years) Recruited by CEO to join leadership team and help build awareness and understanding for smart card technology in the US and emerging markets; team efforts resulted in building a$150M business in 2 years and focused on the convergence between smart cards,the Internet,cellular telephony, network security, portable software applications and mobile payment.A division of Gemplus SCA, now Gemalto $2B),the world leader in smart cards. Vice President,Global Technology Accounts at Golin Paget 1996 - 1997 (1 year) Formerly Shandwick/Golin Harris.Recruited to serve as technology practice lead and lead Digital Equipment Corporation turnaround.Responsible for identifying,staffing and resourcing teams across the network of offices and affiliates. Identified,trained and hired communications experts in the technology field.Opened firms first Boston office and established technology teams in Singapore and Australia.Managed and staffed other key global accounts including Hewlett Packard and Tektronix. Power Macintosh Public Relations at Apple 1994 - 1996 (2 years) Responsible for the global launch and communications of all Power Macintosh products. Served as media support and spokesperson for eWorld,Apple Newton and Powerbook products. Marketing Specialist-Manager at Schlumberger Test&Transactions 1989 - 1994 (5 years) Global marketing communications. Skills & Expertise Strategic Communications Public.Relations Digital Marketing Social Media Corporate Communications Strategy Reputation Management Integrated Marketing Marketing Communications Crisis Communications Media Relations Marketing Internal Communications Brand Management Corporate Social Responsibility Social Media Marketing Leadership Strategic Partnerships Public Policy Community Development Digital Media Press Releases Event Management Marketing Strategy Thought Leadership Public Affairs PagO Education University of California, Santa Barbara Bachelor of Arts (BA),Communication and Media Studies, 1985 - 1989 Colorado State University Mass CommunicationlMedia Studies, 1985 - 1987 Activities and Societies: Young Republicans,Tri Delta 4rgani:zatiot�s 100,000 Opportunities Initiative Member, Strategic Oversight Committee August 2015 to Present http://www..100kopportunities.orgt Volunteer Experience National Board of Trustees at Boys and Girls Clubs of America 2013 - Present (3 years) Member Board of;Directors at Discovery Science Foundation 2012 - Present(4 years) Pago4 Amy Kavanaugh Chief Public Affairs Officer, Taco Bell Corp. aniykaVan aLIgh(4,,loffi aiLconi Uhked�a ' 1,24 WE h Contact Amy on LinkedIn Page5 STEVE KOZAK PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS 2013-2016 Management Consultant,Kozak Consulting Group ■ Provide strategic,management,and financial consulting services to government and non-profit agencies and small business enferprises,including analysis of methods and - practices,project planning,policies and procedures, business plans,and operational improvements. 2014-2015 Chief Operating Officer,Family Assistance Ministries ■ Plan,direct, and manage financial,administrative,and facilities operations,including budget planning and reporting,regulatory compliance,and audit coordination for a homeless and hunger prevention non-profit agency with a 26 bed women's transitional 2012-2013 shelter,and food pantry serving 3,600 clients each month in south Orange County. Director of Finance&Treasurer,Municipal Water District of Orange County ■ Provided strategic leadership in developing, implementing, and sustaining best financial and business management practices including managing a $144 million annual operating budget and a$14 million fixed income investment program. ■ Planned, organized, and directed full service finance and accounting department, including budget administration, investment management, banking and treasury operations, procurement and contracts,and IT systems and user support. 2006-2012 Chief Operations Officer&Treasurer, Children&Families Commission of Orange County ■ Planned, organized, and directed day-to-day operations including program development and evaluation, financial, accounting and audit fimctions, contract administration, IT systems, procurement,and scheduling of administrative support services. ■ Managed a$46 million annual operating budget and a $120 million fixed income investment program,including portfolio benchmark performance evaluation and reporting. ■ Prepared and managed strategic plans, annual business plans and budgets, along with KPI performance measurement,monitoring,and reporting. 2005—2006 Controller,Los Angeles County Superior Court ■ Directed a comprehensive program of financial management, accounting operations, and revenue functions, including administration of the Court's $665 million annual operating budget, budget v. actual monitoring and reporting, revenue and expenditure forecasting, annual audit,administration of grants totaling$14 million,procurement,and collections. ■ Planned and directed development and implementation of a new revenue collection, allocation,accounting,and reporting structure for civil court fees totaling$12 million annually. 2003—2005 Director,Financial Planning&Budget,San Diego County Regional AmportAuthority ■ Developed and implemented business and staffing plans, and operating budget for a new Financial Planning & Budget Department responsible for departmental budgets, capital improvements financing,grants,investment management,and treasury operations. ■ Project Manager for development,acquisition,and implementation of a new$10 million ERP financial and accounting management information system,including cost/scheduIe planning. 18272 ALEXANDRA PLACE•TUSITN,CA 92705-3252•PHONE 7I4-227-5254•E-MAIL STEVEKOZAK@JUNO.COhi STEVE KOZAK PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONTINUED) 2000-2003 Financial Manager,Budget,Debt&Treasury,Los Angeles World Airports(LA WA) r Directed the Financial Planning Division,including Budget,Rates,Fees& Charges,FAA Grant Programs,and Debt&Treasury Management activities. ■ Established and managed LAWA's $300 million Commercial Paper (CP) capital improvement projects financing program. ■ Planned, organized, and managed preparation, monitoring, and reporting for a $465 million Annual Operating Budget,and a$950 million Multi-Year Capital Projects Budget. 1994-2000 Financial Manager,Finance&Risk Management, Orange County Sanitation District " Planned and directed$440 million fixed and variable rate Certificates of Participation (COP) financing program for capital projects,including refunding,and new money issues. ■ Controlled insurance and risk management programs for an asset base valued at$1.5 billion. ■ Initiated,implemented, and managed new$350 million fixed income investment program and treasury operations function. ADDITIONAL EXPERIENCE ■ Planning Commissioner,City of Tustin,2006-Present ■ Citizens Advisory Committee,OCTA,2016-Present ■ Successor Agency Board,City of Tustin,2016-Present ■ Board Member,CSDA Finance Corporation,2012-2013 r Board Member,Tustin Community Foundation,2010-Present ■ Tustin Police Department Citizen Academy Class No.30,2010 EDUCATION ■ M.B.A.,California State University,Fullerton ■ M.P.A.,University of California,Riverside ■ B.A.,Political Science,California State Polytechnic University,Pomona ■ Community College Instructor Credential,Public Services&Administration ■ Certified California Municipal Treasurer, (CCMT),Cal Municipal Treasurers Association 18272 ALEXANDRA PLACE•TUMN,CA 92705-3252•PHONE 714-227-5254•E-MAIL MVEKOZAK@]UN0.001f Austin Lumbard 1404 Charleston St., Tustin, CA 92782 ■ austinlumbard@yahoo.corn ■ (949) 584-2092 BAR ADMISSION Admitted to the California Bar and the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California,2011 EDUCATION Indiana University Maurer School of Law, Bloomington, IN Doctor of Jurisprudence,2011 Activities: Indiana Journal of GIobal Legal Studies-Executive Editor AAJ Student Trial Advocacy Competition-Advocacy Horrors;National Team Sherman Minton Moot Court Competition- Written and Oral Honors Awards: Dean's Honors: Spring 2010,Spring 2011 London Lav Consortiwn: Maurer School of Law sponsored study abroad, Spring 2010 California Polytechnic State University- San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo, CA Bachelor of Science-Business Administration,2006 Concentration: Financial Management Double-Mirror: Economics and Political Science Activities: Lambda Chi Alpha International Fraternity-President,2005-2006 EXPERIENCE Fluor Enterprises,Inc., Irvine, CA Contracts&Procurement, September 2011 —Present ■ Negotiating and administering construction and engineering contracts Orange County Sheriffs Department,Orange County,CA Reserve Deputy Sheriff,November 2012--Present ■ Sworn peace officer with California state Peace Officer Standards and Training certification Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, Los Angeles, CA Lav Clerk- Preliminary Hearing Unit,June 2011 • Conducted felony and misdemeanor preliminary hearings,case preparation,and prosecution support under guidance of a supervising Deputy District Attorney United States Array JAG Corps,Presidio of Monterey, CA Legal Intern,June 2010—August 2010 ■ Drafted briefs and opinions,conducted claims investigations, interviewed witnesses and assisted in the preparation of courts-martial Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, Los Angeles, CA Lav Clerk- Major Narcotics Division,May 2009--August 2009 ■ Drafted constitutional search and seizure briefs and assisted in felony prosecutions Orange County Supervisor Patricia C.Bates' Office, Santa Ana, CA Political/Legislative Aide, May 2009—August 2009 • Conducted policy analysis and managed constituent concerns and inquiries P.E.A.C.E.Mission Trip, Rwanda,Africa Missionary Team Member,June 2008 ' ■ Represented the initiative to combat global illness impacting overseas nations Fluor Enterprises, Inc., Aliso Viejo, CA Procurement Specialist,January 2007—August 2008 ■ Managed sourcing and purchasing of project material from price quoting to field delivery Ryder Todd Smith 1520 Voyager Drive Tustin, CA 92782 Cell/Voice Mail: (626) 536-2173 ryder@rydersmith.com Experience TRIPEPI, SMITH & ASSOCIATES Irvine, California President November 2000 to Present Provide marketing, technology and public affairs advice to a range of small to mid-sized corporate clients and public agencies spanning the healthcare, construction services e-commerce sectors and local government. Achievements: Recognized as corporate supporter of the year for the city management profession by the California City Management Foundation. Provided interim part time IT management for an insurance claim processing company that was continuously extended for over two years. Developed websites from the ground up for several different clients in the government, construction and professional services verticals. Executed identity development efforts for business including color scheme, branding, logos and marketing themes. Developed and executed social network marketing strategies for clients. MAVENT INC Irvine, California Senior Vice President, Operations May 2005 to September 2009 Responsible for the quality assurance,technology operations and intemal infrastructure organizations. Built team of technology professionals to manage multi-site production environment at co-location facilities. Managed vendor relationships and reviewed all invoices. Brought focus to key areas, including: system documentation, knowledge sharing with other employees, schedule management for finite resources and enhanced security. Developed and managed the departmental budgets for three groups. Achievements: Led the selection and migration to a new hosting provider for all Mavent infrastructure, resulting in the consolidation of three production datacenters into one and culminating in a $1.3 M annual savings. Seeded and enhanced significant documentation around all major processes and procedures associated with the operational activities of the company by leveraging a wiki- based technology (Twiki) to ensure information was available throughout the organization. Hired and retained a team of skilled professionals that stabilized our production environments, enhanced uptime and response times and ensured greater accuracy in the execution of production deployments. Staff retention remained high which further enhanced the capabilities of the team. Managed all security due diligence requests that were initiated by our financial service customers (Bank of America/Countrywide,Wells Fargo, AmTrust, National City Corporation (PNC) among others) in line with requirements under the Gramm-Leach- Bliley Act. Mavent consistently met clients' stringent security requirements in a cost effective manner. Vice President, Marketing August 2004 to May 2005 Managed the Company's outside PR firm relationship, creative firm relationship, corporate website, ad campaigns, conference schedule, conference logistics and internal employee communications. Developed and managed the marketing budget. Achievements: Led the reengineering of Mavent's tag line and imagery for our marketing strategy resulting in a re-branding of all of Mavent's marketing tools: brochures, booth, and magazine advertisements. Managed the relationship with the major industry associations (Mortgage Bankers Association of America and National Home Equity Mortgage Association) and developed the sponsorship and conference participation plan for the year. I participated in the conferences and coordinated all the logistics around convention floor presence and hotel suite arrangements and meetings. Planned all the media purchases for the year and newly branded ad placements in various industry publications and online media. Vice President, Government Relations February 2003 to August 2004 Monitored nationwide political activities that were pertinent to the Mavent's interests. Developed relationships with third-party interest groups that impacted the Company's product. Participated in industry conferences and represented the Company at industry events. Led sales presentations in front of large groups with senior executives of the Company. Developed and managed the government relations budget. Achievements: Without any DC-based lobbyist presence, positioned Mavent as a go to resource for compliance information and knowledge with key regulator associations(American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators and Conference of State Bank Supervisors). Asa result, Mavent was invited to bid on two separate regulator initiatives to enhance oversight of the mortgage industry. OLYMPIC STAFFING SERVICES Diamond Bar, California information Technology Manager January 1998 to November 2000 Manage and control all aspects of the technology environment at this five location 35 employee company. Achievements: Led the effort to move Olympic from a paper-based process to a fully-automated staffing operation leveraging a full front-to-back office software toolset_ Coordinate rollout of company automation project using a SQL Server database with a MS Access front end. Completed rollout in under 5 months and on budget. Leverage the newfound capabilities of the staffing toolset to oversee development of a client extranet that enabled clients to access reports and information on their relationship with Olympic Staffing. NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION Los Angeles, California State and Local Government Representative July 1997 to December 1997 Work directly with Director of State and Local Government Relations to research issues of concern to the Northrop Grumman. Develop agendas to target upcoming legislative issues. Assist in lobbying work and development of testimony. Achievement: Created a complex.Excel model to identify the potential tax credit benefits for Northrop Grumman of the Welfare-to-Work program implemented by the Federal Government in 1997. Technology Oversight Experience Oracle Databases ➢ Sun Solaris Microsoft Access ➢ Window/Active Directory Microsoft SQL Server > MS Exchange Server lntertel Phone Switches ➢ Direct Attached Storage Cisco FirewallsNPN > 3PAR SAN ➢ Router Technologies ➢ ATT Co-location Services Education CLAREMONT MCKENNA'COLLEGE, Claremont, California 4992-1996 Bachelor of Arts in Politics-Philosophy-Economics with Dual in Economics, May 1996, Cum Laude Volunteer Activity Leadership Tomorrow Participant--2011 -2012 President, Claremont McKenna College Alumni Association—2008-2010 Trustee, Claremont McKenna College—2008-2010 Career Services Committee Chair, Claremont McKenna Alumni Association—2005-2008 Board Member, Claremont McKenna College Alumni Association—.2001 -2010 RESUME OF JEFF R. THOMPSON 415 West 6th Street, Tustin, California 92680 • Cell: 7141231-6270 FAX.- 7141544-4846 Email: thompsonconsult(tatt.net Linkedln:Jeff Thompson December 2016 Key Skills • Team leadership for implementing infrastructure and building programs and projects totaling more than$213 for Rancho Mission Viejo,Walt Disney Company, and City of LA. • Public agency leadership as city engineer for Los Alamitos,Villa Park, and Mission Viejo; Chief Engineer for Garden Grove Sanitary District; Prop. K Program Manager for City of LA. • Civic Leadership and Outreach as planning commissioner for City of Tustin and member for OCTA Citizens Advisory&Environmental Committees; ULI CRC Council Member; former board member of LA Skid Row Central City Community Outreach and MESA/MEP for CSULB. • Teaching and Presenting for ASCE sustainability workshops (2014/2015); OC Water Summit (2016), CSULB and Cal Poly Pomona guest lecturer(2016), and private water board (2014-16). Education HARVARD UNIVERSITY, CAMBRIDGE,MA 2016 Real Estate Management Program—Finance, Design, &Leadership UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA,LOS ANGELES, CA 2011-2013 Master of Business Administration; Awarded Beta Gamma Sigma Honor Society for top 20% CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY,LONG BEACH, CA 1981 - 1989 Master of Science in Civil Engineering; Outstanding Achievement Award for thesis Bachelor in Civil Engineering; Awarded Greatest Distinction Experience Vice President Development Engineering 2005-Present RANCHO MISSION VIEJO,LLC, SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA Ranch Plan implementation for the historic lands of Rancho Mission Viejo -comprising 6 communities for 14,000 dwelling units and 5.2 million square feet of commercial uses. Responsible for: • Comprehensive planning for water systems, sewage conveyance, roadways,highways,power supply/distribution,telecom, and community land use including developing cooperative agreements with public agencies and CEQA certifications. • Obtaining over$100M of federal, state,and county grant funding for over$200M in projects. • Implementation for engineering design of infrastructure resulting in construction of over 15 miles of roadway,pipelines,and utilities integrated with community development. • Executive Director for Mutual Water Company; formation administration,basin management, and infrastructure implementation for riparian water for domestic and irrigation uses. Program/Project Manger 2003-2005 WALT DISNEY CO. - DISNEYLAND RESORT,ANAHEIM, CA • 50'h Anniversary celebration—managed renovation for facilities within the Disneyland Resort: Walt Disney's historic apartment, Disneyland railroad system, city hall, and security check. • Facilitated planning and logistics for daily attendance of up to 100K guests and 20K vehicles under Resort Guest Services, fleet management, and guest relations. Program/Project Manager 2002-2003 CITY OF LOS ANGELES & UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,IRVINE, CA • City of LA$1.413 Prop. K management(via Harris &Associates)reporting to City Engineer for rehab and construction of over 60 community recreation facilities. Developed scheduling and Resume of Jeff R. Thompson Page 2 reporting system for city financial and document control system. • UCI Medical Center$50M facility expansion and replacement of university hospital and trauma center including planning, design, HMA, and construction for service utilities,central energy plant,traffic circulation, real estate acquisition, central park, and ER modifications. Senior Project Manager 1997-2002 WALT DISNEY CO. -WALT DISNEY IMAGINEERING,ANAHEIM, CA Infrastructure implementation for the $1.413 Disneyland Resort expansion,including: • Design and construction management for Downtown Disney,utilities (SCE, City, PacBell, Gas Co.,Navy Jet Fuel Line, etc.), Disneyland Drive &Disney Way roadways/bridges, I-5 connections, over 60 property acquisitions,landscape, security systems, Back-of-House building reconstruction leveraging over$100M in public bond financing for$150M of improvements. • Facilitated 10,000 parking space expansion of Resort parking lots. • Collaborated with City of Anaheim officials for plan check review, inspection,and acceptance. Project Manager/Deputy City Engineer/Engineering Services Manager 1995-1997 CH2M HILL, SANTA ANA, CA Contract project manager for Walt Disney Imagineering and City Engineer for the City of Los Alamitos; Engineering Services Manager for 24 miles of designibuild with Silverado Constructors for the Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency toll road, responsible for permitting with local public agencies. Design Engineer through Senior Vice President/Consulting City Engineer 1985-1995 BERRYMAN&HENIGAR,INC., Santa Ana, CA Various responsibilities included plan check review or project management for public agency improvement projects for streets,highways,water, sewer, and drainage improvements. Administered master plans of drainage for agencies throughout California. Contracted as Chief Engineer for Garden Grove Sanitary District and City Engineer for Los Alamitos, Mission Viejo, and Villa Park. Managed Civil Engineering and Field Survey Services; Orange/LA County office manager with over 100 staff. Professional Registrations — Civil Engineer: CA,AZ, and WA; Land Surveyor: CA; State of California Emergency Management Agency Safety Assessment Program(for Disaster Response) Community & Civic Activities 2016 OCTA Environ. Cleanup Alloc. Com 2015 -2016 ULI National Comm. &Retail Council 2007-2016 Tustin Planning Commission 2005 -2016 OCTA Citizens Advis. Committee 2002—2009 Board Member of Central City Outreach 2002—2005 Church High School counselor 1999—2004 Student Prog's King-Drew Med. Univ. 1998—2005 Asst. Coach for baseball &softball 1995 —2001 Church Married Couples Leader 1993 - 1999 CSULB MEP student programs 1989 - 1997 1 Tustin Historic Resources Comm. Awards 2012 ASCE OC Land Dev. Engineer of the Year 2011 &2015 OCBC Partnership Award 2011 ASCE Proj. Achiev. &ACEC Excellence 2009 Outstanding Renovation for 1878 home 2000 OCEC Proj. Achiev. &ASCE Proj. of the 2001 OCEC Outstanding Engineering Merit Year Resjefl61220 City of Tustin Dee 2016 Elizabeth A. Binsack 16396 Martin Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92649 562-592-9223 (H) 714-573-3031 (iN) PROFESSIONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS ■ Over thirty years working in the public sector with community development, land use planning, historic preservation, building safety, environmental review, and community outreach experience. ■ Ability to develop cooperative relationships with elected and appointed officials, community leaders, the residential and business communities, co-workers, and colleagues within the development industry. ■ Responsible for planning and development entitlement, historic preservation planning, and code enforcement for a developing and established city. ■ Executive team member for the MCAS Tustin Base Reuse Plan, Executive Leader for the WAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment, the Downtown Commercial Core Plan and the Red Hill Avenue Specific Plan, and public and private redevelopment projects. ■ Achieved State Housing and Community Development certification for the City's Housing Element. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENTDIRECTOR January 1996-Present City of Tustin Responsible for the leadership and administration of the Community Development function.for a diverse Orange County city with a population of 82,000 in 11 square miles. Manage a 25-person department,which includes:advance,current and environmental planning; building plan check, permit issuance and inspection; code enforcement; historic preservation planning;and Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) management. COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENTDIRECTOR/BUILDING OFFICIAL July 1992-January 1996 PLANNING SERVICES MANAGER July 1991—July 1992 City of Los Alamitos Responsible for managing, directing, budgeting,and administering all programs and activities related to current and advance planning; building plan check, permit issuance and inspection; Community Development Block Grant administration; and, neighborhood preservation and code enforcement. ASSOCIATE PLANNER September 1989—June 1991 City of Dana Point Researched, prepared and presented reports for land use development entitlements, including coastal development permits;developed and reviewed information for inclusion in the City's first.general plan and zoning code; and managed the Community Development Block Grant program. Charter staff member for a newly incorporated city. ELIZABETH A.BINSACK PAGE 2 OF 2 ASSISTANT PLANNER 1 AND 11 May 1988—September 1989 City of Corona Analyzed and prepared reports and associated environmental documentation for land use entitlements; and conducted development plan review meetings, plan checks and inspections. PROGRAMANALYST August 1987--May 1988 United States Department of the Interior, Long Beach Evaluated marine mining programs and lease operations; prepared environmental assessments;acted as federal liaison with the State of Hawaii for the joint State/Federal Manganese Crust Environmental Impact Statement project;conducted legislative analysis;and prepared Federal Register notices and press releases. PLANNING ASSISTANT--INTERSHIP August 1985—May 1987 City of Dayton, Ohio Assisted in the development of an amendment to the Historic District Landmark Ordinance;conducted field research related to the preservation of significant structures; assisted with reports for consideration by the Historic Architecture Committee; and, assisted the business and residential communities by providing guidance regarding the certificate of appropriateness process. SURVEY RESEARCH ASSISANT August 1985—May 1987 Norman J. Fogel, Ph.D., Dayton, Ohio Assisted with surveys conducted for the Montgomery County Human Services Department;the Montgomery County Parks and Recreation Department;the City of Dayton, Ohio—Office of Management and Budget; the City of Oakwood; and the University of Dayton Research Institute. EDUCATION MASTER OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION California State University, Long Beach BACHELOR OFARTS,POLITICAL SCIENCE.MINOR,ENGLISH Area Concentration; Public Administration University of Dayton MEMBERSHIPS AND APPOINTMENTS Management Oversight Committee—Center for Demographics and Research,Vice Chair, Past Position Orange County Planning Director's Association, Past President American Planning Association Urban Land Institute City of Huntington Beach, Historic Resources Board (May 1990—June 1998) PIER Group—Persons Interested in Reconstruction of the Huntington Beach Pier, Volunteer Therapeutic Riding Center of Huntington Beach,Volunteer REFERENCES Available Upon Request. NEW STAFF RESUME Elaine Dove, AICP, RLA 17501 Parker Drive,Tustin,CA 92780•Phone: (714)337-6311 Elaine_Dove@attnet Summary A unique blend of experience in the public and private sectors as a Planner for municipalities and a registered Landscape Architect. My experience in public/private arenas has given me a unique perspective on working with the public. As a paralegal, I honed my skills in analysis, research and writing. I am a strong believer in continuing education and take advantage of opportunities to improve my knowledge and skills. Experience February 2017—Present City of Tustin Senior Planner • Evaluate complex planning applications for land development or use changes including CEQA analysis and preparation of reports and presentations to decision makers. • Preservation Planning including analysis of proposals for rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of historic buildings and Cultural Resources District. • Provide guidance on developer, business and residential inquiries related to zoning regulations, General Plan compatibility and design character. • Draft ordinances. • Review and approve planning applications and building permits, including Certificates of Appropriateness for historic properties, establish conditions of approval, and draft environmental planning documents. Coordinate planning activities with other City departments and outside agencies September 2012 to February 2017 City of Fullerton Associate Planner • Evaluate Planning applications for land development or use changes including project and CEQA analysis, interdepartmental coordination, preparation of staff reports, and presentation to Planning Commission/City Council. Recent projects include four residential tracts, multi- family housing, affordable housing, and preservation/conservation related applications, and Zoning Code amendments. • Assigned as Preservation Planner for Community Development Department including analysis of proposals in preservation zones and historic downtown for compatibility with Zoning Code, Design Guidelines and Secretary of Interiors Standards; responsible for landmark designations and preservation zone overlays; presentations to Design Review Committee and Landmarks Commission. • Consult with.applicants and potential applicants about process, applications, zoning regulations, General Plan compatibility and design character for development projects. • Provide staff support to Council-appointed E=nergy and Resource Management Committee. • Coordinate and track Planning staff workflow in relation to Permit Streamlining Act deadlines. • Perform peer-related review of work in progress and provide input on zoning code revisions. • Plan check grading, building and landscape plans on planning projects. September 2010 to September 2012 City of Fullerton Assistant Planner • Drafted Landscape/Water Conservation ordinance. • Met with architects, builders, homeowners, etc., regarding City Planning and Zoning process. • Analyzed projects, prepared staff reports and resolutions, and made presentations to Design Review Committee and Planning Commission for development projects; conditional use permits, variances, subdivisions, etc., and conducted onsite inspections before and during construction. March 2009 to September 2010 City of Fullerton Planning Technician • Provided full-time Planning/Zoning customer service at the public counter, including property research and analysis, plan checks, zoning verification letters, and excellent customer service. • Supervised two interns • Responded to inquiries in person,via telephone and in writing. Elaine Dove, AiCP, RLA April 1997 to March 2009 David Volz Design Landscape Architect(Project Manager • Project manager for design, construction documents including technical specifications, and construction management for public parks, streetscapes, and community centers. • Supervised design and clerical team. • Prepared project budgets, coordinated schedules, responded to RFPs & RFQs, site plans, design concepts/construction drawings. • Drafted technical reports (master plans, design guidelines, strategic plans, feasibility studies and General Plan update). • Conducted community workshops. Education 1998 University of California, Irvine Cert. in Landscape Architecture 2012 CSU, San Marcos Environmental Leadership Academy 2014 USC School of Architecture Heritage Conservation Course CSU, Fullerton BA Communications, in progress Professional California Department of Consumer Affairs Registered Landscape Architect#4828 Memberships American Planning Association American institute of Certified Planners May 2017 California Preservation Foundation Community City of Tustin, Parks & Recreation Commission 4 terms, including Chair&Vice Chair PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 27, 2015 7:01 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Given INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Lumbard ROLL CALL: Chair Thompson Chair Pro Tem Lumbard Commissioners Altowaiji, Kozak, Smith None. PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 September 22, 2015 Minutes, RECOMMENDATION: as amended. That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the September 22, 2015 Planning Commission meeting as provided. It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Altowaiji, to approve-the September - 22, 2015 Minutes, as amended. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Adopted Reso. 2. AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 01-030, DESIGN Nos. 4299 and REVIEW 2015-022 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2015-18 4300. To increase the transitional housing facility capacity from 192 beds to 387 beds, construct a new parking lot and establish an ancillary church use, open to the public, at the Village of Hope transitional housing facility. APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNERS: Jim Palmer Orange County Rescue Orange County Rescue Mission Inc. Mission Inc. 1 Hope Drive and the City of Tustin Tustin, CA 92782 ENVIRONMENTAL: On January 16, 2001, the City certified the Program Final Environmental Impact StatementtEnvironmental Impact Report (FEISIEIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 Minutes—Planning Commission October 27,2015—Page 1 of 5 i 1 approving a Supplement to the. FEISIEIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia North Loop Road. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEISIEIR. And, on May 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a second Addendum to the FEISIEIR. The FEISIEIR, along with its Addenda and Supplement, is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEISIEIR, Addenda and Supplement considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former MCAS, Tustin. An Environmental Checklist, has been prepared and concluded that these actions do not result in any new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified significant impacts in the FEISIEIR. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since certification of the FEISIEIR. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt: 1) Resolution No. 4299, approving an increase to the transitional housing capacity and construct a new parking lot in a vacant parcel, and 2) Resolution No. 4300, establishing a church use at the Village of Hope transitional housing facility. Hutter Presentation given. Thompson Thompson had one clarification for the presentation as it related to Resolution No. 4299, Condition 2.6. In the event the parking is not completely available, .he wanted to ensure the residents living on-site could still enjoy the church services. Hutter In response to Thompson's clarification, Huffer stated the church services would be available for the on-site residents. Altowaiji Altowaiji asked for the number of families and the number of singles currently using the facility. Mr. Jim Palmer, applicant, stated the numbers are 60% family members, 40% singles and that,the numbers could change based on the needs of the facility. 7:19 p.m. Public Hearing opened. The following residents were in support of the item: Mr. Dane Meckler; Mr. & Mrs. Steve Giddings; Mr. Bryan Crain; Mr. & Mrs. Jimmy Lin; Mr. & Mrs. Kevin E. Rafferty, III; Mr. Costandi Him; and Mr. Anthony Wood. Their favorable comments generally included: VOH's success stories; the additional parking; and the church use. Minutes—Planning Commission October 27,2015—Page 2 of 5 7:26 p.m. Public Hearing closed. Commissioners Smith, Lumbard, Kozak and Thompson's were in support of the item and their comments generally included; VOH is a greattpositive, well-run project; thanked the audience for their positive comments; thorough staff report; and OC Rescue Mission's great "track record" and compliance with the City's regulations. Commissioner Altowaiji was concerned with the increase in density; he suggested increasing the capacity in increments and on a trial basis; Altowaiji was concerned there would be a negative impact with the number of people per bedroom as well as the parking arrangements; and he was concerned more people would be brought into the area. Mr. Palmer stated that in the past, the military operated with four (4) people per room prior to VOH using the facilities. He believed if it was done previously, then there should be no problem moving forward. Binsack Binsack clarified Mr. Palmers statement with reference to the military accommodating four (4) marines per room. The City conducted a separate review of the facility as it is today to ensure there is enough room to accommodate additional individuals that are being proposed per the current Building Code. The facility complies. If there was any doubt the facility did not comply, then the City would not be making a positive recommendation to accommodate additional individuals at the location. With respect to Altowaiji's concerns, Binsack stated that as with all conditional use permits, City staff did include conditions related to the parking intensification as well as the church services. Also included in Resolution 4299 is Condition 1.8, which allows annual review by City staff, if necessary, should there be any concerns at the location. It was moved by Thompson, seconded by Lumbard, to adopt Resolution Nos. 4299 and 4300. Altowaiji opposed. Motion carried 4-1. Adopted Resb. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2015-09 & DESIGN REVIEW 2015-011 No. 4298, as amended. A request to establish an alcoholic beverage sales establishment with outdoor seating, in conjunction with a restaurant use, and to satisfy required on-site parking (seventeen (17) parking stalls) through the Old Town Parking Exception Program at 365 El Camino Real. APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: Kimberly Conroy Arnold.Surfas American Grub 145 W. First Street 365 EI Camino Real Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 rr Minutes—Planning Commission October 27,2015—Page 3 of 5 ENVIRONMENTAL: This project is categorically exempt (Class 1) pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4298 approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2015-09 and Design Review (DR) 2015-011 to authorize on-site beer and wine sales (ABC License Type 41) in conjunction with a restaurant and outdoor seating area and a parking exception of seventeen (17) parking spaces for the property located at 365 EI Camino Real. Thompson recused himself being that he owns property within 300 feet of the subject property. Reekstin Presentation given. Reekstin informed the Commission of an amendment to Conditions of Approval 2.6 (hours changed from 8am- 10pm to 8am-11 pm). Binsack Binsack informed the Commission of another modification to Resolution No. 4298 — duplication of Conditions 3.3 and 3.8. She recommended that Condition 3.8 be eliminated and that it be left"intentionally blank". 7:46.p.m. Public Hearing opened/closed. Commissioners Smith, Kozak and Lumbard were all in support of the project and all had favorable comments. Altowaiji was in support of the project; however, he did ask if the outdoor seating hours were limited, similar to the surrounding restaurants in the area, to 10:00 p.m. He also commented on the parking fees being outdated and that they should be increased. Reekstin In response to Altowaiji's concern, Reekstin stated 10:00 p.m. would be the limit only if the restaurant were directly adjacent to a residential area, which the project is not. It was moved by Lumbard, seconded by Smith, to adopt Resolution No. 4298, as amended. Motion carried 4-0-1. Thompson abstained. None. REGULAR BUSINESS None. STAFF CONCERNS COMMISSION CONCERNS: Kozak Kozak attended the following: • 10117 Tustin's ArtWalk • 10122 PDAOC's- Planning Officials Forum Minutes—Planning Commission October 27,2015-Page 4 of 5 Altowaiji No comments. Smith No comments. Lumbard "Baby watch!" Thompson Thompson attended the following: • ULI Annual Conference in San Francisco • 9124 Building Administration Association • 10117 Art Walk • 10120 OCTA CAC Committee • 10121 Bicycle/Pedestrian Subcommittee Meeting • 10122 Conducted a Presentation to the ULI Infranstructure Committee • 10122 PDAOC's—Planning Officials Forum 10123 Sustainability Workshop (PDAOC) He also informed every one of the upcoming Dino Dash on 1111. 7:54 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, November 10, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. j J F TFISON Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning Commission October 27,2015--Page 5 of 5 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 9, 2016 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Given INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Smith ROLL CALL: Chair Thompson Chair Pro Tem Lumbard Commissioners Altowaiji, Kozak, Smith None PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: ' Approved I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—JANUARY 26, 2016 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approves the Minutes of the January 26, 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. Motion: It was moved by Kozak, seconded by AltowaUl, to approve the Minutes of the January 26, 2016.Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: Adopted Reso. No. 2. APPEAL OF DENIAL OF BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION — 4509 BUY GUM FREE FUN, INC. Mr. Todd H. Iger ("Appellant') appeals from and requests reconsideration of the Director of Finance's denial of a business license application for a coin pusher machine inside the Soapy Lee Coin Laundry, located at 17292 McFadden Avenue, Suite H & I, Tustin, CA. APPELLANT: LOCATION: TODD H. IGER SOAPY LEE COIN LAUNDRY BUY GUM FREE FUN, INC. 17292 MCFADDEN AVE., # H&I 10 HUGHES,'SUITE A106 TUSTIN, CA 92780 IRVINE, CA 92618 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that.the Planning Commission uphold the denial of the Appellant's business license application by adopting Resolution No. 4509. Minutes--Planning comMission February 9,2016—Page 1 of 5 Interrante Presentation given. Daudt Daudt, Deputy City Attorney, informed the Commission of the appellant's attempt to bring the coin pusher machine ("machine") into the chamber in order to demonstrate its operations to the Commission; however, there were concerns with potential Penal Code violations therefore the appellant was asked to remove the machine. 7:13 p.m. Public Hearing opened. Mr. Todd Igees, appellant, comments/opinions generally included: His extensive research on amusement, games; he presented a written appeal to the Chair, along with copies of his business licenses with the City of Santa Ana and the City of Colton; Mr. Iger referred to Attachment E, of the Citys staff report, stating that it was an "advisory document which does not constitute legal advice" and that Attachment E was "outdated"; he said California Justice Bureau Gambling Control's phone number was disconnected; the flow chart does not accurately state current law and he referenced California versus Moussa case (with regards to Consideration Exemption - Section 330:5) which omits ,any section to Section Code 330.5; he referred to additional legal advisory documents, specifically Section 330b (skill exemption); Mr. Iger believes his machines comply at the state level, per Section 330.5; and he claims his machine is"unique"and referred to it as a"mousetrap". Smith Smith asked if Mr. Iger believed the video, presented by staff, was an accurate portrayal of his machine. In response to Smith's question, Mr. Iger stated that the machine on the Video is a "portion" of his machine and that the 'Workings are an accurate portrayal'; however, his machine has been modified ("every time a quarter is put in, a gumball is put out") requiring skill. Thompson Thompson asked for clarification with regards to Attachment E being outdated-and reWrences within the staff report to communication and interpretations by the Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) Board and Califomia lottery and the context of interpretation by City staff and state law. Daudt Daudfs response to Thompson`s questions generally included: Dana Ogdon, Community Development, was the individual who spoke with representatives at the ABC and the California lottery; Daudt and the lead detective from Tustin Police spoke with an agent at the Department of Justice; and that the City does not solely rely on the law advisory memorandum that was distributed to jurisdictions but that City staff made the determination based on reading and interpretation of the Penal Code, evaluated the state law, and came to a determination. Mr. Iger again referred the Commission to the state law and the codes he referred to previously. Minutes—Planning Commisslon February 9,2016—Page 2 of 5 Ms. Valerie Gonzalez, marketing director for Buy Gum Free Fun, provided-her brief history in the marketing industry and spoke in favor of the item. She also spoke about skill tests she has given to children on the skill set button on the machine, 7:32.p.m. Public Hearing closed. Lumbard Lumbard asked if the City Attorney researched the decision of the Moussa case. He referred to the Law Enforcement Advisory memorandum cites to Penal Code Sections 330 and 330.5 and asked if anything had changed or if the information was accurate. Daudt Daudt stated that the decision of the Moussa case was determined by a superior court jury which unanimously found that a similar coin in/coin out pushing device was an illegal gambling device under state law. Regarding the Penal Code question, Daudt stated that in his assessment, it is an accurate reflection and that there have been no changes to Sections 330 and 330.5 since 2010. AltoWaiji Altowaiji asked about the appellant's machine versus the games at Dave & Buster's (D&B's) and how they compare. Daudt In response to Altowaiji's question, Daudt indicated that he was hesitant in discussing the nuances of D&B's machines without actually looking at them. However, the one differentiating factor would:be that a customer at D&B's is paying for tokens at the door to play a number of games and a customer does not win cash prizes, but redeemable tickets that only have a value within D&B's. Smith Smith's questionskomments generally included: He questioned the City's position on denying the item and the City's interpretation that the machine is an illegal device and the implication would be that the cities of Orange, Santa Ana, and Colton are on the"wrong side of the law"; he asked if it is a matter of opinion on whether or not this is a legal or illegal machine; Smith asked if the City's compelling interest in denying the appellant's machine is because it is perceived to be an,illegal device or if the City finds this machine does not fit within Tustin community; he also asked for the position of the Califomia lottery and ABC being identified as two (2) different state agencies and if they have authority on gambling devices in the state or if they are limited to the Gambling Commission; Smith further questioned the nature'of the machine not being.permitted by an ABC license facility. Daudt Daudt agreed with Smith's assessment in terms of anecdotal information ("'one would be just as likely to find instances of cities across the state that have similar machines"). His assessment in reading the law is that the appellant's machine is an illegal gambling device as defined in the Penal Code. Daudt could not speak on behalf of the other cities Smith referred to. He stated it would be presumed that the legality of the device is the reason for denying the device. With regards to the California Lottery and ABC,they have permits and conditions attached to Minutes—Prann Ing Commission February 9,2018—Page 3 of 5 their permits (i.e. ABC will allow the sale of liquor and alcohol.and in the instance they find one of these devices on a licensed premise, this could be grounds to revoke the license based on their understanding that it Is an illegal device). The same would apply to the California Lottery only it would pertain to the authorization of the sale of lotto tickets from the premises. Lumbard Lumbard stated that the Commission's role is not to interpret the law but to discuss a business license that was denied based on the City Attomey's understanding and interpretation of .the Penal Code so the Commission either needs to reject or rely on that advice as well as the City's staff report and presentation. These types of machines are trying to fit under the exceptions of the law but it is not the job for the Commission to interpret all of thei nuances. Thompson Thompson referred to Attachment E not being the sole determination of the interpretation and he reiterated the key points previously made. Bobak Bobak informed Mr. Iger of a 10 calendar day right of appeal to the City Council. Mr.;Iger insisted on speaking again after the Commission had closed the Public Hearing and voted. Bobak advised Thompson to re-open the Public Hearing officially or consider it an expansion of the public comment section of the meeting, which would allow Mr. Iger to provide his input This would also allow staff to understand what his position is, in the event he appeals the item then staff could better prepare for the Council meeting. 7:42 p.m. Public Comment re-opened. Mr. iger's comments generally included: Concerns with ABC and the Califomia Lottery and their position with regards to the appellant's. machine; he stated that in their view, the ability to sell alcohol or lottery tickets is a privilege, not a right and as such, they contract with locations and are allowed to put whatever exemptions they wish to provide that privilege to that location, and they have a right to decide what clients they choose: the fact that the Califomia Lottery does not like these types of machines does not have anything to do with whether or not the machines are legal or illegal; and the differences from the machine in the video and Mr. Iger's machine is that 'store provides vouchers for store credit which means the customer does not win cash, they win credit at the-merchant's location. Motion. It was moved by Lumbard, seconded by Altowaiji, to adopt Resolution No.4309. Motion carried 5-0. None. STAFF CONCERNS: COMMISSION CONCERNS: Minutes—Planning Cammission February 9,2016—Page 4 of 5 Smith No concerns. Lumbard No concerns. Kozak Kozak had favorable comments for staff and the appellant He attended the following events: 1128: Downtown Commercial Core Plan Workshop 1129: Mayor's Inaugural Dinner Happy Valentine's Day! Altowaiji Happy Valentine's Day! Thompson Thompson attended the following events: 1128: ULI Mentorship Program 1129: Mayor's Inaugural Dinner 214: ULI Office & Commercial Initiative Council 7:47 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, February 23, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. J . TH4MPSON Chairperson l ELIZABETH A. BI SACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning Commission February 9,'2016—Page 5 of 5 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2016 7:01pm CALL TO ORDER Given. INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Thompson SEATING OF COMMISSIONERS KAVANAUGH MASON AND THOMPSON Nielsen The Mayor swore in Kavanaugh Mason and Thompson. PLANNING COMMISSION REORGANIZATION As a matter of standard procedure, the Planning Commission reorganizes once per year by appointing a new Chairperson and Chairperson Pro Tem. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission elect a Chairperson and Chairperson Pro Tem pursuant to standard procedures. Modon: Thompson moved to nominate Lumbard as Chairperson, seconded by Smith. Motion carried'5-0. Kozak moved to nominate Smith for Chairperson Pro Tem, seconded by Thompson. Motion carried 5-0. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Kavanaugh Mason, Kozak, Lumbard, Smith, Thompson None. PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—FEBRUARY 9, 2046 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approves the Minutes of the February 9, 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. Motion. It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Thompson, to approve the Minutes of the February 9, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Kavanaugh Mason abstained. Motion carried 4-0-1. Minutes--Planning Commission March 8,2016—Page 1 of PUBLIC HEARING: Received '2. WITHDRAWAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2015-26 & DESIGN and Filed. REVIEW 2015-021 On January 26, 2016, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing and continued the item to the February 23, 2016, Planning Commission meeting to provide time for the applicant to prepare revised elevation drawings incorporating various architectural enhancements. However, on February 16, 2016, the applicant submitted a written request (attached) to Withdraw the application for CUP 2015-26 and DR 2015-02.1. It is requested that the Planning Commission consider the applicant's request at this time. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1) Receive and fie the applicant's letter to withdraw Conditional Use Permit 2015-26 and Design Review 2015-0121 for the conversion of an existing temporary building toa permanent building at 1301 Sycamore Avenue, and 2) Remove the item from consideration as requested by the applicant. Reekstin Presentation given. Binsackl Binsack reiterated that the item was continued from the last Planning Commission Bobak meeting and now the applicant is asking for the item to be withdrawn. Per Bobak, she informed Lumbard that it is not necessary to hold a public hearing or open the public hearing portion of the meeting and to simply receive and file the letter indicating that the application had been withdrawn. Lumbard Lumbard asked if there was anyone in the audience that wanted to speak on behalf of the item, since it was listed as a Public Hearing item on the agenda. Mr. Joe Novoa, Diocese of Orange, asked staff if there would be an official letter following the meeting. Reekstin In response to Mr. Novoa's question, Reekstin answered in affirmation. REGULAR BUSINESS: 3. 2015 GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL REPORT AND ANNUAL MITIGATION MONITORING STATUS REPORT FOR FEISIEIR FOR MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC'PLAN The Califomia Govemment Code requires that the Planning Commission provide an annual progress report to the City Council on the status of the City's General .Plan and the progress in its implementation, including the progress in meeting our share of regional housing needs and efforts to remove govemmental constraints to housing development, maintenance, and improvement. Minutes—Planning Commisslon March B,2016--Page 2 of 4 In addition, the City Council certified the Program Final Environmental Impact StatementlEnvironmental Impact Report (FEISIEIR)for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin along with its Supplemental and Addendums. The FEISIEIR evaluated the environmental impacts of the reuse and disposal of MCAS-Tustin, which included the adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. The MMRP requires annual review to ensure compliance with required mitigations. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission review and authorize staff to forward the General Plan Annual Report on the Status of the Tustin General Plan and the Annual Mitigation Monitoring Status Report to the City Council for consideration. Beier Presentation given. Thompson Thompson referred to Public Works improvements, specifically the status of arterial circulation improvements, and he suggested that the,next year's report list the Blimp Hangar (Page 182) list of activities taking place at Hangar 29. Nishikawa Per Thompson's question, Nishikawa briefly explained the following infrastructure activities occurring at Tustin Legacy, in general: Armstrong Avenue (between Barranca and Warner Avenues) not yet complete (once the commercial office space is complete, the roadway will be complete as well); Moffett Drive may be extended to Tustin Ranch Road; Peter's Canyon Channel bridge to be completed by 2018; Kensington Park extensions to be designed in conjunction with Tustin Unified School District campus; Planning effort between the two (2) hangars as far as future developments which could then add more roadway extensions; and open space and parks, linear and sports parks, as well, in the future, Kozak Kozak had favorable comments for staff with regards to the staff-report It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Kavanaugh Mason, to forward the General Plan Annual Report on the Status of the Tustin General Plan and the Annual Mitigation Monitoring Status Report to the City Council for consideration. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS: Binsack Binsack welcomed Commissioner Kavanaugh Mason. She introduced City staff members, sitting in the audience, as well as Community Development's two (2) new Senior Planners, Erica Demkowicz and Elaine Dove. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Kozak Kozak.congratulated Lumbard and Smith on their new appointments. He attended the following events: • 2124 California Preservation Foundation ("California Historic Building Code') webinar at City Hall. Minutes—Planning commission March 8,2016—.Page 3 of 4 • 311 City Council Special Meeting — Planning Commission appointments. • 3/5 Swirl, Sip & Stroll Event in Downtown Tustin. Kozak also welcomed Commissioner Kavanaugh Mason. Thompson Thompson announced the following: • Week of April 191h he will be attending the ULI Conference in Philadelphia. • Congratulations to Commissioner Kavanaugh Mason! • Thanked Wisam "Sam"Altowaiji for his years of service as a Commissioner. • His daughter's upcoming wedding. Smith Smith welcomed Commissioner Kavanaugh Mason and mentioned a Pickle Ball event he participated in at Currie Middle School. He also had favorable comments for the Parks & Recreation Department. Lumbard Lumbard had favorable comments for Thompson's reappointment as well as }Cavanaugh Mason's appointment as Commissioner. He also spoke favorably of the entire Commission, as well as Community Development staff. Lumbard attended the City Council's Special Meeting on March 1st and had favorable comments for all that interviewed for the Planning Commission. He welcomed the new staff members as well. Kavanaugh Thanked everyone for the warm welcome! Mason 7:38pm ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, March 22, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. AUSTIN WMBARD Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSAC Planning Commission Secretary Minutes-Planning Commission March 8, 2016-Page 4 of 4 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 22, 2016 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Given INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Lumbard Present ROLL CALL: Chair Lumbard Chair Pro Tem Smith Commissioners Kavanaugh Mason, Kozak,Thompson Given PRESENTATION: Proclamation to former Commissioner Wisam "Sam" Aitowaiji recognizing his years of service. None. PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES--MARCH 8, 2016 March 8, 2016 Minutes, as RECOMMENDATION: amended. That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the March 8, 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. Motion. It was moved by Thompson, seconded by Kozak, to approve the March 8, 2016 Minutes, as amended. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: " Adopted Reso. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2016-04 No. 4311, as amended. Applicant: Michael C. Corey Wellness Stop 14471 Chambers Road, Suite 105 Tustin, CA 92780 Property Owner: Tustin Corporate Center, LLC. 2552 Walnut Avenue, Suite 230 Tustin, CA 92780 A CUP request to authorize joint-use parking for a chiropractic office at an existing condominium office complex at 2552 Walnut Avenue, Suite 145. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4311 approving CUP 2016-04 to authorize Joint-use parking to accommodate a Minutes—Planning commission March 22,2016—Page 1 of 5 chiropractic office at an existing condominium office complex located at 2552 Walnut Avenue. Dove Presentation given. Thompson Thompson's questions/comments generally included: On-street parking; clarification on "parking poaching" which was referenced in the traffic study and if the term referred to adjacent properties, not condominium units.which have an open flow of parking; Thompson asked if there is currently an existing joint-use parking arrangement between the adjacent properties; and the restrictive hours and if there would be any adjustment to those hours. Willkom In response to the on-street parking question, Willkom stated that there is no on-street parking along Walnut Avenue and Franklin. Per the "parking poaching" question, she explained when the buildings were built in 1985, it consisted of five (5) °parcels and five (5) buildings, which included CC&R's affecting the five (5) properties which are more related to ingresslegress and some architectural control of exterior modification to the building. There is no joint-use parking among the five (5) buildings. Willkom referred to the Conditions of Approval included in the staff report, which makes reference to minor modifications that the Community.Development Director could revise at her discretion. Lumbard Lumbard asked if the hours of operation were presented by the applicant, specifically the 12:00 to 3:00 p.m. break and why no chiropractic services during that time period. Dove To answer Lumbard's question, it was-the applicant that dictated the hours of operation within the application. Mason Mason asked what the"triggers"would be that would require staff to go back to the Commission or the Community Development Director. Willkom In response to Mason's question, the trigger would be if the Parking Demand Analysis cannot demonstrate that adequate onsite parking is available for all uses within the building. Which means the applicant would have to go back to the Planning Commission with a type of variance with the reduction of on- site parking. 7:15 p.m. Public Hearing Opened. Dr. Michael C. Corey addressed the Commission and thanked them for the business opportunity and he also provided a brief background of his chiropractic business. 7:16 p.m. Public Hearing Closed. Thompson Thompson was satisfied with the presentation and his. questions were answered therefore he was ready to move forward with the item. :Motion: It was moved by Thompson, seconded by Lumbard, to adopt Resolution No. 4311, as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Minutes—Planning commission Match 22,2016--Page 2 of 5 Adopted Reso. 3. CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT (CUP) 2016-03 TO ESTABLISH No.4310. PAWNBROKER USE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RETAIL WATCH STORE LOCATED AT 195 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE 102 Applicant: Guillermo Del Rio Time Watches 195 EI Camino Real, Suite 102 Tustin, CA 92780 Property Owner. Guillermo Del Rio/Lizet Marie Orozco 5022 Greencap Avenue Irvine, CA 92604-2412 A request to establish a pawnbroker use in conjunction with a retail jewelry and watch store located at 195 El Camino Real, Suite 102. RECOMMENDATION: That the PIanning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4310 approving CUP 2016-03 to authorize the establishment of a pawnbroker business in conjunction with a retail watch store located at 195 EI Camino Real, Suite 102. - Dove Presentation given. Smith Smith asked if there were any police reports consistent with the complaintslconcems in the letter included in the staff report. Willkom In response to Smith's question, Willkom stated there were no police concerns. Kozak Kozak made reference to Condition 1.8 of the Conditions of Approval, which is a standard condition. He wanted to be sure Ms. Candyce Belanger was aware of it when she obtained an audio transmission of the Commission meeting. Kozak also made favorable comments with the great care of the building both the applicantlproperfy owners have done. Mason Mason referred to no signage being displayed and if that refers to inside and outside of the building. Dove Dove stated signage for the jewelry store would be displayed inside and outside the building. Willkom Willkom also responded that the signage restriction for the pawnbroker business would be applicable to the exterior of the building. Thompson Thompson made reference to the letter making reference to the pawnbroker business and asked that staff provide further explanation of:a pawnbroker business because there could be an interpretation of terminology that could be raising concerns. He also asked what the City code and Zoning code would allow. Minutes—Planning Commission March 22,2016—Page 3 of 6 Willkom Willkom provided examples to the Commission on how a pawnbroker business is conducted with approval of a.CUP. 7:27 p.m. Public Hearing opened. Ms. Paula Meyer, built the building at 170 EI Camino Real, where she lives and works and spoke in opposition of the item. She stated she did minimal research on pawnbroker businesses and found there is the potential of an increase in crime. Ms. Meyer was concerned the pawnbroker business would not help the property value or be consistent with the "live, work, walk'' in the Downtown area. 7:29 p.m. Public Hearing closed. Smith Smith had a follow-up question with regards to the limited scope pawnbroker use permit (Red Hill Avenue / Edinger Avenge) and if there was any related crime increase at that location. He also mentioned that should concerns arise in the future, then staff could address them then, which is why it is being conditionally permitted in this use. Willkom Willkom stated that the Tustin Police Department(TPD) has not reported any increase in crime activity at both locations. Lumbard Lumbard stated 'that the term "pawnbrokers' elicits some sort of stigma. He also referred to the Conditions of Approval, specifically, the hours of operation, which are consistent with the surrounding businesses, as well as there being no concern with the TPD. Bobak Bobak -also provided, to the Commission, a definition of the term "pawnbrokee'from the Tustin City Code,via the City's website: Thompson Thompson had favorable comments withregards to the input Ms. Meyer previously provided to the Commission. He also referenced the C-2 central commercial district designations and overlays, in general. As long as noise, parking, safety, etc. are being addressed adequately as a permitted use Within the definition of the C-2. Bobak The project is not permitted as a matter of right but it is permitted with a conditional use permit which allows the process of staff review, as well as TPD review to ensure there will not be any problems with it. The Commission's further comments generally reiterated what is stated in the Conditions of Approval. Should there be any issues in time future, then the Community Development Director can address at that time and re- evaluate the conditions. There was also direction provided.to Ms. Meyer that if she was planning on appealing the item, to raise her issues to the City Council. Willkom Willkom informed the Commission that:the item is appealable and that there are ten (10) calendar days to appeal to the City Council. Minutes—Planning Commission March 22,2016—Page 4 or 5 Motion: It was moved by Smith, seconded by Mason, to adopt Resolution No. 4310. Motion carried 5-0. None, REGULAR BUSINESS STAFF CONCERNS: Wilikom No concems. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mason No concems. Kozak Kozak welcomed Dove to the City and thanked her for the presentations given. He will be attending the March '26, 2016 Annual Easter Egg Hunt at Tustin's Sports Park (Tustin Parks & Recreation event). Thompson Thompson attended the OCTA Citizens Advisory Committee Bicycle Pedestrian meeting on March 15, 2016 and his daughter got married. Congratulations to Lauren and Jordan DeGracial Smith No concerns. Lumbard Lumbard congratulated the Thompson family. He will also be attending the March 26, 2016 Annual Easter Egg Hunt. Lumbard mentioned the Old Town area and the conditionally permitted uses and the study MIG is currently working on. He also directed staff to take note on the community's concems regarding conditionally permitted uses as far as the concerns mentioned. Kozak Kozak requested to close the meeting in memory of Matthew Nisson, who passed away on February 20, 2016, served in World War ll, graduated from USC, married his high.school sweetheart Peggy, and had three(3) children. 7:43pm ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, April 12, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. CLOSED IN HONOR OF MATTHEW NISSON. AUSTIN LUMBARD Chairperson tun- BETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning Corn6sston March 22,2016—Page 5 of 5 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 26, 2016 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Given INVOCATIONIPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Kavanaugh Mason Present ROLL CALL: Chair Lumbard Chair Pro Tem Smith Commissioners Kavanaugh Mason, Kozak,Thompson None PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—MARCH 22, 2016 Minutes of the Mai h 22, 2416 RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission That the Planning Commission approves the Minutes of the March 22, meeting. 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. Mofion: It was moved by Thompson, seconded by Smith, to approve the Minutes of the March 22, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: Adopted Reso. 2. SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2015-05 FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TPM) No. 4312, as 2016-107, DESIGN REVIEW (DR) 2015020, AND CONDITIONAL USE amended. PERMIT (CUP) 2095-25 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF ONE (1) PARCEL INTO TWO (2) PARCELS, THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW 7,206 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT USE PARKING APPLICANT: Jamie Knollmiller Twinsteps Architecture 15615 Alton Parkway, #125 Irvine, CA 92618 PROPERTY OWNER: Crest Properties, LLC 3134 Sycamore Lane Billings, MT 59102-0524 LOCATION: 721 W. 1 sr Street Minutes Planning Commission April 26,2016—Page 1 of 6 REQUESTS: 1. SUB 2015-05 for TPM 20.16-107 for the subdivision of an approximate _1.8 acre site consisting of two (2) numbered lots for the development. of a new 7,206 square foot office building. 2. DR 2015-020 for the design and site layout of a new .7,206 office building. 3. CUP 2015-25 for joint use parking between the proposed properties to accommodate medical uses. ENVIRONMENTAL: This project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 and Section 15315, Class 15 of Title 14, Chapter 3 of the Califomia Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the Califomia Environmental Quality Act) pertaining to new construction of small.buildings and minor land divisions. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4312 approving TPM 2016-107, CUP 2015-25, and DR 2015-020, authorizing the subdivision of an approximate 1.8 acre site consisting of two (2) numbered lots for the development of a new 7,206 square foot office building and to establish joint use parking to accommodate medical uses. Hutter Presentation given. Smith Smith's questions/comments generally included the following: He requested clarification on the allocation of the parking spaces (per 1,000 square feet up to 4,000 square feet is four (4) spaces per 1,000 square feet and then thereafter it is six (6) spaces per 1,000 square feet) as well as the reasoning for the increase in a planning and parking demand perspective. Huffer Hutter confirmed,in response to Smith's comment. Binsack 'Binsack provided a brief historical background in response to Smith's question which generally included: allocation always used to be six (6) spaces per 1,000 square feet, it was modified years later to four (4) spaces per 1,000 square feet to provide flexibility so that medical office uses could be accommodated where there was not enough parking; the 4,000 square foot accommodation is somewhat de minimis for larger centers to accommodate a minor medical office; and typically in this type of community there is a higher requirement for a medical office. Minutes--Planning Commission April 26,2016--Page 2 of 6 Kozak Kozak asked if the existing sign facing the freeway (northwest comer of the property) would be removed as part'of the new project. He also asked if the intent is to have both ingress/egress on both driveways on First Street and Myrtle Avenue and wanted to ensure the sign removal was not a part of this approval. Hutter Nutter's response to Kozak's question generally included: currently there are no plans to remove the existing monument sign; if there is a proposal to modify the signage, a comprehensive sign program for the center, since it is a multi- tenant center, may be necessary; and with regards to the driveway access, those are proposed to remain. Thompson Thompson asked about the roadway dedication (Figure 3) and asked if it is incorporated in the parcel map. Hutter Hutter confirmed that the roadway dedication was shown on the parcel map as well as in the conditions (Condition 9.1d). 7:12 p.m. Public Hearing opened. Ms. Jamie Knollmiller was present in order to answer any questions the Commission may have. Thompson Thompson made favorable comments with regards to the architecture of the building. 7:14 p.m. Public Hearing closed. Thompson Thompson's favorable comments generally included: he commended the applicant on working with City staff on the parking; noise not being an issue; architecture; the use being compatible with the medical building along First Street; and compliance with the City's landscape (water conservation ordinance). Mason Mason also commended the applicant on keeping up with the "like-minded" companies, the review of the parking, and the CC&R's after both businesses open.. She also stated that as long as the City implements and reviews the Conditions of Approval in the future, she felt it should be a good project. Kozak Kozak echoed comments previously made by the other Commissioners as well as the compatibility with the site and area. Smith No Comments. Lumbard Lumbard expressed concern with parking space requirement versus the parking study and the demand. He said he was comfortable with the item since Public Works and the Orange County Fire Authority have reviewed as well as advised staff that the conditions be included in the resolution. Motion: It was moved by Thompson and seconded by Smith, as amended. Motion carried 6-0. Minutes—Planning Commission April 26,2015--Page 3 of 6 REGULAR BUSINESS: 3. WITHDRAWAL OF DESIGN REVIEW(DR) 2015-019 Received and On December 15, 2015, the applicant submitted a request for continuation riled and in order to allow additional time to work on a design solution with CRY staff. removed the item On January 12, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public meeting and from tabled the item to a date uncertain in response to the applicant's request. consideration On March 30, 2016, the applicant submitted a written request to withdraw the application for DR 2015-019, indicating that a new design review request will be submitted in the future. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1) Receive and file the applicant's letter to withdraw,DR 2015-019 for the request to permit vacuum hoses, with signage, and a car care vending system that were installed without permits at,the service station and carwash located at 3017 Edinger Avenue; and 2) Remove the item from consideration as requested by the applicant. Kozak Kozak asked if there was a deadline for the removal of the vacuum hoses. Binsack Binsack's response to Kozak's question generally included: staff requested, on numerous occasions, that the vacuum hoses be removed then the applicant requested an opportunity to re-tile a design review application as well as a conditional use permit application; she referenced the email provided in the packet identifying the applicant stating they would be submitting an application by April 12, 2016, but staff has not yet received that application; staff provided outreach,to the applicants representative to ask the status of the application; and Binsack noted the City's concern with the design of the vacuums regardless of whether or not an application is-submitted and another project is considered by the Commission. Lumbard Lumbard requested clarification on the waiting period with filing a similar application and how a withdrawal would be affected in that the Commission would be approving a withdrawal as if it were not submitted, which would not affect any timeline. Binsack In response to Lumbard's question, Binsack stated withdrawals are related to CUPs, variances, discretionary applications and that would be if the applicant is denied. Generally, the Commission would not be considering the exact same application for a period of one (1) year and no action has been taken. Motion; It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Mason, to receive and file the applicant's letter to withdraw DR 2015-019 and. remove the item_ from consideration. Motion carried 5-0. Minutes--Planning commission April 26,.2018»Page 4 of 6 7:15 p.m. Re-opened the Public Concerns portion of the meeting due to the public's late arrival. Ms. Penny Lambright, representative for Patriots and Paws (non-profit organization), shared the background of Patriots and Paws for the Commission. The organization helps veterans and their families and it is all volunteer-based. The Commission, collectively, thanked Ms. Lambright for sharing her information. Ms. Blenz asked why a dialysis center was needed in Tustin when there is currently already one in Tustin. Lumbard Lumbard asked Ms. Blenz if she was referring to Item #2, and Ms. Blenz was referring to that item, which the Commission already discussed and voted on. Lumbard also informed Ms. Blenz that the Commission does not make business decisions for applicants, but only hears presentations and approves items as they relate to planning. He referred her to direct the question in an email or written form to the applicant being that the business is not on city- owned property nor is it a city-owned business. 7:21 p.m. Re-closed the Public Concerns portion of the meeting. STAFF CONCERNS: Binsack Binsack informed the Commission of a scheduled tour in ,tune, to begin at 5:00 or 5:30 p.m. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mason Mason informed the Commission she would be absent for the May 10, 2016 Commission meeting. Kozak Kozak attended the following events: • March 2&-The City's 47t`Annual Easter Egg.Hunt • March 3& — California Preservation Foundation webinar hosted by Community Development staff—"ADA Accessibility' • April 3`d — City sponsored Document Shredding event — "Kudos to the field operations staff!" Thompson Thompson mentioned.the State's extension of the classification of the drought. He attended the following events: • February 22°d— ULI Office& Commercial Initiative Council • March 3& -' CPF webinar hosted by Community Development staff-- "ADA Accessibility" r March 31st— USC "Technical Leaders"Workshop on Fidelity Title Minutes—Planning Commisslan Apnl 28,2018--•Page:5 of G March 31St — "Association of California's Cities for Orange County Infrastructure and Master Planning"Tour Gentlemen's Fundraiser Retreat in.Santa Ana April 19"—215t- ULI National,Convention in Philadelphia Smith No concerns. Lumbard Lumbard thanked staff for the agenda items, as well as the Tustin Police Officer present at the meeting. He also wished Binsack a "speedy and healthy recovery". 7:31 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, May 10, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the City's Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. AUSTIN L-UN16ARD Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning Commission April 26,2016—Page 6 of 6 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 14, 2016 TOUR OF DEVELOPMENT SITES 5:30 P.M.TO 7:00 P.M. DEPART FROM TUSTIN CITY HALL PARKING LOT AT.5:30 P.M. Given TOUR DESTINATIONS: 5:50 p.m. Greenwood at Tustin Legacy CIubhouse (250 Downs Road); 6:00 p.m. - Victory Park (3300 Park Avenue); 6:10 p.m. Union Market at The District (2493 Park Avenue); 6:35 p.m. — Edinger Avenue Well (2100 E. Edinger Avenue); 7:00pm—return to City Hall 7:09 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Given INVOCATIONIPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Kozak ROLL CALL: Present: Chair Lumbard .Chair Pro Tem Smith Commissioners Mason, Kozak, and Thompson None. PUBLIC CONCERNS Brief recess to restore audio. Approved the CONSENT CALENDAR: Consent Calendar. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—APRIL 26, 2016 RECOMMENDATION: That.the Planning Commission approves the Minutes of the Ap6l 26, 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. 2. FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FINDING OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN The Planning Commission is required to review the projects in the Capital Improvement Program (C1P) and verify their conformance with the General Plan. The City Council will soon be adopting the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 budget and appropriate funding for the ensuing year CIP projects. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4314 finding the proposed FY 2016-2017 Capital Improvement Program in conflormance with the,General Plan pursuant to Section 65401 of the Government Code. Minutes—Planning Commission June 14,2016--Page 1 of 10 Motion: It was moved by Smith, seconded by Thompson, to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried M. 7:15 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Approved 3. DESIGN REVIEW (DR) 2014-006, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) Reso. No. 2014-13 AND AMENDMENT TO USE PERMIT (UP) 79-15 4375, as amended. APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: Henry L. Botts, Jr. & Gerald Mouzis Grace Harbor Church & School Grace Harbor Church &School 12681 Newport Avenue 12881 Newport Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 LOCATION: 12881 Newport Avenue REQUESTS: 1. DR 2014-006 for the design and site layout of a new two-story, 10,015 square-foot classroom building. 2. CUP 2014-13 for joint use parking between the church, preschool and elementary school uses. 3. Amendment to UP 79-15 to increase the maximum number of students allowed from 135 students to 418 students. ENVIRONMENTAL: This project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15332, class 32 of Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations:(Guidelines for the Califomia Environmental Quality Act) pertaining to in-fill developments. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4316 approving DR 2014-006 and CUP 2014-13, and amendment to UP 79-15 for the development of a new 10,015 square foot classroom building, the establishment of joint use parking to accommodate church, preschool and elementary school use, and increase the maximum number of students an a property located at 12681 Newport Avenue. Nutter Presentation given. Thompson Thompson's commentslquesfions generally included: the number of parking spaces - 122'parking spaces required by Tustin City Code which the parking study showed a maximum of 52 parking spaces being needed where 59 parking spaces are being provided, and asked if that was for the entire site; referenced the average number of students (27) per room with the proposed new building having 12 classrooms and the existing building having a few more classrooms and placement of the.400+ students; the hours of operation for the school; and graduations, pageants and how they would fit into the school schedule. Minutes—Pianning Commission June 14,2016---Page 2 of 10 Hutter Hutter's response generally included: currently the preschool children are in the rear of the sanctuary building (approx. eight (8) classrooms in the existing building) as well as a separate building for first grade students (she referred to the submitted plans within the staff report); and the school is currently using some of the rooms surrounding sanctuary area for classrooms when the church is not being used. 7:24 p.m. The public comments portion of the meeting was opened. Ms. Janice Sheehan, resident, spoke In opposition of the project. Her concerns generally included: her property backs up to the church; therefore, screaming children; bails going over to her yard; noise level from church services; concern w'Ith removal of the Italian Cypress trees; concern with property values being affected poorly; and an increase in noise due to more students from school. Mr. Gerald Mouzis, applicant, introduced Doug Andresen, architect, Pastor Fred Snyder(in:the audience), as well as Henry Botts, Chairman of the Grace Harbor Church Council, and other staff members from Grace Harbor to the Commission. Mr. Mouzis' comments generally included: Hutter's hard work on the project; the diversity, economic/social diversity, within Grace Harbor; unique architecture; in response to the concerns previously mentioned, notices were sent out by the applicant to the surrounding community to meet the applicant and architect (6/5/16) to hear of any concerns but the community did not show up; Cypress trees will not be removed as a memorial to Mr. Spaulding, founder of the church, and serves as a buffer between the neighbors and playground; there are 59 parking spaces-with 13 overflow if any special events were to take. place (i.e. Easter, Christmas program, etc.); a nearby commercial property (to the north) allows overflow parking from ,the church for Christmas/children programs; and traffic flow study ingress/egress taken into account. Denise Baker, resident, concerned with noise and value of her property plummeting: In response to Thompson's question regarding TCC requirement of 122 parking spaces, Mr. Andresen clarified that the church parking requirement is actually 72 spaces and 32 spaces for the school. The church and school do not run concurrently. He also mentioned the increase in students would happen over several years, not overnight. Mr. Andresen added that the second floor would not be completely occupied since there are not enough children to fill up the second floor and it will be built out as needed. The goal is to get the children out of the church building and into the classroom area. Mr. Mouzis responded to Thompson's question regarding the existing building and the location of the classrooms. The pre-school will be towards the front of the building once the school is constructed (K thru & grades). There are 39 students currently(capped out at 90 students) and there is currently a waiting list as well, Thompson Thompson asked for clarification on the hours of operation of the school. He also asked about graduations, pageants and: how they would fit into the school schedule. Minutes--Planning commission June 14,2016—Page 3 of 10 Mr. Mouzis referred the Commission to Page 11 of the staff report (Table 3) which listed the hours of the church and school. Presently, the Christmas programs and graduations are held in the church sanctuary, which are typically during the week and evenings. Kozak Kozak's comments/questions generally included: the parking study addressed his concerns with the traffic circulation on the site; referred to the Use Restriction (Reso. No. 4315) student drop-off/pick-up plan; schedule and overflow parking and designating the area along Newport Avenue to the southern part of the property for staff parking and the parking to the northeast comer; and asked if it would be necessary to commit that in writing and how it is being addressed from a Use Restriction standpoint. Willkom Wilikom's response to Kozak's,concerns generally included: The parking study identified measures to assist with the queing and to prevent back-up onto Newport Avenue; Condition 2.4 requires parking and student drop-off schedule to be submitted to Community Development for staff to review—once submitted, staff will look at the recommendation of the three staggered times which will be made part of the parking management plan. Thompson Thompson asked if the applicant would be okay if staff were to add a condition to the resolution regarding the landscape to ensure the Cypress trees are retained and maintained in a healthy manner. Mr. Mouzis stated that the Cypress trees would be taken care of by the maintenance company the church currently uses and ,that they would not be removed. He also stated there was no issue with another condition being added to the resolution. 7:47 p.m. The public comments portion of the meeting was closed. Lumbard Lumbard referred to Condition 5.2 of the resolution which relates to plant materials and asked staff if that would encompass maintenance of the Cypress trees as discussed earlier. Binsack Binsack stated that staff would add verbiage to Condition 5.2 to address the concerns previously mentioned. Thompson Thompson mentioned Noise Ordinance 3.1 and asked the applicant to ensure the rear doors be kept closed during church services and school. Mason Mason concurred with the previous commentskoncems her fellow Commissioners addressed and also asked staff with regards to the church keeping a good rapport with the neighboring commercial property and the overflow parking, if this is something that could be formalized or discussed among the Commission in order to negate any future concerns. Binsack Binsack referred to the Demand Analysis provided within the staff report and that the analysis identified, based on the evidence provided to the Commission that they actually provide enough parking spaces given the uses operating at any given time. If they were to provide in a more formalized fashion, tying the sites together with the adjacent commercial use, then they would need to tie the two (2) parcels together by presenting a CUP to the Commission for their Minutes—Planning Commission June 14,2016—Page 4 of 10 G consideration, including the special events. The item presented to the Commission at the meeting is what was noticed to the public. Binsack referred to Condition 1.6 in the resolution, which identifies parking-related concerns or possible concerns in the future that would require the applicant to look at other sites, adjusted hours of operation, reduced enrollment, reduced or eliminated activities, or providing additional parking on other sites. Bobak Bobak added to Binsack's statement that if there is a problem with the parking at the neighboring commercial property, then staff could bring back to the Commission. Kozak Kozak's concern with parking and circulation were addressed by staff and the applicant. Favorable comments regarding the site improvements improving the functionality of the site and the building complimenting the existing sanctuary and he thanked the residents who spoke on their concerns. Smith Smith asked staff to explain the noise mitigation and requirements around zoned pre-schools and schools and if the noise is not a regulated concern with schools. Favorable comments to the architect and style of the building. Binsack Binsack's response to Smith's question generally included: if there is noise" generated from a site, it does not necessarily mean there is a violation of the City's Noise Ordinance or make it illegal; the City's Noise Ordinance is very specific — noise level can be somewhat higher during daytime hours versus the evening hours, which the school does not operate during the evening. if there is a violation of the City's Noise Ordinance, a noise analysis can be performed. Lumbard Lumbard had favorable comments to the residents who voiced their concerns and the willingness of staff and the applicant to work on addressing the concerns addressed. Motion: It was moved by Lumbard, seconded by Mason, to approve Resolution No. 4315, approving DR 2014-006 and CUP 2014-13, and amendment to UP 79-15 for the development of a new 10,015 square foot classroom building and the establishment of joint-use parking to accommodate church, pre-school and elementary school use and increase the maximum number .of students on a property located at 12881 Newport Avenue. It was moved by Lumbard, with the addition to Condition 5.2 to Resolution No. 4315, seconded by Mason. Motion carried 5-0. Binsack Binsack informed the audience that the item is appealable within 10 calendar days of the Commission's decision. 8:00 p.m. Public Hearing Closed for Item 3. 8:00 p.m. Public Hearing Opened for Item 4. Minutes—Planning Commission June 14,2016—Page 5 of 10 Continued to 4. REVOCATION OF CUP 2015-05 (ON-SITE BEER AND WINE SALES), the July 12, AND DR 2015-005 (OUTDOOR SEATING), ASSOCIATED WITH IVY 2096 Planning LOUNGE RESTAURANT Commission meeting, with stipulations. RESTAURANT OWNER: PROPERTY OWNER: Vahid Adamkhoshbakht Louie Properties Ivy Lounge and Grill 5936 Temple City Boulevard 14001 Newport Avenue, Unit Temple City, CA 91780 LOCATION: 14011 NEWPORT AVENUE, UNIT A RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No.4313 to: 1. Find that the continuance of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2015-05 for on-site beer and wine sales (ABC License Type 41) and Design Review (DR) 2015-005 allowing outdoor seating associated with the Ivy Lounge restaurant located at 14001 Newport Avenue, Unit A, would be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use, or would be injurious or detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City; and, 2. Direct staff to transmit a report of the Planning Commission's findings and recommendation that the City Council revoke CUP 2015-05 and DR 2015-005. Bobak Bobak informed the Commission of a telephone conversation she had on June 6, 2016 with MaAar Mafi, attomey representing Mr. Adamkhoshbakht. Per Bobak, Mr. Mafi requested that staff recommend to the Commission that the item be continued. Mr. Mafi requested additional time to prepare a response to the staff report and to the allegations within the staff report. Mr. Adamkhoshbakht and Mr. Mafi were actively marketing the business and are in the process of trying to sell the business. They would rather continue the item and come back to the Commission with a valid CUP versus a revoked CUP. Mr. Mafi also indicated that Mr. Adamkhoshbakht would comply with all of the conditions of approval in the interim. Bobak worked with staff and collectively developed a series of conditions, that In the event Mr. Adamkhoshbakht agrees to those conditions, staff would recommend a continuance of the revocation hearing from meeting to meeting which allows staff not to have to re-notice the hearing. If staff decides to pursue the revocation and if!here is a violation of any of the conditions of approval, staff`could bring the item back to the Commission at the next Planning Commission meeting and pursue the revocation. On June 8, 2016, Bobak forwarded the conditions to Mr. Mafi and she offered to discuss and explain the conditions to Mr. Mafi and Mr. Adamkhoshbakht. Mr. Mafi and Mr. Adamkhoshbakht had an opportunity to review the conditions and consult, which Bobak understood they are in agreement with the conditions. The conditions generally included: Mr. Adamkhoshbakht must appear at the June Minutes—Planning Commission June 14,2016—Page 6 of 10 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting and accept the conditions on the record, as part of the record and agree there will be strict compliance with all of the Conditions of Approval within Resolution No. 4281, which would include that the restaurant will be closed and all patrons off of the premises at closing time (weekdays 11:00 p.m. / weekends 12:00 a.m.); the City would conduct periodic/random field inspections to ensure compliance (may be more than one (1) inspection on any given night); If there are violations, staff would bring the item back to the next Planning Commission meeting and ask that the Commission move forward with the revocation hearing; each of the prospective buyers of the property must be notified of the Conditions of Approval, so they know what they are contemplating buying, the enforcement actions the City has taken so the prospective buyer knows the City is serious about enforcing the Conditions of Approval, and about the continued revocation hearing and so that the prospective buyer is aware that the City is pursuing possible revocation of the permits for the business they are contemplating buying; prior to the close of escrow; any new buyer would have to come to the Planning Commission meeting and acknowledge, on the record, that they have seen the Conditions of Approval, understand the Conditions of Approval and that they accept the Conditions of Approval; the new buyer would have to have a notarized acknowledgement and acceptance form of the City's conditions, which any applicant is required to provide and if the business sells, and a new owner comes in and there are continued violations, the notarized acknowledgement would allow the City to start where they left off with the previous owner rather than start over from the beginning since the City would have on the record that the new business owner knew and understood the Conditions of Approval and what the prior problems were; Bobak referred to Conditions 1.5 and 1.8 which requires that Mr. Adamkhoshbakht reimburse the City the costs of enforcement actions; the City has incurred approximately $7,500 in enforcement costs (i.e. police overtime, City attorney time, Community Development staff time) in terms of action taken in order to monitor the conditions; all administrative citations must also be paid, if they have not been paid already; there would have to be a commitment that if there were future violations, and enforcement actions were necessitated because of the violations, while Mr. Adamkhoshbakht owns the business, that he would be responsible for those costs as well; and assuming Mr. Adamkhoshbakht commits to the conditions previously,stated, staff is willing to recommend that the Commission continue this item. Kozak Kozak asked Bobak how the Commission would be able to, at a time when the sale of the business is completed, check out the new owner, with respect to acknowledging and committing to the Conditions of Approval and Use Restrictions. He also asked if the hearing could happen before escrow closes. Bobak Per Bobak, the CUP and the DR "runs" with the land so the Commission, generally, would not have the right to conduct a background check or do any analysis on a prospective buyer. However, she stated that the ABC license does not run with the land and that the new business owner would have to apply for a new ABC license from the State which the City would automatically be notified by the State, therefore the City would know if the business had been transferred. This is why staff recommends the prospective buyer attends a Planning Commission meeting in order for the prospective buyer to understand what it is he/she is buying and the Conditions of Approval that are in place. Again, Bobak reiterated that-before escrow closes, the new business owner must attend the next Planning Commission meeting. Bobak also mentioned from Minutes—Planning Commission June 14,2016—Page 7 of 10 her email correspondence to Mr. Adamkhoshbakht's attorney, that staff is comfortable recommending the continuance of the item from meeting to meeting, but by the last meeting in July, if the business has not yet sold, then staff would like Mr. Adamkhoshbakht to attend the next Planning Commission meeting, since it will be agendized for a public hearing on the revocation and to update the Commission on the status of any potential sales. Thompson Thompson thanked the applicant for being present to listen to the methods of compliance. He asked that one (1) comment be added to the list of conditions previously stated by Bobak to include any other stipulations on compliance that were identified in previous letters, and that they be included to the list so not only complying with the original conditions, but more specifically, the charcoals placed near the transponder, etc. Bobak Bobak agreed with Thompson's suggestion that staff ask the applicant to commit to strict compliance with not only the Conditions of Approval in the resolution, but the technical provisions within the.Municipal Code. 8:12 p.m. The public comments section of this item opened. Mr. Mafl and his client, Mr. Adamkhoshbakht, stood at the podium and Mr. Mafi spoke on behalf of Mr. Adamkhoshbakht. Mn Mafi's .response generally included that he and Mr. Adamkhoshbakht agree, in person, to be in compliance with staff and Bobak's requests provided to them on June 8, 2016; Mr. Mafi notified the Commission that the severity of the situation was understood and there is not going to be any issue with respect to any prior issues nor with anything to do with compliance on any conditions agreed to that Bobak sent via email; Mr. Mafi claims there has only been one (1) citation and that Mr. Adamkhoshbakht paid the citation in December 2015; and that there are no outstanding citations. Kozak Kozak asked :if Mr. Adamkhoshbakht had. received any offers on the business and if the business is currently up for sale. He also asked if the prospective buyer has previous restaurant experience. Kozak asked if Mr. Mafi or Mr. Adamkhoshbakht have provided information (i.e. the staff report), that was presented that evening to the Commission, to the prospective buyer. He suggested that the staff report be provided to the prospective buyer. Mr. Mafi's response generally included: he stated that the business is up for sale and that there is a prospective buyer; there is a particular buyer who has shown interest and has received documentation on what the business does and does not allow; the prospective buyer is doing their own inspection and there is an ongoing process; the staff report presented to the Commission was not provided to the prospective buyer, however, Mr. Mafi and Mr. Adamkhoshbakht requested a formal proposal and deposit from the prospective buyer before they proceed any further to ensure the prospective buyer is serious before they provide further documentation; they will agree to provide a_copy of the staff report, along with obtaining their signature(s) and the notarized acknowledgement previously listed in the Conditions of Approval;,and Mr. Mafi assured ,the Commission that .the prospective buyer will attend a Planning Commission meeting prior to the close of escrow. Minutes—Planning Commission June 14,2016--Page 8 of 10 Or Mason Mason's questions generally included: status of the current marketing of the business; Mr. Adamkhoshbakht's commitment to following through the condition in the CUP and the Conditions of Approval outlined with regards to the hours of operation; and if there were any intentions to change the terms for driving traffic to the area at night and how they plan to mitigate that. Mr. Mafi stated that"if for any reason the prospective buyer does not happen, he and Mr. Adamkhoshbakht would return to the Commission with an application with sufficient data and back up. Mr. Mafi stated, "At this point in time, there is a strong possibility we will not have to do any of that." Lumbard Lumbard asked Mr. Maf and Mr. Adamkhoshbakht if they agree to comply with the list of conditions read by Bobak including compliance with the Municipal Code. Mr. Adamkhoshbakht provided his name to the Commission and agreed/accepted the conditions read by Bobak, including compliance with the Municipal Code. 8:18 p.m. The publiccomments section of this item closed. Lumbard Lumbard reiterated to the Commission that the recommendation for this item was modified to continue the item from meeting to meeting to allow for the applicant to comply with the conditions read into the record and pursue the sale of a business and if that sale has not occurred by July 26, 2016, the applicant shall reappear at a Planning Commission meeting. In conducting the continuance from meeting to meeting, staff does not have to re-notice the public hearing but re-open the public hearing each meeting. Lumbard asked the Commission if they understood what was being recommended. Bobak Bobak informed the Commission that staff would cancel the second meeting in June therefore the next Planning Commission meeting would be July 12, 2016, which would be a 30-day continuance. She confirmed the public hearing item would need to be re-opened meeting to meeting. If the applicant does not violate any of the Conditions of Approval, the applicant would not have to be present at the July 26, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. If there are violations to the Conditions of Approval, staff will notify the applicant and his attomey that the City will proceed with the revocation of the public hearing at the next meeting and they would expect Mr. Adamkhoshbakht be present at that time. Smith Smith made favorable comments to staff on the flexibility offered to the applicant with regards to the CUP. Lumbard Lumbard stated that with the evidence shown in the staff report, the applicant has not shown willingness to comply with the City's conditions. He is hesitant to --a pproVe the continuance because he does not believe the new conditions will be complied with by the applicant; however, stated it is a good compromise between the City and Mr. Adamkhoshbakht. Motion: It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Smith, to continue the item to the next scheduled meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Minutes--Planning Commission June Z4,2016—page 9 of 10 8:22 p.m. Closed the Public Hearing, None. REGULAR BUSINESS STAFF CONCERNS: Binsack Binsack thanked the Commission for participating in the tour. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mason Mason thanked. staff for the detailed 'staff reports and for the tour of the City. She also attended the State ofthe City on June 9, 2016. Kozak Kozak attended the May City.Council and congratulated Parks & Recreation on the Grand 'Re-Opening oi' Frontier Park's playground and splash pad. He thanked staff for the staff reports and tour. He also attentled the Chili Cook-Off (June 6, 2016)and was the "People's Choice Chili Judge". Thompson attended the following'. • 515: ULI Commercial &Of ice Initiative Council 5112-13'. Transportation Forum • 5120: Orange County Water Summit • 612: Building industryLegal'Defense Law_ & Policy Conference • 614: 'Camp Pendleton Mud Run • 619: State of the City • 6113: OCTA ;Board — appointed to 'the_ Environmental Clean-up Committee • 6/14: American Legion Flag Ceremony Thompson enjoyed the tour. Congratulations-to Luke Thompson who graduated and,was accepted to Northem Arizona University! Smith Smith had no concerns, "C.ongratulations to the Chili Cook-off success. Lumbard Happy Flag Day:everyone! Lumbard informed every one of the Concerts in the Parte occurring now through August and the Movles in the.Park in.July. 8:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, June 28, 20'16, at 7:.0.0 p.m. 'in the Council .Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. Closed in "solidarity with Orlando and our brothers and sisters. AUSTIN LUMBARD Chairperson ELIZABETH A.,BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes--Planning Commission June 14,2016-Page 10 of 10 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 12, 2016 7:00 p.m. -CALL TO ORDER Given INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Smith ROLL CALL: Chair Lumbard Chair Pro Tem Smith Commissioners Kozak, Mason,Thompson None. PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—JUNE 14, 2016 June 14, 2016 Minutes. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. Motion. It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Smith, to approve the Minutes of the June 14, 2016 Planning'Commission meeting. Motion carried 5-0. 2. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY DETERMINATION APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 LOCATION: 1) 14542 Newport Avenue#3 2) 27 Look Out Lane 3) 140 South A Street REQUESTS: 1. General Plan Conformity finding for conveyance of two (2) residential units located at 14542 Newport Avenue#3 and 27 Look Out Lane, 2. General Plan Conformity finding for conveyance of one (1) vacant parcel located at 140 South A Street. Minutes—Planning Commission July 12,2016—Page 1 of 8 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4316, determining that the conveyance of two (2) affordable residential units located at 14542 Newport Avenue #3, and 27 Look Out Lane at market rate and one (1) vacant parcel located at 140 South A Street owned by the City of Tustin to the Habitat for Humanity of Orange County, Inc. is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan. Thompson Thompson commented on the equity that is being preserved with two (2) units being sold as market rate units which once were affordable and the two (2) units being added to the inventory of the City as"for rent' housing stocks. It was moved by Thompson, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4316, as amended. Motion carded 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: Adopted Reso. 3. REVOCATION OF CUP 2015-05 (ON-SITE BEER AND WINE SALES), No. 4313 DR 2015-005 (OUTDOOR SEATING), IVY LOUNGE RESTAURANT APPLICANT: Vahid Adamkhoshbakht Ivy Lounge and Grill 14QO1 Newport Avenue, Unit A Tustin, CA 92780 PROPERTY OWNER: Louie Properties, 5936 Temple City Boulevard Temple City, CA 91780 LOCATION: 14001 Newport Avenue, Unit A REQUESTS: This item.was continued from the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL: This project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15270(b) (Article 18. Statutory exemptions for projects which are disapproved) of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQ4 Guidelines for the Califomia Environmental Quality Act). RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4313: 1. Finding that the continuance of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2015-05 for on-site beer and wine sales (ABC License Type 41) and Design Review (DR) 2015-005 allowing outdoor seating Minutes—Planning Commission July 12,2016—Page 2 of 8 _ a associated with the Ivy Lounge restaurant located at 14001 Newport Avenue, Unit A, would be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use, or would be injurious or detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City; and, 2. Directing staff to transmit a report. of the Planning Commission's findings and recommendation that the City Council set a hearing to revoke CUP 2018-08 and DR 2015-005. 7:05 p.m. Public Hearing opened. Binsack Binsack informed the Commission of the applicant's request to continue the Rem then referred the Commission to Bobak to hear her,comments on the matter. Bobak Bobak provided an overview of the item that was presented at the previous June 14, 2016 Commission meeting with regards to the revocation. Her comments generally included: the status of the owner's efforts to sell the business; staffs previous recommendation that the Commission continue the item to give the applicant the opportunity to open escrow and proceed with a then-contemplated sale of the business; staffs recommended conditions/stipulations for the applicant; non-payment of the City's administrative enforcement costs which was included in the original CUP approval; the applicant agreed to all stipulations, including payment of the City's administrative enforcement costs; Bobak was recently notified the proposed sale of the business was not moving forward and was delayed due to lack of funds from the prospective buyer; a formal invoice was sent to the applicant's attomey, Mr. Mafi, .lune 28, 2016 with a payment date of July 5, 2016; Bobak received a call from Mr. Mafi's office on June 30, 2016 stating they would be working with the applicant on payment date; Bobak received word from Mr. Mafi on July 11, 2016 that the invoice had not been paid since he did not have the opportunity to review the invoice with his client since he was hospitalized; staffs recommendation to the Commission was to proceed With the revocation hearing; any final action would be made.by the City Council and would likely not be heard until the September 20, 2016 Council meeting; if the applicant still wants to pursue the sale of the business, it can be done within the 60 days between this meeting and the Council meeting; if the applicant opens escrow, staff could recommend to the Council•that they either continue the item to allow the sale be completed or return the matter to the .Commission so that the Commission.could monitor the new business owner, and since the original continuance allowed the sale to move forward, and the sale is likely not going to occur, staff sees no reason to continue the hearing on the revocation any further, but it would be up to the Commission. Lumbard Lumbard asked the Commission if they would like to continue the item. He was in favor of recommending to the City Council that they move forward with the revocation. Lumbard asked for any comments from the Commission. Kozak Kozak agreed with Lumbard's recommendation. Minutes--Planning Commission July 12,2016—page 3 of 8 Mason Mason also agreed with Lumbard and Kozak. Thompson Thompson wanted to continue to hear the item on the basis that the item has already been continued from the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Smith Smith was not in favor of continuing the item. The applicant's attorney, Mazir Mafi, stepped lip to the podium and asked when he would be able to respond to the Commission. Lumbard Lumbard informed the attorney once the public comment portion was opened, the attorney could respond. Binsack Binsack provided highlights of the Power Point presentation, staff report, resolution, and supporting documents and noted that all are inclusive of the public record, for the Commission's consideration. She also mentioned that Tustin police officers and Code Enforcement staff were in the audience and that they had conducted investigations of the business, in the event the Commission had,questions for them. Lumbard Lumbard reminded the Commission to ask staff questions and comments and to not get into commentary about what the Commission thinks about the revocation. He also stated that the attorney and applicant were in the audience to address the Commission. Thompson Thompson asked staff about the Initial CUP being approved. He asked for clarification on the type of ABC license associated with the restaurant, as opposed to a bar with regards to a revenue business standpoint. Thompson also asked if there was any confirmation that the applicant has been adhering to the ABC license requirements. Binsack In response to Thompson's questions, Binsack clarified that the.business was approved as a bona fide eating establishment versus a bar which generally means the majority of sales is food versus alcohol. She said that there has not been any confirmation but staff or the Commission could request an audit of the alcohol versus food sales, although she was not sure if there would be any success in receiving that information. Smith Smith questioned the initial investigation from one (1) year ago and asked, from a residents perspective, if the complaints stemmed from noise issues. Binsack In response to Smith's question, Binsack-stated that the multiple afterhours noise complaints Is what 'triggered the Tustin Police Department and Code Enforcement staff to investigate the business. 7:31 p.m. Public Comments opened. The applicant's attorney, Mazir Mafi, addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. His comments/complaints generally included: procedural issues (June 28, 2016 email correspondence and the violation of the applicant's Minutes--Planning Commission July 12,2016—Page 4 of 8 stipulation -- payment of the administrative costs that Mr. Mafi and the applicant agreed to pay); he stated that they have not backed out of paying the invoice and "promised to make the payment tonight..." but due to the 0 of July holiday, they found it was."unreasonable" to pay the invoice four (4) days later since Bobak and the applicant were on vacation and Mr. Mafi was in and out of the hospital; the Planning Commission packet being emailed to his office on July 7, 2016 and that it was "insufficient time" to review and prepare a response; he referred to the U.S. Constitution; claimed the contents of the staff report were "allegations", "Far-fetched" and °ridiculous"; that he and the applicant have complied with the agreement; their capability of complying with the business hours and conditions set forward; they claim they have not violated any of the conditions and that whatever happened in the past, will not be repeated; and he requested the item be continued in order to find an alternative with regards to submitting an application for extended hours for the restaurant. Thompson Thompson reminded Mr. Mafi of the outcome of the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting which was to continue the item to the July 12, 2016 Planning Commission meeting and to continue with the proceedings unless the applicant was in compliance with all of the conditions, which he is not He also asked if Mr. Mafi was aware that the June 14, 2016 meeting was an actual hearing. Although there appears to be no new issues from the applicant; however, the applicant still was not in compliance with the conditions (no fees have been paid). Mr. Mafi understood the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting was a hearing and as long as the applicant was in compliance with the conditions, the hearing would be continued. He did not understand that at each hearing there would be the prospect of a revocation hearing going forward. Mr. Mall repeated some of the statements he previously made with regards to non- sufficient time to respond to the July 7, 2016 email. He also stated that everything, with the exception of the invoice being paid, has been complied with and if the invoice could be paid in three (3) payments. Lumbard Lumbard mentioned the agreement made between staff and the applicant at the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. His understanding of the revocation was being based on the non-adherence of the conditions to the CUP up until June 14, 2016. Lumbard asked Mr. Mafi if the applicant did in fact adhere to those conditions up until the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Mafi stated it is "constitutionally impermissible to respond to staff on a two (2) day court notice being that they are not prepared". Kozak Kozak asked the City Attorney, Michael Daudt, to put Mr. Mafi's comments in perspective for the Commission. Daudt In response to Mr. Mafi's comments/concems, Daudt did not see any procedural bar to moving forward with the revocation hearing and that the matter was slated for the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting, which the Commission, at that time, made a determination to continue the hearing in Minutes—Planning Commission July 12,2016—Page 5 of 8 an effort to allow the business owner to bring forward a prospective buyer for the business, which did not happen. Therefore, staffs advice to the Commission was to recommend to the City Council that they move forward with the revocation, which would still allow a.period of 60 days for the owner to prepare for the City Council's final determination. The City Council will act as the final decision maker on this matter. 7:45 p.m. Public Comments Closed. Lumbard Lumbard clarified to the Commission that the decision the Commission is being asked to make is whether to recommend that the City Council proceed with revocation in September or continue the item to a future Planning Commission meeting based on the applicant's request. Kozak Kozak concurred with Lumbard's comments and added that the information presented to the Commission on June 14,. 2016 is valid information for the Commission's decision. Thompson Thompson commended staff with the staff report presented. His comments generally included: he was not in favor of the applicant's request for additional time since the first violation occurred one (1) year ago. If his colleagues agreed, Thompson suggested a two (2) week continuance with the request that the Commission obtain additional information on compliance with the California Alcohol Beverage Control (ASC). Mason Mason had favorable comments for staff and the applicant for their information brought to the Commission. Her understanding, from the June 14,. 2016 Planning Commission meeting, was that this meeting would be a revocation hearing and that an extension was already given with regards to the prospective buyer and ultimately, the stipulations were not met. Mason was in favor of recommending,that the City Council proceed with the revocation. Kozak Kozak was also in favor of recommending that the City Council proceed with the revocation being that the evidence provided shows non-compliance with the CUP based on the information provided at the June 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Smith Smith asked Lumbard for clarification with,regards to the options he mentioned previously. Lumbard In response to Smith's question Lumbard stated that the Commission did not have to recommend that the City Council move forward with the revocation hearing. That the Commission can 1) say no 2) continue 3),recommend to the City Council revocation or however the Commission wishes to proceed. Smith Smith agreed with Mason's comments previously stated and recommended revocation to the City Council. Lumbard Lumbard compared the CUP to a contract. He was reluctant to continue the item since the violations occurred throughout the year. Minutes—Piann"Ing Commission July 12,2048—,Page 6 of 8 Motion: Lumbard moved to approve Resolution No. 4313, seconded by Smith. Motion carried 5-0. 7:66 p.m. Public Hearing item closed, Binsack Binsack noted to the Commission that all decisions made by the Commission are appealable to the City Council; however, this item will be recommended for revocation to the City Council; therefore, no appeal is necessary. A report will be transmitted, within five (5) days, of the Commission's actions and set for hearing at the first available City Council meeting, which will be the second meeting in September. Staff will comply with the process set forth in the Tustin City Code. Lumbard Lumbard asked that staff and counsel keep the lines of communication open with the applicant's counsel and keep them apprised of all deadlines. Thompson Thompson added that the open items discussed (i.e. fees, escrow documents) be encouraged to the applicant for the next 60 days until City Council takes action. REGULAR BUSINESS: Received& 4. SUMMARY OF PROJECTS Filed The following report provides a summary of projects and activities since. the Year in Review report was presented at the January 26, 2016, Planning Commission meeting. The report focuses on the status of projects that the Planning Commission, Zoning Administrator, or staff approved; major improvement projects; Certificates of Appropriateness; Code Enforcement activities;and, other items which may be of interest to the Commission. DiLeva-Johnson Presentation given. Smith Smith had a clarifying question on Area 15 at Tustin Legacy, which encompasses one of the hangars and if the City has entered into negotiations with a group to take on development or design of the entire area. Also, if it would be for the entire Area 15 or a portion of Area 15. Smith asked if it would include the City-owned Blimp Hangar. He also asked if the developer's plans are contingent upon potential ongoing engineering studies at the Hangar being incorporated_ into the development plans. Smith asked for the timeline of the Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan (DCCSP). Binsack Binsack showed the Commission an area map showing Area 15 and stated that the City entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement to develop part of the area. The developer is Oliver McMillan and they will design and that they may be the builder as well. Binsack stated it does include the Blimp Hangar. The development plans will incorporate the Hangar but it is uncertain what type of form it will provide. The structural engineering analysis has not been completed. Once completed, then staff will know what the Hangar's future possible uses will be. For the DCCSP, staff continues working through the regulatory document and then the environmental document will follow, Minutes—Planning Commission July 12,2016—Page 7 of 8 which could be approximately six(6) months. Kozak . Kozak commended DiLeva-Johnson on the presentation, staff report and asked about the timeline for the Red Hill Specific Plan. STAFF CONCERNS: Binsack Binsack informed the Commission of the July 21, 2016 public workshop— Red Hill Corridor Specific Plan, along with the Brown Act should all of the Commission attend. The Red Hill Specific Plan is estimated to take 15 to 18 months to develop. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mason Favorable comments for staff, DiLeva-Johnson's presentation, as well as the many City activities. Kozak Thanked staff for the items presented. Continue to attend the'Concerts in the Park (thanked P&R for` the line-up for the: music groupos), appointed to the OCTA Citizens Advisory Committee by Supervisor Spitler (thanks to Chuck Puckett for his sponsorship of his application). Thompson 'Great project overview of things happening in Tustin; the manyimprovments of things' happening in the Downtown Tustin; OCTA re-appointment. He attended the following: - • 714: Tustin's,Firework Display 715 Completed training for his commission position. at OCTA's Environmental Cleanup Allocation • 719: Grand Opening of Sycamore-Grove -Smith Smith had no concerns and nothing to report. Lumbard Lumbardahanked staff for-presentations and all that is happening in Tustin.. 8:17 p,m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning. Commission is :scheduled -for. Tuesday, July 26, 2016; at 7:00 p.-'M' . in the Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. Closed the meeting in solidarity with all Law Enforcement and their families. AUSTIN LOMBARD - Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary :Minutes—Planning Commission July 12,2016--Page 8 of 8 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 23, 2016 7:00 p:m. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.` Given INVOCATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: "Thompson ROLL CALL: Chair.Lumbard Commissioners-Kozak, Mason,Thompson ABSENT: Commissioner Smith None. ' PUBLIC CONCERNS , CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL-OF-MINUTES--JULY 12,'20'16 k July 12, 2016 Minutes, as RECOMMENDATION: amended . That the Planning 'Commission approve the 'Minutes of the July 12, 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. om son, seconded b ,Kozak, to a of the Jul 12,2016 ` p y pprove the Minutes Motion: It was moved'b Th Planning Commission"meeting, as amended Motion. Y y cardbd,4-0-1. PUBLIC HEARINGITEMS: 7:0.,4 p.m. Opened Public Hearing for Item-#2. Lumbard recused-himself due to a :conft'ict of interest'with.this project.. Die to the absence of Chair Pro Tem,`it was moved by Kozak, seconded by Mason;,to elect'Commissioner Thompson to chair the item. 3 , , Ado'P ted Resp. 2,-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-(CUP) .2016-12'&•� DESIGN REVIEVI! No.'4317, as (DR)2016 amended. " APPLICANT: Didar Singh Tustin Fleld Gas & Food 3017 Edinger Avenue Tustin,CA '02780 -PROPERTY OWNER:. Dr.;Harvinder Sahota, MD H.E.-Enterprises 9890 Park Street Bellflower, CA 90706 LOCATION: 3017 Edinger Avenue Minutes-PIanning Commission August 23,2016—Page 1 of 8 REQUEST: A CUP to authorize joint-use parking to accommodate service station, carwash and retail store uses and a DR to authorize the installation of Vacuum units. ENVIRONMENTAL: This project .is categorically exempt (Class 'i) ;pu.rsuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt 'Resolut on No. 4317 approving CUP 2016-12 authorizing joint-;use ; parking to Accommodate ':sdrvice,station, �cairwash and retail store uses, and I DR 2016 -15 authorizing -the installation,` of three .(3) vacuum units on a property located at_3017 Edinger`Avenue. Huffer Presentation given. Binsack Binsack informed the Commission of the supplemental itern,`presented at the` dais for Resolution :No., 4317 ' which resulted `from questions. d'iscUssed with a `Commissioner prior to, .the Planning :Commission meeting. She stated that staff is ",recommelnding ,:additional revised langl�age fo Condiiion A Er�elated to tine payment of fees. ,'Binsack also stated' that, this approval would require.,a positive vote by all three (3) members of the Commission. Thompson Thompson mentioned the supplemental2items.presented,at.the dais for Condition 2.5, new,addition of Condition 2.7, as we16 as a revision to Condition 3.1. `He also noted a,minor correction to one (1)-word,within ' Condition 2:5. 7:08 p.m. PubliclComments Opened. Ms: , Cecilia de ,Heras, Action Property Management,' :representing; Jamboree Plaza .Owners Assoc'lation, 'voiced .her conoerns which" generally included current ,parking issue in dambaree Plaza; ti re car wash. business.currently has four(4),spaces Allotted within ;the common parking .area,. which is part of their,FCCWN- and that° the property management will be conducting a parking survey soon to. see :abouf creating more parking,spaces. Mr.. Peter Buffa, representing the applicant, Danny Singh, responded-to Ms.. De Heras c'oncems and stated: that the current:parkng Is not accurate. He also mentioned the parking spaceswhere.the vacuums are located are.not just for vacuums and,,that anyone can°.park in those spaces. Mr. Su th. di ,cussed ;th e parking study completed by Michael Baker Company .and stated"there care no ;parking issues and th6t since the project opened in 2012,there have,bee.n no complaints af!using other businesses parking spaces. He :then shared a video with the Minutes.-Planning Commission August 23,.2016—Pate 2 of 8, Commission showing the parking and circulation, as well as spaces at the gas pumps being used as parking spaces. Mr. Buffs stated that the vacuums were in place for three (3) years before receiving a violation. Mr. Buffa then asked'that Condition 3.1 (a) related to suspending the use of vacuum stations until permit and::.final. inspection are obtained, be, eliminated. Kozak For clarification, Kozak asked Mr. Buffa If a building permit was ever obtained for the.existing vacuum cleaning stations. Per Mr. Buffa, there was no discrefio'n, for a building permit when the 'Vacuum stations were installed three (3) years earliei"therefore; the existing vacuum cleaning stations do not have a building permit. ,Mason Mason asked Mr. ,Bulla if he was.aware that the vacuum stations were not part of the original CUP submittal'in=2015. She also"asked 1f a CUP was provided at the time .of ,purchase in 2012 as we11 'as what was., permitted and what was not. Per M.r..:Buffa, there:was a CUP forthe car`wash and, a schematics showed where;the Vacuum stations Vwould be. He also mentioned :that the a pp[icant did not understand that there could not be dedicated parking spaces just for the vacuum stations; however, there was no documentation. to cohfirrn that staterhent Mason Mason asked for further clarification :on the four .(4) additional parking. spaces being:partof the CC&R's previoUsly'mentioned. Mr. Buffa did not know,If time four (4) additional parking spaces were part of the CC&R'§.. He stated that the 2009 CUP application had'discretion of using four(4)'parking spaces in,the conimowparking area. Thompson In,rep once to Mason's statements,FThompson clarified that thele is,no change.to the parking inventory, per thestaff report. He further explained that the current property has eleven;O on-si#e;parking spaces and four. (4)`bff�ite. parking spaces that are part of the association, which would not be changing. 7:31, p.m. Public Comments Closed. Mason Mason requested that, for the, record, staff state what the revisions/changes to'the,Conditions:of Appror►alwere. a vnsack ' # In response to Mason's request, Binsack stated., the `following reoommendatlons, in general: amendments to Condition. 4.8, 2.5. 31 and'addition of Condition 2.7; staff could suggest that the building.permit timeframe be mod'Med;:however, this is:an appealable:item ('10 days) to the .City Coitncil ,which would make it difficult to modify.if the applicant. was ,issued a building permit and the,City Council took,another action; . and the original DR and CUP did not include the vacuum stations that ,were installed,ttherefore no�building per mi#as well as the current vacuum stations at the carwash; and staffs cor ceM of the vacuum stations being Minutes-:Planning Commission August 23,2016 -.Pag6 3 of 8 improperly installed with respect to their use. Thompson Thompson referred to Condition 3.1 and if the item were appealed, would fifteen 05) days be reasonable for the applicant 'to obtain a building permit. He also asked if staff would. be able to modify, .and report differently to the City Council. Thompson asked if the condition could be modified with regards to the immediate suspension of the vacuum use and what staff would find reasonable as,far as.timeframe. Binsack Per Binsack, staff could receive:plans, along with a fetter of risk, during the appeal period and issue a permit,on tthe eleventh ;(111) day, as long as.there is no appeal. She was not.sure if staff could say a non-permitted electrical improvement is acceptable to use:without staff 1.nspecting the vacuum stations. Kozak Kozak commended 'Blnsagk for clarifying ,te !matter, sufficiently. He inquired, on the °.original' vacuum units ever. receiving a-mview and approvai of a:buiiding permit. Kozak stated Condition 3..1 .1s important for public`safety and was concerned that the vacuum stations were installed without,review and approval from,the City in order to meet City standards. Mason Mason inquired ori the" signage 'placed on the vacuums (FREE VACUUM): She asked if the intent was#o alleviate,parki f ig. d... :Thompson Inresponse to'Mason's statement, Thompson stated that staff,needs to, review the signage and it !s not within the Commission`s purview to` regulate'signage, 13obak Bobak asked the:Commission if she'could read the.revised:Condition 1.8, as amended, into therecord since it was not typed up for the Commission, and to ensure the language is clear and that:there were no questions,'in. the",event-there is an issue. Mofroir:n It was moved:by Thompson to adopt Resolution 190. 4317, as,amended, seconded°by Kozak. .Lu nbard abstained from the vote. Motion.carred 3! U-2. Adop -fed -Reso. 3 . DESIGN REVIEW.(DR) W.: 4318, as amended. APPLICANT: Zahra-Khalaf., Bublyz Gam ' 2505 El Camino.Real Tustin; CA' 92782 , PROPERTY OWNER: FGHK Ltd. _ - 750 Old Hickcory'Blvd. Two Brentwood Commons, 150 Brentwood,TN 37427 :LOCATION: 2505 El Camino Real Minutes—Planning Commission August 23,201 B—Page 4 or 8 REQUEST: To authorize the establishment of :a 7,231 square foot outdoor restaurant seating .area in conjunction with an existing restaurant located at 2505 El Camino Real. ENVIRONMENTAL: `This project .is categorically exempt (Class'3) pursuant to Section 15303 of the Calitomia Environmental Quality Act. " RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning, Commission adopt Resolution No.-4318 approving. DR 2016_-011 to authorize the-establishment of a-7,231 square foot outdoor restaurant seating area in conjunction with an existing restaurant located:-at 2505 El Camino'Real. Reekstin Presentation given. l Binsack Binsack stated ;that staff made.recommendations to `Condition 1.6 and ' Condition 2.10 to be amended further and,.she read the:amendments into - 7:% p.m. Opened Public.Hearing"for Item#3 The':public that spoke in ,favor of the;iterri generally made',the followfig favorable comments desirable , ttng outdoor sea , . family dining," international food`; And'`.that it is a good,use for the neighborhood: The .public that spoke not in favor of the `iterri generally stated the •following concerns: noise pollution;' ,hors -of operation; `loud music, allowance;of smoking'and alcohol, _arid' the impact:it would have in the neighborhood. Reekstin Reekstin's :re"s ons-e to comments previously.made generally included: alcol will not be,served - on the patio; conditions in the"'rresolution with regards to alcohol_for future business."owners who wantAto serve alcohol ," Which is an outright permitted use an'd bo"CUP is required to.conjunction with a bonafde,restaurant;a condition,With regards to rto ampi ied music or I]lve entertainment,and compliance,,with the °City's Noise Ordinance; and smoking is allowed,by Califoitnia Law`within an outdoor:'seating Area unless the,restaurant owner prohibits.smoking. Mr. Matt AKniad, a` representative' for' the applicant, 'made favorable comments for Re- ekstin and he also"stated the followifi4•n general:; .any noise :coming from the outdoor seating;would be muffled by the .walls; reyoested Condition 22. related to removal:of the existing masonry wall be,'"removed; .Bublyz will- abide`by the`City's,Noise Ordinance; there will not :be amplified ;music; the applicant would never request to serve alcohol;.requested that the applicant not be required to remove the walls or ,make large openings to the walls; match occupancy .Insideloutside; Minutes—Planning comriilsolon August 23,2018—Page 5'of 8 and he presented a list of signatures from the-local residents, in favor of the:project. Ms. Zahra Khalafi, applicant,°in general, stated the following: removing the wall would diminish the property value; the wall is a noise buffer, occupancy inside/outside;:patio;.alcohol not being served; low.music;no live music; and she provided a short video of a resident that could not be in attendance but who was in favor of the project. 8:27p.m. Public Hearing Closed. Thompson Thompson stated the following in general: wall does not fit the architectural design appropriate; :suggested modifying tide existing wall; Condition.2.2 "substantially remove"with`reference to tfie wrought iron; reuse of the block wall; asked staff to clarify appropriate:interpretation of that term;,and,sound attenuation. ` Lumbard Lumbard asked staff to address Condition 31 with instruction on , . Inteipieting the language: He wanted to avoid.approving something that is-,untenable. Lumbard informed the Commission that theyneed to either approve or continue the'item .in order-to directstaff to.6ontinue. i4orking with the appricanton altemative methods; Binsack Binsack .stated that staff's desire.to-modify Condition.247 was o allow .flexibility to give staff Ahe opportunity to.;work with.the applicant to 16ok at what:could .be considered and in the'event an agreement could not be made; then the item 'would be brought back to 'the,Commission; for consideration. Bobak Bobak said;staff intended Condition 3.7 would supersede-Condition 2.2 wfich has to-,be consistent with the revised Condition'3:7`othenMse there` would be conflicting aond_itions in the 'resolution. She`suggested the Commission consider removing Condition 12:2. Mason Masora.asked for clarification.with,regards to!'substanblaily nn-enclosed°. Bobak Bobales response to Masorfs question . generally included; the Commission may provide staff direction on what the Commission thinks substantially un-enclosed means because.-staff mays-have, a different understanding of t`iat:term than-the Commission (i.e`. does the masonry wall come down or just the wrought iron?). 161711'66nd, Lumbard's concern is that the .wall has'not stopped the. noise from bothering the neighbors. Mason Mason was in support of Thompson's statement previously.;made. The intent should be to create an environme_hi that is amenable to=both the, corrimerclal and residential'areas. Kozak Kozak voiced his concern with Condition 3.7. He did not want to read "si bstantially. .unenclosed" because to him that mean's, "no covering'. Kozak suggested adding "small not be covered".- He',also suggested Minutes-,Planning Commission August M,2016=Page 6 of 8 t revising Condition 2.17 which would remove the ability of obtaining a-°live entertainment permit". Kozak stated that If revising Condition 3.7 causes a legal issue,then he would withdraw his suggestion. Bobak Bobak suggested that if-it is the consensus of the Commission, simply' state, "no live entertainment is permitted"., Bih§Ack Binsack stated some forms, of live entertainment are exempt and that anything over and above an individual or a duo are non-exempt. Kozak Kozak.stated he is now satisfied with addressing the noise issue. Lumbard The",Commission is willing to support a slight modification to the wall to address noise and.the'impact to the surrounding neighborhood. P Mason Mason reminded that there may be limitations based on the landlord. Lumbard. Lumbard further stated.that the Commission wants,an amenable solution that can actually happen: As per the applicaimt's requesf on the increase of occupancy on the patio-(Conditio ' ,21),.°Lumbard �is of the opinion to start with the recommerndation first, ttieri f successful, the applicant-could. requestniodify'the approved DR tpe('Bobak). 'R666fin Reekstin- noted,that Condition 2.1 does allow the applicant to request an mcr�ease in the number of seats,subJect to.the Comm'unity'Development. Dimdoes;approval: Lumbard Lumbard reiterated that.the Commission :is"proposing Condition 2:2 be . removed. ; Mo0on: ?It ;was reoommendeo by Lumbard to�approve Resolution,No. 4318, :as amended, .seconded by Mason. Motion-cartied.4-4-1: None REGULAR BUSINESS 'STAFF CONCERNS:: msack Binsack informed the-Commission .of the upcoming Planning Officials Forum'in September., COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mason Nothing to report. Thompson Thompson.atteimded the following: 7/1.3: USC Commercial Real Estate. Program 7115: Ethics`Training 7118: Neighborhood-Weting—420 W. fi"`Street 812: Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting 812: -.Opening;of the La Pada Avenue In South Orange County 8118: Urban Land Institute Minutes—Planning Commission August 23.201e.—'Page 7 or 8 Thompson thanked staff for the notes on the Red Hill Corridor Study Workshop. He congratulated Kozak for being nominated to the Successor Agency. Kozak requested he be excused for October 11 and October 25 since he will be out of town for training. Kozak Kozak thanked staff for their hard work on the agenda items and as well as the Red Hill Corridor Study Workshop comments. Kozak attended the final concerts in the Park and commended Parks & Recreation. He attended OCTA Citizens Advisory Board Committee Meeting on August 2, 2016. Lumbard Lumbard attended the following: 7121: Red Hill Corridor Workshop 7128: Veterans Housing Ribbon Cutting 7129: OC Animal Shelter Groundbreaking 8110: Concerts in the Park 8114: Marconi Auto Museum Open House 8119: Broadway in the Park—"Beauty &the Beast" Lumbard congratulated Luke Thompson, who will be attending Northern Arizona State University to play football. He also congratulated Rusty Kozak for attending Chapman University Law School to obtain his graduate degree. 8:56 P.M. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, September 13, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. AUSTIN L -BARD Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes— Planning Commission August 23,2016—Page 8 of 8 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 7:01 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. Given INVOCATIOWPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mason ROLL CALL: Chair Lumbard .Chair Pro Tem Smith Commissioners Mason, Kozak,Thompson None. PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—AUGUST 23, 2016 August 23, 2016 Minutes. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the August 23, 2016 Planning Commission meeting, as provided. Motion: It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Mason; to approve the Minutes of the August 23, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Smith abstained. Motion carried 4-0-1. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: 7:05 p.m. Public Hearing Opened. Adopted Reso. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2096-08 TO ESTABLISH A No. 4319, as KARAOKE MUSIC STUDIO AT 14561 & 14571 RED HILL amended. AVENUE APPLICANT: Sung Hak Ko JDS Total Design Solution 3183 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 610 Los Angeles, CA 90010 PROPERTY OWNER: Richter Farms Trust Interpacifc Asset Management Co. ENVIRONMENTAL: This project is categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 95301, Class 1 pertaining to existing facilities. Minutes—Planning Commission September 13,2016—Page Z of 5 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4319 approving CUP 2016-08 to establish a karaoke music studio in an existing 5,000 square foot tenant space located at 14561 & 14571 Red Hill Avenue. Dove Presentation given. Thompson Thompson asked staff about the opposition letters presented within the packet, as well as at the dais. He questioned the signatures since some were out-of-city addresses versus Tustin and what the Ietters relevance would be since the subject property is over 150 feet away from the addresses listed in the letters. Thompson also asked that the individuals who signed the opposition letters come forward and state the proximity from ' their residence to the subject property in order to get a better understanding of locations. Binsack In response to Thompson's questions, Binsack stated that the residential uses are likely within 150 feet from the:property line of the,entire plaza. She also stated that the letters of opposition in question were likely form letters and that individuals may have just included their names on the form. She also stated that staff already identified that the subject property is within 150 feet from the property line. Lumbard Lumbard addressed the audience and asked if the authors of the opposition letters were present and that they would be given an opportunity to speak at the meeting. 7:13 p.m. Public Comments Opened. Mr. Ken Henderson, Red Hill Avenue resident, lives 390 feet from the subject property and his opposition to the project generally included: assumption that people would drink alcohol, noise from people and cars, as well as-loitering in parking lot of the plaza. Mr. Fred Cox, owner of the condominium property on, Red Hill Avenue (south of the plaza area), stated that the opposition forms were from him and that they were signed by his tenants. His main concem was the presumed increase in noise from the subject property. Mr. Doug Brown, principal designer/land use specialist, of the project, referred to staffs accurate findings with regards to the project and that the use would be compatible with the neighborhood. He also stated that there would be certain setbacks that the applicant would adhere to and there would be sound attenuation provided within the subject property. Mr. Brown referred to Mr. Henderson's comments on noise and alcohol. He stated that the subject property is not a nightclub. Mr. Brown also disagreed with Mr. Cox when he stated he lived close to the:subject property. He also referred to the two (2) other units separating the subject property from the property line. Ms. Huong Ngo, owner and resident of the Red Hill Avenue Plaza, opposed Minutes--Planning Commission September 13,2016—page 2 of 6 the project Her concern was that she considered it "adult entertainment' and because of the church and school are near the plaza. 7:25 p.m. Public Comments Closed, Thompson Thompson thanked members of the audience for their opinions on the item. He also referred to Condition 2.3 with regards to the restriction on alcohol use. Thompson read the modified Condition 2.5 to the audience with regards to sound attenuation addressing the comments made on the noise concern. He also explained the revocation process, should the applicant not comply with the conditions within the resolution. Kozak Kozak was concerned with the possibility of the sound. from the karaoke music studio affecting the nearby residential area. He met with staff and.the result of that meeting was the amended Condition 2.5. Smith Smith commended staff on a job well done with the Conditions of Approval as far as addressing the concerns previously stated by the opposed. members of the audience. He also reminded them that, if necessary, staff could review the CUP should any issues arise in the future. Lumbard Lumbard reiterated what his fellow commissioners stated. He stated that if he lived near the proposed. project, he would also be concerned with the noise of people singing, drinking in theparking lot, people loitering outside of the proposed project and being a nuisance to the neighbors. Lumbard also stated that staff has attempted and succeeded in restricting what can happen on the subject property and the plaza area.. He also understood those who were opposed and their concerns. Lumbard asked the applicant to come forward to state whether or not he will abide by the amended Condition 2.5. Danesh Mistry, representative for the applicant, stated that he and the applicant agree with Condition 2.5. Mason Mason thanked the audience members for their thoughtful comments. She also thanked staff for the detail they provided with the staff report. Motion: It was moved by Mason, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4315, as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Binsack Binsack stated, for the record, that the item is appealable and that the appeal period ends in ten (10) calendar days. 7:36 p.m. Public Hearing Closed. REGULAR BUSINESS: 3. WORKSHOP—HISTORIC PRESERVATION The purpose of this workshop is to highlight the Ciiy's programs to protect and revitalize historic structures, sites, and features within Tustin and to provide the Commission with an update on the status of the Ciiy's historic Minutes—Planning Commission September 13,2016--Page 3 of 6 preservation programs and the Commission's efforts to date. Many of these programs were implemented in conjunction with the City's recognition as a Certified Local Government in Historic Preservation. Reekstin Presentation given. Mason Mason commended Reekstin on his presentation. She also asked for clarification on the two (2) separate recognitions. Mason referred to a "tax break" or "incentive" if a person owns historic property and restores the property back to its original state and they match the specifications or if it is based on distinct buildings. Reekstin In response to Mason's quesfion, Reekstin referred to the Plaque Program and the Commendation Program and provided descriptions of each program. He also stated that the programs are only available to those who have historic buildings. Reekstin mentioned other programs that might benefit new buildings (i.e. parking incentive). Binsack Binsack stated the Mills Act Program is only available to historic residential properties and does not apply to commercial properties. The City s currently evaluating whether or not staff might make a recommendation to the Commission and City Council as to whether or not it should be applied to commercial properties as well. Smith Smith asked for the number of Certificates of Appropriateness issued in the last year. Reekstin/ In response to Smith's question, Reekstin stated that approximately ten (10) Binsack Certificates of Appropriateness were issued in the last year. Binsack stated that in this calendar year, approximately 30 Certificates of Appropriateness were issued. Thompson Thompson commended Reekstin on his presentation. He also asked if staff could put the Power Point presentation on the City's website. Binsack Binsack stated that people have a misconception that they cannot do anything to historic buildings, but they can. Under the Commission's Ieadership, the Residential Design Guidelines were set as well as establishing the City's first Commercial Design Guidelines. The purpose for the guidelines is to ensure that all new -development is compatible and complementary to the District and that if additions are going to be proposed, the additions must be compatible and complimentary. As an example, Binsack referred to the Jabberwocky as being one of the most significant projects with reference to the add-0n located at the rear of the Jabberwocky property. Kozak Kozak had favorable comments for Reekstin's presentation. Lumbard Lumbard had favorable comments for,Reekstin's presentation. Received and filed. Minutes—Planning Commission September 13,2016—Page 4 of 5 STAFF CONCERNS: Binsack Binsack informed the Commission of Samantha Bier's promotion to Associate Planner and introduced new employee Jessica Aguilar, Assistant Planner. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mason No concerns. Favorable comments for the Tustin train station. Kozak Kozak congratulated Beier and welcomed Aguilar. He attended the 9111 Remembrance at Fire Station #37. Kozak asked staff to contact Cal Trans and have them clean up the debris off of the landscaped areas between Red Hill Avenue and Tustin Ranch Road off of the 5 Freeway. Thompson Thompson attended the following events: • 9111 Remembrance Ceremony • 9113 Urban Land Institute Luke Thompson started at Northern Arizona University. Thompson will not attend currently scheduled Planning Commission meetings in October 2016 for coursework on real estate finance and management at a school back east and the ULI Annual Conference in Dallas, Texas. Smith No concerns. Lumbard Lumbard attended the following events: • 8125 Groundbreaking of the Village at Tustin Legacy Happy Belated Labor Day everybody! • 918 OC Tax Fair in Newport Beach • 9110 Thin Blue Line Supporters Group • 9/104 1h Annual Pasta Fest • 9111 Remembrance Ceremony ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, September 27, 2016. at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. Closed the meeting in memory of those lives lost and those affected by the 9/11 terrorist attacks. AUSTIN LUMBARD ✓ � � Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning Commission September 13, 2016--Page 5 of 5 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 7:02 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Given INVOCATIOWPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Lumbard ROLL CALL: Chair Lumbard Commissioners Mason, Kozak, Thompson EXCUSED ABSENCE: Smith Thompson Thompson introduced the Young Leaders Group associates from ULI in attendance. None. PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 September 13, 2016 Minutes, as RECOMMENDATION: amended. That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the September 13, 2016 Planning Commission meeting as provided. Motion: It was moved by Thompson, seconded by Mason, to approve the Minutes of the September 13, 2016 Planning Commission meeting, as amended. Motion carried 4-0-1. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: Adopted Reso. 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2016-01; ZONE CHANGE 2016- Nos. 4325, 001; SUBDIVISION 2016-03 1 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17993; 4326, 4328, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2016-002; AND DESIGN REVIEW 4327 2016-004 FOR A SUBDIVISION OF AN EXISTING 6.81 ACRE LOT FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TO CONSTRUCT 140 FOR- SALE RESIDENTIAL UNITS APPLICANT: Intracorp So Cal-1, LLC 4041 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 250 Newport Beach, CA 92660 PROPERTY OWNER: Van Buren Plaza, LLC PO Box 16562 Beverly Hills, CA 90209 Minutes--Planning commission September 27,2016—Page 1 of 13 LOCATION: 420 W. Sixth Street&320-694 S.'B Street ENVIRONMENTAL: A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) Article 6 of California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3. r REQUEST: 1. General Plan Amendment 2016-01: amend the General Plan Land Use designation from Industrial (1) to Planned Community Residential (PC Residential). 2. Zone Change 2016-001: change the zone from.Planned Industrial (PM)to Planned Community (P-C). 3. Subdivision 2016-03/Tentative Tract Map 17993: a subdivision of an existing 6.81 acre lot for condominium purposes to construct 1.40 for-sale residential units. 4. Development Agreement 2016-002: facilitate the development of the 6.81 acre site and accept public benefits. 5. Design Review 2016-004: site design and aesthe#ics of the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4325 recommending that the City Council find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is adequate for General Plan Amendment 2016-01, Zone Change 2016-001, Subdivision 2016-03/Tentative Tract Map 17993 for condominium purposes, Development Agreement 2016-002 and Design Review 2016-004 for the proposed project. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 4326 recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 2016-01 to change the property's General Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial (1)to Planned Community Residential (PC Residential). 3. Adopt Resolution No. 4328 recommending that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 1472 for Zone Change 2016-001 to change the zoning from Planned Industrial (PM) to Planned Community (P-C). 4. Adopt Resolution No. 4327 recommending that the City Council approve Subdivision 2016-031Tentative Tract Map 17993 and Minutes—Planning Commission September 27,2016—Page 2 of 13 Design Review 2016-004 to subdivide the existing parcel for condominium purposes to accommodate the construction of 140 for-sale residential dwelling units and adopt Development Agreement 2016-002 to facilitate the development of the 6,81 acre site and accept public benefits. Binsack Binsack reiterated to the Commission of the City's goals and plans for the Downtown area which generally included: this project is one of the more significant private investments in Old Town (with the exception of Ambrose Lane and Prospect Village) in decades; the City received various comments and input from residents and business owners wanting to promote development and businesses in the Old Town area; input was received from the Downtown Commercial Corridor Specific Plan Workshops, as well as the Tustin Center New Beginnings studies; the desire is to stimulate the Downtown area and to get more people into the Downtown area; various capital improvement grant projects; narrowing Main Street; establishing parklets on El Camino Real and Main Street; the provision of mixed-use;�and the City has worked with this applicant to ensure the compatibility with the historic development across the street as well as workforce housing. Thompson Thompson recused himself from Item #2 since he resides near the project area. Dove Presentation given. Dove informed the Commission of the list of names of telephone calls she received, for the record, as follows: Connie Chic, Grace Flores, Mark McCorder and an unknown caller. The callers expressed concern about parking, traffic, noise, pollution, crime and overall they were not in favor of the project. Several emails and letters were also received, which were provided to the Commission at the dais. 7:45 p.m. Public Comments Opened. Mr. Peter Lauener, applicant, provided a graphic presentation showing the highlights of the project The following individuals spoke in opposition during the Public Comments portion of the meeting: John Garay, Linda Jennings, Mark Wilken, Libby Pankey, R.J. Schwichtenberg, Madeleine Spencer, Stephen Jones, Nancy Shumar, Jackie Young, Pauline Chu-Collins, William Collins, and Jason Clarke. Concerns generally included the following: the legitimacy of the traffic Impact report; parking; proposed two (2) car garages being used for storage versus parking; lack of community outreach; design of development; public notices not received by all who opposed; B Street parkingltrafFc issue; traffic; businesses being displaced in thirty (30) days; re-zoning; historic building; storing cars on Main Street; health and safety (i.e. pollution, hazardous materials, lead-based paint); increase in occupancy; aesthetics; impacts to parking in the Old Town area; area will Minutes--:Planning Commission September 27,2016—Page 3 of 13 be deteriorated; suggested "nose4nn parking on B Street; increase in water usagetwater restrictions; tree removal; suggested there be a representative from Old Town on the Commission; increase in noise; development does not fit community; density too high; increase in crime; traffic impact onto Newport Avenue, Main Street and Sycamore Avenue; and proposed project design looks like Irvine. The following individuals spoke in favor during the Public Comments portion of the meeting: Sherri Gust, Lindburgh McPherson, and Tiffany Miller. Comments generally included: much needed development for Old Town; will bring more businesses and customers to Tustin; need more people to frequent Old Town; too many undeveloped and vacant parcels; if not supportive of development, more parcels will remain vacant for years; and tax payers should be able to park on public streets. Mr. Lauener's response. to the comments generally included the following: community outreach was provided to the Chamber of Commerce, local residents, the Historical Society and the Tustin Preservation Conservancy; with regards to the parking, ample parking will be provided in the project; the homeowner's association will enforce garage parking and may not be .used for storage; and the applicant is assisting the owner with tenant relocation. Konnie Dobreva, JD, EPD Solutions (environmental consultant) provided a response regarding the alleged potential hazards and historic buildings on site— Phase 1 and Phase 2 soil testing were conducted as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed site does not have any hazardous materials remaining. There are no issues with the transport of hazardous materials for this proposed project. There are no impacts to sensitive uses (i.e. residents, schools). A historical study was conducted and the buildings onsite are 45+ years old and historic records were checked (within 1A of a mile of the project site). There are no associated historic impacts. 8:32 p.m. Public Comments Closed. The Commission ,discussed the Commission's role, City CounciPs role, and the Commission's appointment by City Council. Kozak requested comments from staff with respect to parking, specifically the Main Street area and what impact the proposed project would have to Main Street parking and parking in the area. Saldivar Saldivar's response to Kozak's question with regards to parking generally included: Predominantly, parking impacts along Main Street has to do with multi-family units; does not anticipate any parking issue with the proposed project since there will be additional on-site parking; any provisions/CC&R's will enforce the parking and the use of the garages; Minutes—Planning commission September 27,2016—Page 4 of 13 Lumbard Lumbard addressed the major concem of parking and stated that the City Council is currently working on parking and traffic concerns to neighborhoods. Timing is an issue; however, this proposed project does not necessarily impact the traffic in the area. Mason Mason asked staff about speeding (speed bumps) and traffic in the area and who that question should be directed to. Binsack To answer Mason's question, Binsack stated that if the proposed project legally operates the way that it should, then there should not be a negative impact. What residents are experiencing is a code enforcement issue that is spilling over from mainly Tustin Acres, other multi-family developments, or single-family residences where there are non-permitted additional units that have overcrowding conditions which resulted in additional cars that cannot be accommodated onsite. Staff has been working with Tustin Acres to get the residents and guests to park onsite. The City (Public Works) would have to look at parking on more of a master plan perspective-on public streets and Community Development in private communities. The Police Department is already working on some of the issues on Pacific Street. Lumbard Lumbard stated that this project is part of an overall plan for the community (i.e. traffic and changing roadways) to get more residents into Old Town. There is a broader strategy. There were three (3) associated public workshops. This was a conclusion/solution from the City Council wanting to move forward with similar developments. Lumbard requested clarification on water needs for new development. Kozak Kozak stated that the Draft Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan designates this project area for residential housing. Mason Mason inquired about Old Town and the boundaries and commented on the project's aesthetics. She had favorable comments with the project's aesthetics. VVillkom Willkom stated that the Water Department did review the project and that there is available water to accommodate the project. With the Govemor's Executive Order related to water, the City has adopted a Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. All new developments are equipped with water efficient appliances and with water efficient appliances; there would be less water usage than in older homes. Art Valenzuela, Valenzuela provided a brief description of the Urban Water Management Water Services Plan (prepared every (5) years) and that the Water Department looks at Manager what the uses are,future growth (i.e. population Increase)which would be infill, and-the project is compatible with the urban water management to serve this development. Drought and water restrictions (Stage 2) - the proposed project will have less watering. The City is looking long-term with regards to the drought. Minutes—Planning Commission September 27,2016—Rage 5 of 13 The Commission further commented on the following in general: they agree with - the recommendations from stafP,, favorable comments regarding moving from an industrial to a residential development; bulb out is traffic calming; they encourage the project be built out expeditiously; staff should consider a traffic plan with the community; sound wall; community park; properties along 6tt and B Streets - suggested staff and the applicant work together with respect to some cosmetic additions to increase the architecture's interest; this first project is good for the overall plan of the area; suggested a communication plan with the neighborhood (i.e. traffic and parking) and communicate to the City Council; and the Commission would like a report back with regards to the communication. Motion: It was moved by Lumbard, seconded by Mason,to adopt Resolution Nos. 4325, 4326, 4328, and 4327, as amended. Motion carried 3-1-1. Binsack Binsack asked the Commission if it would be their desire to receive a summary of the concerns and recommended action as an additional item that the City Council study the matter, Recess Meeting to reconvene"at 9:17 p.m. Adopted Reso. 3. THE FLIGHT AT TUSTIN LEGACY: GENERAL PLAN Nos. 4320, CONFORMITY, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2016-001, 4321, 4322, CONCEPT PLAN 2016-001, DESIGN REVIEW 2016-001, 4323, 4323, as SUBDIVISION 2016-02 / VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP amended. 18003, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2016-01, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2096-02, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2016-15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2016-23, MINOR MODIFICATION (MM) 2016-01 AND MINOR MODIFICATION (MM) 2016-02 TO CONSTRUCT A PHASED COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE PROJECT .LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY THIRTY-EIGHT,(38) ACRE SITE WITHIN A PORTION OF PLANNING AREAS 9-12 OF THE MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (NEIGHBORHOOD E). THE PROJECT WILL BE A CREATIVE OFFICE USE CAMPUS WITH A RETAIL USE (FOOD HALL) AND CONFERENCE CENTER WITH A TOTAL OF 870,000 SQUARE FEET. PHASE 1 WILL CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY-390,440 SQUARE FEET AND CONTAIN TEN (10) SEPARATE BUILDINGS AND A PARKING GARAGE. PHASE 2 WILL CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY 479,560 SQUARE FEET AND CONSIST OF CONSIST OF EIGHT (8) SEPARATE BUILDINGS AND A PARKING GARAGE. APPLICANT: Flight Venture LLC Attn: Matt Howell 114 Pacifica, Suite 370 Irvine, CA 92618 PROPERTY OWNER: City of Tustin Minutes—Planning Commission September 27,2016—Page 6 or 13 LOCATION: NW Corner of Armstrong Avenue and Barranca Parkway ENVIRONMENTAL: On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEISIEIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 approving a Supplement to the FEISIEIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia North Loop Road, On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEISIEIR. And, on May 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a second Addendum to the FEISIEIR. The FEISIEIR, along with its Addenda and Supplement, is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEISIEIR, Addenda and Supplement considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. An Environmental Checklist has been prepared for the proposed project is consistent with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and is determined not to result in any new significant environmental impacts, substantial changes or a substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified significant impacts in the FEISIEIR and,addendum. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since certification of the FEISIEIR and addendum. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Planning Commission: a. Adopt Resolution No. 4320, determining that the location, purpose, and extent of the proposed disposition of an approximately thirty-eight (38) acre site within a portion of Planning Area 9-12, Neighborhood E of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan for the development of a commercial mixed use project is in conformance with the approved general plan. b. Adopt Resolution No. 4321 recommending that the City Council adopt Ordinance No, 1471 approving the Development Agreement 2016-001 to facilitate the development and conveyance of an approximate thirty-eight (38) acre site within the boundaries of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Development Agreement was intended to further the purpose and intent of the General Plan and Specific Plan, and FEISIFEIR and will ensure the orderly implementation of infrastructure and development. The Development Agreement includes a schedule of performance and obligations that ensure adequate local infrastructure Minutes—Planning commission September 27,2016--Page 7 of 13 programs are in place to support the proposed development. c. Adopt Resolution No. 4322 recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 18003 to subdivide an approximately thirty-eight (38) acre site into twenty-one (21) numbered lots for the development of an 870,000 square-foot commercial mixed-use project. d. Adopt Resolution 4323 recommending that the City Council approve Concept Plan 2016-001 for the development of an 870,000 square-foot phased commercial mixed-use project and ensure necessary linkages are provided between the development project, the Integrity of the specific plan and purpose and intent of the neighborhood is maintained, and applicable City requirements are identified and satisfied, Design Review 2016-001 for design and site layout of Phase 1, Conditional Use Permit 2016-02 for joint-use parking for Lots 1-10 of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 18003, Conditional Use Permit 2016-23 for mechanical equipment to exceed the maximum allowable building height, Minor Modification 2016- 01 for a ten (1,0) percent reduction in parking for Phase 1 and Minor Modification 2016-02 for a ten (10) percent increase in building height for Building Type A. e. Adopt Resolution No. 4324, recommending that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit 2016-01 for on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages and Conditional Use Permit 2016-15 for live entertainment in conjunction with the operation of the food hall for Building D Demkowlcz Presentation given. Thompson Thompson questioned the building height and asked if the buildings that are going to be higher than standard, for staff to comment on John Wayne Airport's (JWA) regulations/requirements. He also asked about the noise mitigation .study, relating to flight patterns and the noise that planes generate onto the buildings, and if that included the air traffic above the buildings as well as the attenuation standards as part of the building. Thompson also asked about Resolution No. 4323 and intersection improvements and the City of Irvine's input that they will continue to monitor collaboration. He inquired if there are off-site intersections improvements within the original CEQA documents that approved the Tustin Legacy or are we increasing "tum pockets". Thompson referred to Page 766 of the staff report — he asked if'the intersections are being exasperated or are they within the limits of the original CEQA document and how it would affect the neighborhoods. He also asked about the parking study and why it deviates from City standards. Thompson requested clarification on the. ten (10) percent reduction. He inquired about the standard Condition language that states the City can check periodically to ensure the applicant is being consistent Minutes—Planning Commission September 27,2018—Page 8 of 13 With operating with the Conditions of Approval. Thompson asked for additional clarity on how the massing and pedestrian flow on the project site relate to everything around it (i.e. greenbelt park area on the westleast side) and what is expected to occur on the other side of Armstrong and how it compares to the vertical massing on the south side of'Barranca. He referred to tying the District to the linkages. Willkom Willkom responded that the off-site intersection improvement with the Specific Plan was considered in the EIR/EIS. The.height standards within the vicinity are 180 feet and the request for a ten (10) percent increase will not penetrate the flight path for JWA. Demkowicz To answer Thompson's question on the noise mitigation study, Demkowicz confirmed that the study included vehicular and airport noise. Willkom In response to Thompson's question on the intersection improvements, Willkom stated that majority of street improvements are planned for the Specific Plan and certain-improvements are a result of the project design. In response to Thompson's question on the ten (10) percent reduction, she referred to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan which allows ten (10) percent deviation with respectto parking. The requested ten (10) percent reduction included the joint-use parking analysis and the Transportation Demand Management strategies: (i.e. carpooling, bike usage, pedestrian, between one planning area to another, etc.). To answer Thompson's question on the Metrolink service, the Conditions do not require the developer to provide shuttle service to the Metrolink Station. When staff looked at the project, they looked at the close proximity of the Metrolink to the project site. Willkom stated that there is opportunity for people to ride the train, walk through the.linear park that is proposed within the specific plan, or ride their bikes. The TDM requirements is a plan which will be reviewed by Public Works which will include a bus route, and other alternative transportation, along with carpooling and provision of shower facilities (encouraging bicyclists); along with several other provisions staff can take a look at. Willkom stated that the massing (development across Armstrong to the east) for Planning Area D will allow buildings as high as one-hundred-eighty(180) feet. With the relation to the City of Irvine to the south, there is a new hotel development approval bythe City of Irvine and it consists of a five (5) story building. On the west side of Red Hill Avenue, within the City of Santa Ana jurisdiction, adjacent to the Candlewood Sultes, the City of Santa Ana has approved a twelve- hundred (1,200) unit housing development and mixed-use and would also be a five (5) story building. Willkom stated that in comparison to the surroundings, the proposed project is well within the massing of the area. As per the linkages, the specific plan has a provision for a Concept Plan which would require the developer to demonstrate linkages to include pedestrian, bicycling within the project site and throughout the Specific Plan. As proposed, the applicant has demonstrated all of the linkages Thompson was asking about and she referred Thompson to a condition (Pedestrian Access easement to the linear park). Minutes—Planning Commission September 27,2016.:-Page 9 of 113 Saldivar Per Thompson's question there are three (3) access points to Armstrong Avenue and Barranca Parkway and as shown in the Specific Plan. Nothing additional. How many Ianes they should have or pocket sizing was not evaluated in the original environmental documentation. This is analyzed at the project level. The Specific Plan looked at the level of service and the intersection of Aston/Barranca Parkway was a minor intersection that was analyzed. Binsack Binsack referred Thompson to the exhibits previously presented by staff and the applicant and mentioned the proposed project being a creative offioe with high ceilings, which was why additional building.height was needed. In addition, the exhibits within the presentation showed linkages (Barranca Parkway and Armstrong I Linear Park)within the project site as well. The exhibits showed the pedestrian Iinkages and the bike path that currently exists on Barranca Parkway. Willkom VUillkom referred Thompson to the Specific Plan which includes the linkages concept and a bike path concept which shows connections throughout and within the Specific Plan. In the future when development is going to occur in Planning Area D (east of Armstrong), staff will ensure that the applicant implements what is envisioned within the Concept Plan for linkages. Lumbard Lumbard added that the Concept Plan for linkages would occur in Phase 2 of the project. He also suggested that when Phase 2 occurs, there needs to be a design review. Binsack Binsack's responses generally included: Planning Area D south development; still far off of significant development; requiring the linkages to the District would require legal findings and cannot associate that with the development being proposed; the reason a Concept Plan is required for each development proposal. Thompson Thompson suggested future collaboration on how the linkages would occur. Lumbard Lumbard questioned the amendments provided at the dais, specifically Resolution Nos. 4322 and 4324 (identical changes), Conditions 1.2 and 1.3 and making sure the projects move forward in a timely manner. He also asked why the"one year' review date was no longer required. Willkom In response to Lumbard's concern, Wilikom stated the following in general: the Condition related to timing of development is written to match the Development Agreement which the City has negotiated with the applicant and the longer timeframe is related to the conveyance of the property for the development. She also stated that there are some minimum horizontal improvements included within a certain timeframe along with several provisions to ensure#hat the project moves forward. Minutes—Planning Commission September27,2018—Page 10 of 13 Binsack Binsack also clarified the off-site and on-site improvements and circulation. An analysis of this project was completed, in relation to the original EISIEIR, the addendum and the supplemental documents, and the determination was not a significant departure from those original approvals and it is consistent with the EISIEIR as Iong as the project site improvements are made along with the development. 10:24 p.m. Opened Public Comments. Matt Howell (Lincoln Property Company) thanked the Commission for allowing him to present this project, as well as thanked staff for all of the work put into the project. He provided a brief background on Lincoln Property Company and their history of building mixed-use office buildings and campuses throughout the U.S. Mark Montonaga, partner of Rios Clementi Hale Studios, presented a graphic presentation of the proposed project. There were several renderings, including landscaping along Armstrong Avenue and Barranca Parkway,which will include drought tolerant plants. 10:27 p:m. Closed Public Comments. Thompson Thompson's comments generally included: the significant scale of the proposed project; the creative office space; he asked that staff consider amending the parking language in Resolution No. 4322 to include language that states the Community Development Department andlor the Director can revisit and reassess since it is a City project and therefore should exercise the same diligence that the City does when the development is not tied into City property; and future collaboration (i.e. pedestrian linkage, moving sidewalk, bike path, shuttle stops, etc.) to avoid people from getting into their cars once they have parked,. so that they can get to the District. Mason Mason agreed with the creative aspect of the design of the project, along with the businesses the project will attract. She made favorable comments regarding the thoughtfulness on the history of the community being incorporated into the project. Mason also concurred with Thompson regarding parking. She . suggested amending the recommendation regarding how the applicant would build paired parking 'into Phase 2. Kozak Kozak echoed comments previously made by his fellow Commissioners. He also had favorable comments on the modem architectural design and open office space of the project. Kozak also thanked the applicant for investing in the City of Tustin. Lumbard Lumbard thanked staff, the applicant, for incorporating Tustin's legacy and history(MCAS) into the design of the project. Lumbard reiterated the concerns with the parking and linkages and wanted to be sure the dialogue continues with staff and the applicant. Minutes—Planning Commission September 27.2016—Page 11 of 13 Binsack Binsack referred the Commission to Condition 1.8 (Page and 824) of their packets to show that the Conditions do allow the Community Development Department and/or Director to review the CUPS on an annual basis. As per the parking, staff can require the adjustment of hours of operation, provision of additional parking, and the engagement of parking attendants which is the standard condition staff includes on all Conditions,of Approval. Binsack also referred to the Concept Plan (Page 741) stating that there will be an additional design review for Phase 2 and staff will be working with a future developer for D South to assure the linkages, as well as bikeways are maintained and/or established. Adopted Reso. It was moved by Lumbard, seconded by Thompson to adopt Resolution Nos. 4320, Nos.4320, 43211 43221 4323, and 4324, as recommended,and amended 4329, 4322, and to also incorporate the Iast comments made'With regards to the 4323, and 4324, linkages language. Motion carried 4-0-1. as amended 10:27 p.m. Closed Public Hearing. None. REGULAR BUSINESS None. STAFF CONCERNS: COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mason None. Kozak Kozak thanked staff and the applicants for their hard work on both projects presented.' He presented the following: 9/21: JOCTA Riverside Transportation Commission Tour of the 91 Project 9/22: Planning Officials Forum at the Nixon Library Thompson Thompson attended the following events: 9/20: OCTA Advisory Committee Meeting on Bicycling/Pedestrian Activities 9/21: Cal State Long Beach -- Thompson provided a presentation on their Professional Development Series 9122: Planning Officials Forum at the Nixon Library Other seminars attended (recreational use and marijuana in neighboring cities). Lumbard 9/14: Tustin Chamber of Commerce Breakfast— Lumbard thanked staff for the many other projects happening throughout Tustin and their hard work, 9/24: ACC-OC trip hosted by the Metropolitan Water District to tour Bay Delta Minutes.—Planning Commission September 27,2010—Page 12 of 13 10:46 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, October 25, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the Councif Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. Closed In memory of Al Fnderle. AUSTIN LGM—BARD Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning Commission September 27,2016—Page 13 of 13 PIONEER RECOGNITION PROGRAM CITY OF TUSTIN AL t Tustin Pioneers ' ,. Recognition Program Program Guidelines 1. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND The City of Tustin Pioneers Recognition Program (Program) will provAe a process whereby sponsoring individuals and community organizations will be able to honor Tustin Pioneers by providing funding for bronze busts and plaques that will be placed on pedestals in public places throughout Tustin. II. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Pioneers Recognition Program is intended to reflect and communicate the City of Tustin's (City) values to honor its past, promote cultural and historical significance, and to recognize those who contributed to the Tustin community. The Program will create a more unique and livable city, reflect Old Town Tustin's sense of place, engage citizens and visitors, and enhance the built urban environment.These goals will be realized through the following objectives: • Maintaining high artistic standards in works displayed throughout the City. • Enhancing the Gay's image locally, regionally and nationally by ensuring the presentation of the highest quality bronze busts commemorating Tustin Pioneers and Notable Luminaries. • Building awareness of community history, culture and civic engagement. • Creating safe and accessible pioneer recognition spaces. • Encouraging creative collaborations between private and public sectors. 1111. PURPOSE The purpose of these Program Guidelines is to identify; 1) the list of eligible Tustin Pioneers; 2) the nomination, consultation, and selection process for the Tustin Pioneer; 3) funding sources; 4) the potential locations, 5) installation parameters; and, G) maintenance associated with establishing a City of Tustin recognition program to honor Tustin Pioneers. IV. ELIGIBILITY Sites: Eligible locations will be limited to City-owned properties, public rights-of-way, and private properties regularly frequented by the public. These locations may include parks, City of Tustin Tustin Pioneers Recognition Program parkways, sidewalks, locations adjacent to historic buildings and landmarks, shopping centers, and other prominent locations. When possible, recognition spaces should be sited at points of relevance or significance that correspond to the honored Tustin Pioneer. Tustin Pioneers commemorated by the installation of bronze busts and sited on City-owned property or the public right-of-way do not require an encroachment permit or license. If the location is privately owned (i.e. In a courtyard), the sponsoring individual or organization must submit written permission from the property owner to utilize the space. These sites may require an easement and maintenance agreement to allow City staff to oversee the installation and maintenance of the pedestal and bust. If the bronze bust is located within a building, it should be located in an area that is open and accessible to the public during normal business hours. Artist: The City Council, with recommendations from City staff, an ad-hoc review committee comprised of members of the Tustin Area Historical Society, Tustin Preservation Conservancy, Tustin Area Council for Fine Arts, Tustin Community Foundation (Partners in Parks), and the Planning Commission, will select a single artist/manufacturer for the bronze busts to ensure consistency of design and materials throughout the Tustin Pioneers recognition projects. Alternative materials for the bust may be evaluated and determined appropriate. V.CRITERIA With assistance from the ad-hoc review committee, City staff will establish the requirements for the recognition project, including minimum and maximum dimensions, allowable medium, mounting guidelines, etc. With regard to site placement guidelines, recognition projects should: • Not block windows, entranceways, obstruct pedestrian circulation in and out of a building or accessible paths (unless such alteration is specifically a part of the experience or design). • Not be placed on a given site if the landscaping and maintenance requirements of that site cannot be met. • Be sited so as to be either immediately visible or in a location where it will be visible by most people. • Be placed on a site where it is not overwhelmed by nor competing with the scale of the site or adjacent architecture, retail signage, etc. • Be placed on a site where it will enhance its surroundings or at least not detract from it by creating a "blind"spot. • Be sited where It will create a place of congregation or in a location that experiences high levels of pedestrian traffic and activity. • Be located in a site where it will effectively enhance and activate a pedestrian and streetscape experience. City of Tustin Tustin Pioneers Recognition Program VI. NOMINATION PROCESS Initial Submission Any Tustin resident, business owner or community organization will be able to nominate a Tustin Pioneer to be honored through the Program using a nomination form available from the City. The Program and a call for nominations will be advertised through the City website, press releases, direct mailings, and Tustin Today. Dominations may be submitted by those intending to provide the funding for the recognition project or by those seeking to partner with an individual or organization that has expressed an interest In providing the funding. The sponsoring individual or organization should provide the fallowing infnrmation to the City: • A written description of the proposed bust, Including title (name of the Tustin Pioneer) and specific reasons for the particular nomination. • Total budget, including a description of the sponsoring organization or other method of financing and the name, address, and phone number of the contact person. Ad-hoc Review& Approval Process The ad-hoc review committee and City staff will review the submittal package to determine whether the proposed recognition project Is in compliance with the Program guidelines and to provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission. In addition, The Community Services Commission will review all proposals within City parks or at the Senior Center and also provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will review each nomination and have final approval authority. Preference should be liven to initially recognize the founding pioneers of Tustin. Installation The City will oversee and inspect the installation of the pedestals and busts. Recognition projects will be installed by a City-selected contractor/manufacturer. The scale of busts should not exceed life size. bust pedestals should be properly proportioned. The recommended bust- to-pedestal ratio is 1:3. Calor, texture, materials matching, and combinations will be taken into consideration to achieve a refined overall appearance. Community Input The proposed bust should be developed with community input and comment so that any concerns or issues may be addressed. Project submittals will be announced through press releases,Tustin Today, and the City website. Projects pending Planning Commission review will Ibe agendized as a regular business item. Information on completed recognition projects will be provided on the Ci 's website. City of Tustin Tustin Pioneers Recognition Program VII. BUDGET Sponsoring individuals or organizations will be fully responsible for funding the design, fabrication, and Installation of the bust on the City-installed pedestal. The pedestal and its installation may be publicly or privately funded. The bust and the pedestal would be maintained by, and become property of, the City. The sponsor must provide a realistic budget that Is based on cost estimates provided by the artist/manufacturer, installer and/or contractor. The budget shall include a funding plan and project schedule. Construction or installation of recognition projects will not begin until all funding has been secured. In addition, funds will be held in trust by the City. VIII. RECOGNITION PLAQUE All Tustin Pioneers Recognition projects must include a bronze plaque that will feature a brief description of the honored pioneer(name, contribution, etc.), and acknowledge the sponsoring individual or group, and the City of Tustin. Such signage will conform to the following uniform plaque design standards set forth by the City: • Maximum size of 18" by 24" • Cast bronze material • Dark bronze background color • Single, even width, border Example of Plaque 1 Columbus Tustin 1821-1883 — ----Description and Contribution---------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------- -------- Donated by [sponsoring individual or organization) 1 City of Tustin Tustin Pioneers Recognition Program IX.QUESTIONS/CITY CONTACT Those interested In additional information or staff assistance should contact: City of Tustin Community Development Department 300Centennial Way Tustin,California 92780 (714)573-3016: Staff Is available to answer your questions during office hours between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m. Fridays. Attachment: List of Eligible Tustin Pioneers Tustin Pioneers Founding Pioneers: • Columbus Tustin (1825-1883) o Came to the area in 1868 with W.O.Stafford where these partners purchased 1,359 acres of ,Rancho de Santiago de Santa Ana on which to establish the City of Tustin. In 1870,Tustin moved his family and started selling lots.Tustin married Mary Cleveland and had five children. He later served as Postmaster when the post office was granted on October 28, 1872. o Location:TBD->.Possible location: 15t post office(in the Nathan T. Harris house), later within Tustin building (1875)on the south side of MainStreet,east of C Street. Nelson O.Stafford (1828-1878) o Born in Burlington,Vermont In 1828,Stafford made his way to California by covered wagon in 1849. He and his wife, Mary,Pearl,settled in Petaluma where Nelson entered the carriage-making and blacksmith business.While Stafford did not participate in the founding of Tustin City, he did serve as Columbus Tustin's real estate partner for the sizeable land purchase. o Location:TBD • Charles Edward Utt(1866-1950) o. C. E. Utt married Mary Sheldon, had five children,and owned Tustin Water Works. Utt established one of the City's earliest industries,the Utt Juice Company, alongside Sherman Stevens and the Irvine Ranch, and served as one of Tustin's major developers. He established the San Joaquin Fruit Company(current site of Prospect Village),served as President at the First National Bank,and helped organize the Tustin Union High School District. a Location:Prospect Village along Main Street • David Hewes(1822-1915) o Came to Tustin in 1881 from San Francisco and Is.renowned as the man who conceived the ceremony and donated the golden spike used to complete the first transcontinental railroad In 1869. He built a large home at 350 B Street and owned a large ranch in North Tustin and EI Madera. o Location:Hewes House,350 B Street • Sherman Stevens o Built a classic Victorian home in 1887 for his wife, Martha Snow,daughter of Horace Snow. Stevens was a rancher and helped develop a 900 acre tract of Lemon Heights with Ed Utt, and later established the San Joaquin Fruit Co.alongside Utt and Irvine.Sherman Stevens traveled widely and returned with plants,birds and artifacts from around the world. His residence originally included a large aviary of exotic birds. a Location:Stevens House,228 West:Main Street All Other Pioneers: + Byron Crawford o Bryan Crawford came to Tustin in 1888 and was manager of the Tustin Hills Citrus Association.Crawford became the first mayor of Tustin,elected In 1927. o Location:City Hall,300 Centennial OR Knights of Pythias Building(First City Hall was located In one of thereat stores). • John L.Stanton o Standing at.5'5",Stanton gave an oral application.to become the chief of police on December S, 1927. Based upon his recommendations from Huntington Beach,the council hired him an the spot to become Tustin's first policeman. Known bythe community as"Big John", he held the position until 1942. o Location:Police Station, 300 Centennial • John"Zeke"Zellian o ' Hired to preside over the Tustin-School'District in 1889,Zeilian saw the need for adequate space for this 2-story school house. Following a remodel,the schoolhouse held 4 classrooms on each floor in addition toz library. His-students later organized as"Zeke's Bunch" and held annual pi cnic,reunions In the 1950's at Irvine.Park. b Location:Tustin Unified School District Administrative Building, 300 C'Street near the bell (the only remaining artifact from the original school house built in 1882). • J.H.and Sarah Brown o Lived at 540 W.Third Street.They were active in Tustin's firstochurch,Advent Christian Church.Advent Christian Church was organized in the home of Caroline.Dawns in 1881. o Location:540 W.Third Street(Chandler House) e Porter G. Luther o Father,James E. Luther came to Tustin in:1874.Porter Luther had a ranch at Yorba and Santa Clara Avenue and married Mary McClintock. o Location.TBD • George Dawns o Served as Postmaster from 1894-98 o Location:TBD • Samuel Preble(1826-1897) o Sam Preble came to Tustin in the mid-1870s with his brother,James D. Preble, and his nephew, George Preble. He established his ranch on Prospect,north of First Street. o Location:TBD s George Preble o; George Preble was bom in 1849 and carne to Tustin'in 1876 to build a home for his uncle. He later bought 10 acres of land and set it out to fruit.George Preble's house was located where Jamestown Village is today. o Location:Jamestown Village Dr.James patten Boyd o Dr. Boyd came to Orange County in 1888 and practiced medicine in both Santa Ana and Tustin. He used Dr. Sheldon's bull-ding to see patients, more recently occupied by a dress shop known as."The Jabberwocky",and he later opened an office In the back of the.old bank building. o Location:The.Jabberwocky,434 EI Camino Real OR old bank building • Dr.James Sheldon o Tustin's first physician and the father of Mrs. C.Ei. Utt (Wmle). Sheldon came to Tustin in the 1880s,built his..office,and then practiced medicine until 1894. He and his wife, Calista, lived on D Street(now EI Camino Real), next door to where Mamie and Ed Utt would later live(now El Camino Real and Main Street). o Location:The Jabberwocky,434 El Camino Real OR EI Camino Real near Main • James S. Rice o James Rice, brother of Mrs.James Irvine,came to Tustin in 1876 from Cleveland and purchased 40 acres of land that he dater sold..He then purchased 50 acres.on the north side of E. First Street, between Prospect,and Holt where he built a home-for him and his wife Coralinn to entertain.At one time,he planned to sell land off in town lots and created a map.giving names to the planned streets..Rice and his wife were prominent in business, ranching,and social circles. o Location:North side of E. V Street,between Prospect and Holt • Charles Wilcox a Wilcox came:to Tustin with his'wife,Sarah,in 1873 and located his home at 310.5. Pasadena Street.Wilcox was the founder of the First National Bank and one of the fiat to plant oranges in the area.Wilcox was an orchardist and served as President ofthe.Santa Ana Valley Fruit Company. o Location:.Wilcox Manor,310 S. Pasadena • John Dunstan o Born in England In 1865, Dustan moved to Tustin In 1875 with his father,James. Upon settling in the area,he became a rancher and the first Vice-president of the First National Bank. Dunstan also served as the Director and President of Santa Ana Valley Irrigation (SAVI). a Location:TBD James Dunstan o James Dunstan ranched SO acres of apricots and oranges on the north side of Seventeenth "Street at Vorba Street. Born,in:England, Dustan moved to Tustin in 1875 with his son,John, who became a rancher. o Location:TBD • Samuel E.Tingley o Tingley was a lumberman,and came to Tustin in 1910 where he established the Tustin Lumber Company on E.'Main Street near the'Southern Pacific Railroad Depot on Newport Avenue. o Location:TBD • Dilmer Alderman a Alderman came to Tustin in 1878 with his wife,Ida,and two children. a Location:TBD • William and Ella Bowman o Location:TBD • Ed Pankey o Location:TBD • James.McFadden o Location:TBD • Horado Augustus Allen o Location:TBD Art Bronze,Inc. c 299 S. Lake Street PRT Estimate Burbank,CA 91502 USA - T61: 13113.841.7979 Fax:818.955:9690 a: - ■ Emall:[nfo@aftmrize.com �R Nt 11142014 799 Tustin Area Historical Bodrety Customer Pick-up Undburgh McPherson P.O.Box 185 Tustin,CA 027Bi w ■ w a■ i Oate 5096 order,balance ship. IK Burbank 3 moths " . moo' ■ ' �. 1 1003A Artist sculpting Wilt Henn lY:x tltesiz is 4,000.00 4,000.00 Head and shoulders bust 1 1100 Mold:Columbus Tustin bust 2,000.00 2,000.00 1 1016 Casting:Columbus Tustin bust 1'h x rdbike 3,500.00 3,500.00 1 1016 Casting:bronze plaque-free 0.00 0.00 Hots: Ourestimales are wd4edtadrenge based upon physlcsiinepestron of original ertywit Subtotai $9,500.00 and other project ieatedsk Sales Tari(9.096) $855.DD Estimate Approved W. Total $10,355.6D .