The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01 APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION 04-03-07 AGENDA REPORT Agenda Item Reviewed: City Manager Finance Director N/A 1 ....-,/ MEETING DATE: APRil 3,2007 TO: WilliAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO AllOW FIBERCEMENT SIDING SUMMARY On March 6, 2007, the City Council appealed the Planning Commission's decision to allow the use of fibercement siding on a detached two car garage with second story game room currently under construction on a property improved with an "A"-rated dwelling in the Cultural Resource Overlay District located at 200 South "A" Street. The project was originally proposed by the owner and approved by the Zoning Administrator with redwood siding. The Community Development Director denied the owner's subsequent request to use fibercement siding instead of redwood siding. The owner appealed the decision to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission overturned the Community Development Director's decision by approving the use of the fibercement siding. (Owner: Michelle Young) RECOMMENDATION: The City Council may take the following actions: . Take no action; thereby, leaving the Planning Commission decision to stand; . Deny the use of fibercement siding use on the building and request that staff return with a City Council resolution reversing the Planning Commission's decision; or, . Remand the matter back to the Planning Commission for further discussion and ,investigation of alternative siding materials. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impacts are anticipated for any action the City Council wishes to take. 200 South "A" Street Appeal of Planning Commission Decision April 3, 2007 BACKGROUND: The site is located at 200 South "A" Street and is surrounded by a single family residential neighborhood (Attachment A - Location Map). The property maintains a general plan designation of low density residential and a zoning district designation of single family residential (R-1) in the Cultural Resource Overlay district. The property is improved with a Colonial Revival dwelling constructed in 1907 that is identified as an "A"-rated structure in the City of Tustin Historical Survey (Attachment B - Property Survey). Structures listed on the Historical Survey are given ratings of "A" through "D" with "A" rated structures being the most important in regard to biographical, historical, or architectural significance. The existing dwelling is described by the Historical Survey as the finest Colonial Revival home in Tustin based on very few modifications, original architectural details, quality of materials used, excellent preserved condition, and association with William Shatto, a carpenter who helped build many Tustin buildings. The Historical survey states that the structure may be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. On May 9, 2005, the Zoning Administrator approved Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 for the construction of a 1 ,328 square foot accessory building that includes a 764 square foot two-car garage below and a 564 square foot second story consisting of a game room, two walk-in closets, and a bathroom (Attachment C - Zoning Administrator Action and Project Plans). The approved plans proposed the use of redwood siding on the garage and game room structure to match the existing dwelling (Attachment D - Proposed Siding). On May 10, 2006, a building permit was issued for the project and substantial construction was underway. In September 2006, the owner requested the use of fibercement siding instead of the approved redwood siding (Attachment E - Correspondence). In letters dated September 15, 2006, and January 17, 2007, the Community Development Director denied the request for the use of fibercement siding and confirmed the previous decision allowing the use of redwood siding. On January 23, 2007, Ms. Young filed an appeal of the Director's decision with supplemental synthetic siding product information (Attachment F - Supplemental synthetic siding product information). At the February 12, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission indicated that they would support the appeal and use of the alternate fibercement siding and voted unanimously (3-0) to continue the item to the February 26, 2007, meeting so that staff could present a resolution with findings to reverse the Director's decision and allow the fibercement siding (Attachment G - Staff Report and proposed resolution). At the February 26, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously (5-0) to approve Resolution No. 4051 reversing the Director's decision and allowing the fibercement siding on the detached garage structure (Attachment H - Staff Report, Resolution No. 4051, and Meeting Minutes). On March 6, 2007, the City Council appealed the Planning Commission's decision. 200 South "A" Street Appeal of Planning Commission Decision April 3, 2007 DISCUSSION: The Community Development Director denied the use of the fibercement siding for the following reasons: . The Residential Design Guidelines for projects located in the CR District indicate that new accessory structures should be compatible with the style, quality, dimension, texture, and color of materials used on an existing historic building to the greatest extent possible (Attachment J - Excerpts From Residential Design Guidelines). The section emphasizes the importance of matching the wood siding used on historic buildings. The existing historic home is improved with redwood siding and many of Tustin's architecturally significant houses are clad in wood siding; . Wood-sided houses help define the historic character of the District; . The project is conditioned to match the existing home; . The Design Guidelines require the project to implement character-defining features such as the home, including narrow clapboard siding; . The Guidelines specifically provide several examples of non-wood siding that should be discouraged, including materials that may be similar to fibercement; . The fibercement board dimensions and style would not maintain the beveled or rounded edge characteristics or gradation in width typical of the wood siding used on the residence; . If fibercement siding were allowed, several properties could be subject to inconsistent development with wood, fibercement siding or other materials which could affect the character and may damage the integrity of the District or resources therein; At the February 12, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission considered the owner's appeal correspondence and reviewed an alternate fibercement siding material brought to the meeting (Attachment I - Owner's Appeal Correspondence). The ~Ianning Commission indicated that they would support the appeal and use of the alternate fibercement siding, due to the unique circumstances of the project, because: . The fibercement siding is proposed to be used on an ancillary building and does not need to attempt to incorporate the level of detail and decoration as the existing historical structure; . The proposed alternate fibercement material, to the greatest extent possible meets the spirit and intent of the design review criteria, would be comparable with the style, quality, dimensions, texture, color, and materials of the existing home; . The alternate fibercement siding would not be used on an existing structure listed on the historical survey, would not be associated with an addition to a structure listed on the historical survey, would be installed on a new detached garage setback 67 feet from the public right-of-way which would not be distinguishable from wood siding to the untrained eye; and, . The architecture of the detached garage has been determined to be complementary of 200 South "A" Street Appeal of Planning Commission Decision April 3, 2007 the existing Colonial Revival dwelling on the site as intended in the Design Guidelines and is compatible with structures in the Cultural Resource District. The Planning Commission clarified that fibercement siding may not be acceptable for all structures in the Cultural Resource District and/or properties improved with structures designated on the Historic Resource Survey. The City Council may take the following actions: . Take no action; thereby, leaving the Planning Commission decision to stand; . Deny the use of fibercement siding use on the building and request that staff return with a City Council resolution reversing the Planning Commission's decision; or, . Remand the matter back to the Planning Commission for further discussion and investigation of alternative siding materials. Based on the City Council decision, staff may need to return to the council with a formal resolution. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS If the decision is upheld, the action is statutorily exempt pursuant to section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA does not apply to rejected projects). If the decision is reversed, the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3 - construction of accessory structures, including their respective building materials). n b~~ Ortlie Associate Planner a~~~ Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director 200 South "A" Street Appeal of Planning Commission Decision April 3, 2007 Attachments: A. Location Map B. Property Survey C. Zoning Administrator Action and Project Plans D. Proposed siding E. Correspondence F. Supplemental synthetic siding product information G. February 12, 2007, Planning Commission Staff Report and proposed resolution H. February 26, 2007, Planning Commission Staff Report, Resolution No. 4051, and Meeting Minutes I. Owner's Appeal Correspondence J. Excerpts From Residential Design Guidelines S:\Cdd\CCREPORT\Appeal Siding PC Decision 4-3-07.doc ATTACHMENT A LOCATION MAP IT1 I,~ LOCATION MAP ~'':1F~~,'~l ~l~ ~~'~I' ~~~',~~':J '~~7' J Y4~tPt,lJ. 'mu~~i~Pm~l-T{~~~~~ ~JL :( l Il~ 1'~ljJ ~ ~1 ;J:C1;t'"' ,; .a~~~~~ ~'Lf,; .f i , A~ IIJJI f1 $.~I'" . " ~~ ., J. -;/ ( ~ (~~ .1h';li ,~I.ITI1!!!F"~1J~.'0: ~4'k. ~ -~7' '. /,:~ >, , ~ l I. j.,,,.. t::::i ~ Y, (. ~ I. 1 "..') ( -~~ ;: n.. ~If ~I < ~ lU '3r.. ,!~dZw I ,~ .. ~ )1 lItE =~:. . ~;~~Y.it ~,~ -A., ~~..; ','~l' (1;~ ~.. , I~ ~~~'~1' r ~ J)fg' '._..:~, ;~ I JJ ' 0 [- W~~~~ ). ~~ I ( .; I't:....._~. '-.;1 ~ 1. J' - .~;..u- 1..;n::;~"'Krrl-m::~ti-~;w~. ~ , JI.u~ -1., { , .., :ctL.a.. I .Lt:;. ,r."'_ ~ . \Y:"'~ ~ > 'I ~~~~. ~~. I ] '\..: I ,.' -: ,~,. ~,"""))(~ A~ I;~.. ~ I,~. )~~' I ,~ ~ ~~'" ~ ~ - ~:,@),*,'" , " -; / ~~, ~ ~ ,"..... ~ [I. r !~ ,IJ, :. v, ~ti~ $1~()~ r.-- ~\: ,~ " ~ ~ . I - "'7~. ~, ~~ .r~.a \~~'9C .~S>~ \ ;~-= 11 .'~ '1'" ~ ~ l&J1// \ _~ -, A ~ . r~ _~,l.J ~ ~i..J~ . , y/ in'~ ~ "'~'; ~ ~~. \ J iii Ilao.. ~ ,~/' ~' ~~ ~~ ~. ~ --- ~ ,-~ ". \~ .~ ,~, ~.I.: _'" ..... ~ ~.". ...-I; . /. -..: ~', ! . f:~~blcld '/ (~~~~\, I~"~" ~, . , . )\lli~.~ ',.z., ./..".,~~ .. J~~ #~ ~ . ~~ -~;;,~..' . /,i > ..'~~~'~ '~ /~ . .'~7'~ ~ ~n. /', ",. ~~, '~~IJ ". r'~k W~ .~, ,^ --R ~~ .~ ~ ?,., /1 ;..';jI> "1:!!! ,~ '.. 4 I // JiJ.1 < ,(/7.>' . :' ~ j : 'l" ff1-"'Ill ~.;. ,...~.,. /~ 4 ~ ".d~~ ~~~ ...~ .' ~~ J ~ r~ . . .. ~ ~ ~. '\ '. J ~'.~ -..Jl ~ FIRST STREET / // // 10 - 30 I;i ~Q... i! 45 (It ~50 u '54 ~ - ~: 60 ... - - ; ';fQ ;w- OO ~ - ; - ,.,. .'10.. :.. ,W (~ .~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ;.;3-- ~ if -~.: !i I ~ r~ L.. 120 125 ~~ 120 111, /' 130 135 135A ~O g ~ ~ .. "...... 140 145 1~ / n'tAl ~ 150 "- 150 \ PEPPER '~1 ~ ru:,~::~ ::: ::: '\\. ::: \ PARK " 1:1 ~ II'! ; ~; ~ ~ 180 ~ ~. , SECONO S1REET .3 00' ~, 5/)D I 05 : ~ ~ ~ !J : ~ ;~ V / / J;i - t1t- _' 200 ~ ~oC: ci _ rL / 14: _ ~ 210 ... 220 ~ 225 J 220 ~ ' ~~ J230~~ 230. 245 240. t STIN UJ ~ ~, 250 HOOL DI: ./ ADMIN1STR "" / BUILDIN ____~ 0 co 0 "''''.. ~ ~ ~ N 302 S 320 31S .... ~ ~ -~" 350 -- ;0 - .10 - 30 - 10 - )0 - III III ", ('of lO III \ ~~ ~ a 'lAD SlREET S ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~--..o II) ~ ~ an II') II') ~ ~ :: .... ..- " ~ ".j 330 ."... la................ ~ ~ III III tn l/) ,.. ~ ~ ~ ~ \I) 111 II) \I) r'f 10 TITTl MAIN STREET loeA TION: 200 S. A Street If REQUEST: An appeal of the Community Development Director's decision to disallow the use of Certainteed Weatherboards™ Fibercement Siding on a detached two (2) car garage with second story game room that is currently under construction on a property improved with an A-rated dwelling in the Cultural Resource Overlay District. The project was approved with redwood siding by Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 o ~ N TUSTlI PRESBYTE CHURC II) "" .., ( ~ r--f ATTACHMENT B PROPERTY HISTORICAL SURVEY CITY OlF TUSTiN lHIHSTOIRJICAlL. SURVEY SOURCE: E RA TING: A ,. . p,' ~ ') ~ ~; ADDRESS: 200 A ST (S.) DATE: 1907 STYLE: COI.DNIAL REVIVAL ALTERATIONS: F HISTORICAL DISTRICT: 1'0 COMMENT: DESCRIPTION: A bellcast hipped roof, ringed with carved exposed beam ends and centered with a gabled dormer, caps this two-story Colonial Revival home. The gabled dormer, with carved barge boards is decorated with slant-cut wooden shingles and a multi-paned window. The single-storied offset front porch features a shed-style roof with a bellcast pedimented gable over the main entrance. Slant-cut wooden shingles and a delicate tracery of cutwork accent the gable. Narrow clapboard siding covers the exterior which is divided between floors by a flared beltcourse and plain frieze. Pairs of round classical columns, resting on solid clapboard-clad railings, support the Porch roof. Sidelights flank the natural wood front door, accented with a large pane of glass. A plate glass window with a multi-paned transom above and narrow double-hung windows on each side occupies the area to the north of the porch. A large double-hung window looks out onto the porch. A pair of multi-paned casement windows, which appear to have I replaced a pair of double-hung windows were probably added in the 1920's. On the north side is a high horizontal window, a door in the foundation, and a double-hung window placed half-way between floors. This would indicate the location of the interior stair landing and basement access. Double-hung windows are used throughout the rest of the house and a slanted bay window embellishes the fmt floor of the south facade. A single-storied enclosed. porch on the back matches the rest of the house and is reached by a short stairway sheltered by an added portico supported by chamfered posts and tmned balusters. The high foundation is now covered with used brick and a used brick planter has been added in the front A hedge of pink: old-fashioned roses and a large lawn surround the house. This is one of the frnest Colonial Revival homes in Tustin. SIGNIFICANCE: William Lynch Shatto, who came to Tustin around 1879, built this house for his second wife, but large enough to provide for boarders. Shatto was a carpenter and helped to build many Tustin buildings. including the First Advent Christian Church, of which he was a charter member. Martha Shatto, widow of Joseph Martin, was Shatto's third wife. She lived in the house until 1959. Because this house is probably the Imest Colonial Revival home in Tustin and is significant for its association with William Shatto, it appears to be eligible for the National Register. ATTACHMENT C ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION AND PROJECT PLANS ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION 05-007 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-022 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-020 The Zoning Administrator of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Zoning Administrator finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 was filed by Michele C. Young to construct a 1 ,328 square foot accessory building with a 764 square foot two-car garage, and a 564 square foot second story including a game room, two (2) walk-in closets, and a bathroom at 200 S. A Street. B. The proposed project is consistent with the policies of the General Plan land use designation "Low Density Residential" which provides for the development of single-family residences and accessory structures. In addition, the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub-element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub- element. In addition, the property is zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1) in which accessory buildings used as guest rooms, when no cooking facilities are maintained, are permitted with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Design Review is required for construction of new structures, which includes review of the site plan and elevations. The Community Development Director has deferred consideration of the Design Review application to the Zoning Administrator for concurrent review with the Cond.itional Use Permit application. c. That a public hearing was duly.called, noticed, and held on said application on May 9,2005, by the Zoning Administrator. D. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, as evidenced by the following findings: 1) The use and design of the proposed accessory structure, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to surrounding properties in that the proposed structure will comply with all applicable development standards of the R-1 zoning district; and, 2) The use, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to surrounding residents or properties since the use \,vould be limited to a garage, laundry room, and guest rooms which are accessory to a single-family residence and will be used by the residents in conjunction with the main residence. The property O"'Jner would not be able to lease or rent the accessory guest rooms without first complying with Tustin Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 May 9, 2005 Page 2 City Code Section 9223a(7) for a second single-family structure, including providing two (2) additional garage spaces. E. That pursuant to Section 9272(c) of the Tustin City Code, the Zoning Administrator finds that, as conditioned, the location, size, architectural features, and general appearance of the proposed structure will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole in that the design of the accessory building ensures that it will be accessory to the main residence by appearing to be a garage structure. The first floor would be set seven (7) feet behind the house, the second story set back an additional twelve (12) feet, and the overall height would be six (6) feet lower than the house. The placement of the building is consistent with the predominant land use pattern in the area of single-family residences with detached garages. In addition, the design of the accessory building will be consistent with the features of the Colonial Revival style architecture of the existing main residence by matching the materials and colors, roof pitch, wood siding, and gabled dormers on the second floor with slant-cut wooden shingles and multi-paned windows. In making such findings, the Zoning Administrator has considered at least the following items: 1. Height, bulk, and area of buildings; 2. Setbacks and site planning; 3. Exterior materials and colors; 4. Type and pitch of roofs; 5. Size and spacing of windows, doors, and other openings; 6. Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennae; 7. Location, height, and standards of exterior illumination; 8. Landscaping, parking area design, and traffic circulation; 9. Location and appearance of equipment located outside an enclosed structure; 10. Location and method of refuse storage; 11. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood; 12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares; ~i 3. Proposed signage; and, 14. Development guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 May 9, 2005 Page 3 F. This project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3, Title 14, Chapter 3, of the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act). II. The Zoning Administrator hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 authorizing the construct a 1,328 square foot accessory building with a 764 square foot two-car garage, and a 564 square foot second story including a game room, two (2) walk-in closets, and a bathroom at 200 S. A Street, subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A and the Certificate of Appropriateness in Exhibit B attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Zoning Administrator held on the 9th day of May, 2005. /' ~ L0_~ ELOISE HARRIS RECORDING SECRETARY b~ P1-~ DANA OGDON ACTING ZONING ADMINISTRATOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELOISE HARRIS, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Zoning Administrator of the City of Tustin, California; that Zoning Administrator Action No. 05-007 passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Zoning Administrator, held on the 9th day of May, 2005. // I ltrl~d4~~ ELOISE HARRIS Recording Secretary EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-022 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-020 MAY 9,2005 GENERAL (1 ) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped May 9, 2005, on file with the Community Development Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are to be consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code and other applicable codes. (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with as specified or prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. . (1) 1.3 The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway within twelv~ (12) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. (1) 1.4 Approval of Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 is contingent upon the applicant returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" ,form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. (1 ) 1.5 As a condition of approval of Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, ~gents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third-party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Zoning Administrator, or a~y other decision-making body, "including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (2) CEQA MITIGATION (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODElS (7) (4) DESIGN REVIEW (5) (6) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES PC/CC POLICY EXCEPTION *** Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 May 9, 2005 Page 2 (1) . 1.6 Any violation of any of the conditions imposed is subject to the payment of a civil penalty of $100.00 for each violation, or such other amounts as the City Council may establish by ordinance or resolution, and for each day the violation exists, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council by ordinance. (1 ) 1.7 The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with any necessary code enforcement action, including attorneys fees, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council by ordinance. ' (*) 1.8 Prior to issuance of any permit, a Parcel Merger shall be processed and approved in accordance with the City of Tustin Subdivision Ordinance to combine Lots 5 and 6 of Mrs. D.A. lewis' addition to Tustin, as shown on a Map, recorded in Book 4, Pages 218 and 219 of Miscellaneous Records of Los Angeles, California. Pursuant to TCC Section 9223a, an accessory use cannot be constructed on a separate subdivided lot independent of a single family home in the Single Family Residential District (R-1) zone. Without merging Lots 5 and 6, the garage and guestroom would be constructed on Lot 5, which is legally a separate lot from Lot 6. BUILDING DIVISION (C) 2.1 At the time of building permit application, the plans shall comply with the most recently adopted codes. The City is currently using the 2001 California Building Code (CBC), 2001 California Mechanical Code (CMC), 2001 California Plumbing Code (CPC), 2001 California Electrical Code (CEC), California Title 24 Accessibility Regulations, City Ordinances, and State and Federal laws and regulations. (C) 2.2 Building plan check submittal shall include the following: · Four (4) sets of construction plans, including drawings for mechanical, plumbing, and electrical. · Two (2) copies of structural calculations. · Two (2) copies of Title 24 energy calculations. e.t Elevations that include all proposed dimensions, materials, colors, finishes, and partial outlines of adjacent buildings on-site and off-site where applicable. · Details for the proposed windows and doors. · Roofing material shall be fire rated class "8" or better. " Note on plans that no field changes shall be made without prior approval from the Building Official and architect or engineer of record. (C) 2.3 Water heaters shall not be installed in a closet or other confined space. opening into a bedroom. Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 May 9, 2005 Page 3 (C) 2.4 Escape and rescue windows shall be provided in all sleeping rooms per the 2001 California Building Code (Section 310.4). (C) 2.5 Dwelling units shall be provided with heating facilities capable of maintaining a temperature of 70 degrees at a point three (3) feet above the floor in all habitable rooms per the 2001 California Building Code (Section 310.11). (C) 2.6 All new glass doors and windows, in or adjacent to doors, shall be tempered per 2001 California Building Code Section 2406.4. (C) 2.7 Drainage, vegetation, driveway, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks shall comply with the on-site private improvement standards pursuant to the Construction Standards for Private Streets, Storm Drain and On-Site Private Improvements. (C) 2.8 No outdoor storage shall be permitted except as approved by the Tustin Community Development Director. (C) 2.9 Architectural treatments, exterior colors and finishes of the proposed addition including exterior stucco and siding, doors/windows, and wood trim shall match the existing house, including the wood siding, roof pitch, orientation and material, and the window shape and style. Specifications at building plan check submittal shall reflect material and color call-outs on all elevations with applicable details and notes added. The accessory structure shall maintain the same color scheme as the main residence unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director. ENGINEERING (C) 3.1 Any damage done to existing street improvements and utilities shall be repaired before issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. (C) 3.2 Prior to any \;vork in the public right-at-way, an Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from, and applicable fees paid to, the Public Works Department. USE RESTRICTIONS *.k* 4.1 Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9297, the minimum interior garage space dimensions shall be not less than ten (10) feet in width by twenty (20) feet in depth, clear and unobstructed for each space. All garage spaces on the site shall be used for the parking of vehicles owned, operated, or maintained by residents of the property. *'1(* 4.2 Existing at the subject property is a single-family residence. This residence is within the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zoning district where single-family residences are permitted. Use of any portions of the accessory building with guest rooms as a second unit or boarding house is 'It Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 May 9, 2005 Page 4 not permitted without prior approval of the City. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the property owner shall execute and record a deed restriction in a form acceptable to the Community Development Department and City Attorney to ensure that no parts of the residence are used or leased as a second unit. This deed restriction will need to be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder and shall be binding upon all future owners or interested parties of the subject property. FEES (C) 5.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all applicable fees, including but not limited to, the following. Payment shall be required based upon those rates in effect at the time of payment and are subject to change. a. Building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based on the most current schedule. b. Payment of the Orange County Sanitation District No. 7 Sewer Connection Fees will be required at the time a building permit is issued. With credit for the existing four (4) bedroom single family unit, the current fee due is $580.00. c. Payment of the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fees to the Tustin Public Works Department is required at the time a building permit is issued. The current fee is $1,731.00 for the new residential structure, as applicable. d. . School facilities fee of $2.14 per square foot or based upon the most current schedule unless determined to be exempt by the Tustin Unified School District. e. Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a CASHIER'S CHECK payable to the County Clerk in the amount of forty- three dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. ",,(}'i;:~-~-~;~~jJ}~~ ~._--~-- ..----. .~ ---- ("./,_' -;?.1 :) /1- ) >l' I ." ~~ : ..1:>- \ . N. <~:k,. ~:>. ,,:> :~~~y~>' \'\ .>. y"~ -l::> <)\.,y 0\-i.-,' ,.) ',)..\~ . ' , u.- '\.~ (' ~<' <" t<' ~ , l-,) 6~'. \~ {\":\ ~~ ':~ U(.,.. ~l.!!~n~ ~ :n:iflJ ~~ ~~. '1;.'~:~ ~ " ~ __~_ _ .___ _ ____ _._ ".. <\\\0" - ...J' .JNOJ 1 ~;lX 1" ' ~ \ v'" 1-1 ] , 1/'9 0 C\~ . V 10. (\1:: .!t~..) @ . . fJ I. . .~ .,.y..... C dAlI nUl i"!/ I .,'1 "V' <'. '., -~ . ,>~. ~ ~ -- ./;} I . ,] :~~""~' ,,:~,~ '. .":=':~:~'OOI~~~._-;;~_ ':"J~1.~'~':: ~.~. ~.~~~~ ';~;Yx~_ ~ ~~o~~~ -~~~~X~-~~~_!:.~~ Y ~ , : 0 \'., iJ ~ ! I .' il ~ . (.. ... .,.... . '1' .. .... .. ')~~L ... ... . .. ~. .' ..' .. .. t F . . I ~:"'. r ~" ,: ~;>;{ I g I' 1~/)' ": ...:r::' \ .. ;:. 11 . .;~t.~ ;~~ " ~~ II ~ ci M 1 or. ~ 01 I. )f, " '.,)" . \U () }.~X_.~~~ : 60" rn :c t\A ~ I -\l'gM >t) lUll 1~) 1 X~ ~, ".. .I~)~~ . {Tl <.l I ! 'I ro4 '" '<Y : 1 '" '1'1:: .'~ . r" = I Y I I ~~I-7~<3':7~~:L:LC: IA~ ~<>. I .i ~ v F ~ 1 ~.:". "''o~~' ~JJ(I COON ' ~ ;~ ~, ~~ -~~ ~ I . : ~: ; Id ~ I \j I :J~~, <'~. ~ d>:\'; .,~ . <2'o~.t~>~~!';1..~.,::,: '''~":~;:-"'7oor.:~:~~;..:.. , 'I"''''_'~'_'~-,.._,~___~_",_,-j <'iI;,)' , , a~g " I I Ii fJ). I ~ ~ \' to " (~,J . \\~..,. . }..$,~", I C(;~_':I OOf I \ I \ I I I I :)'<v fr"-?~~ ,,~..,~ . 1',; . ."] . N-.s:g. ,I. oJ.'.. 68 ' "ortr '.. '), '~~..~9' b /S-,Gq OOr '). . '2J~ 0< . J <I. 8fJ 001 \ I I I, I I I I I rc llJ 01- ZI- U:.::J UI.!) .CiJ t- ',' ,~~ I U l..J ,'\~:: ). " ".:Jy /J.< ' ~~eq 001 J:t~ ""~6- '? Q" ~ __._~u__ _. ~..~___ ~. _~~~~./~t:_. ~ ~II___~~,~__ . .)~ <)", '.) __.....____ W'_ ______'__ - - -...._._ 1-+ "j.> \-:) +.,.~> II- I i "f~. .~ 00", '~~> r ~ ~ ~~ 'J If), , I-f J ~~<r~U : I Ix dr..... II~ 3JN3.:J OOON . ; . I" .E 'lSIX3~:' ~~IX " ~~ ~i I x --- X X X ----:1- X Jl ----------~-_. iIJaUON I 1-~ , "J.>. '}~. Q~ :0. ~ ~' 6'66,''''': ' I ;"~.~\.\OI P~:' I ;0 '~ .~ t*," i~ o.;~, I. ~~~ 6-~',)' I --~-------~ ------- ---..... ~~ 01 -' ~I w. 0: ~~~ o~ ""\ Il. r I .... !~ IllJ ,w .CX , "..... lJ1 ~ .J ' .sam . J3lX5I It; hii ~ \~/: ~l~::' ~JI I. . . .. ~Y1 f.J no .b1!'J , . . .--.- -" ..... - -. . -~ -;:~:]..- --..----, ----.--.- . '--, -.. .." ... .. . "f '~.., 'S ($/ \! c. ~,Tli J f." '" \ (;7 "S rC~:I..~r) ^ I r:. I r;, , ':,. .' , i:: · . . ,. ,'" . . · '\..2 .... -7';c,". _....._ " . I " , '9. ,. "If .; 1'10, f r" w, I , ' , . J " " I I I I \ , .... 't: .c:,< - '1)\ .,l:.i----_i.._ I .. ~ " 'jl-' ....- 3(~~~_ '" ~NYft xi..' I - ---..------ --._ '-i~ . . CI).c : ,:. .- "::'<1~.>~1..'_"'''~..:.~.'_..'. _-\''>f1k..,V!;.)!.u- ...........]'. i 'i, v.:!-:~ ;~--. .~ .-~:~.~-r;r~/~~~~lr <It ~r-" ~-~o_... "_I. .~ ~.-~q", ,;P.': . - 'B'~ \ .~ : ,I, ~:'~i . , ~@3) . . . ! C, _n,_. _____.~.,,\ :- . 10 '6 '1. k ~_' l,-; , . 'J f..:i.", I . ii-/. '(J "''' ' .' '" " d.::" 'I ..I,...." ~ -... ---", -- ~ " -f- . --.~:~-=-~r5.n .. .1., t~: ~~l:~' I -'---'--~l- :-~'1_- ---~-.-.-~, ~j;"ls,::-~,-",..".. I.. \ 1)0 cr,/I 1f/;:~7~ .5.'Ul!'ll.r.p~r:1fiJJ,./ill "'- , ;..' \P --- - .~ "". t." y wl2/.af!ly.Y:>J!)Y!O.~!@Q iI, ,,-....:J2(_L.2c~L JJDJQA.__ -- ./ ~-1l. . '..!iXJL!!a- S 1 O~ll1u..0..JJ A. .:; !LJf . ,y X ~.fr,.:i.L '" \J 1/11 [) 10 ,., I;J / H 0 l(J A ( BI/I/) ['.(1 ; '.i (5t~ _.-__..i~I_EJ~J2Q.l~,_ _._...e.L~.~Jl~ _ _~LL:.l:_Q~__.__.__,_. _.. ~ ._.~j{"--_. .. ---..----.....-.- -- -_._.._._----------~--~--,---..,--- ... '\ " j I r-, \.J_. 'j- <J : t; "1'- '0 , ---l~ ; -... --. - . 1- -~ ----....: I;. . I " /i / I ,/ ' , . l "',1. .-~~----::==--=-.:..=:.::-....~:~~. '~\..L .;.~=-_. =:: ~~:.-=-==' - ;\.-..., '\,'.. __ _ 'J _._~ i r !. 1 C Lo:j'.r ;. I fl., . l J ~/ '\~'l 1,1 ",? L ;.. ~I_\: PU) .. ~ ."\. ...,.~fi[;-,"i~;~---- i Jl,j / {-~~'~fi?I~' "'-., - " fF;- (') ..:~~~~.=;- 'rrl~- I -f-i:..,._..__....~.--~. ..----~, . "'" 'Sr'.o)h 0-:;), . // :./ V"'-"rJ(,,i~)t-f? .'1 lJ:;.! ! ,I . '.., . '- '. ~~ GAJ1u:. RoOt,,\ / /f 1.-1.,". ':.:!U.L:,Ot~,1 // .1. U ;-.-_.:-~ :l..:~.-:~:.,:=:..~:-~~/:~.-_..::/ . /'~' "'." ':\ i (}~ 1',;.- "1 ~,." 'I',:, -"-l '/ J '" '. . _ ~ I ."J(.E ! ,-':"'--,r.. IL:J:::.:.,:~<,.II..~../ / / ~ 11!~ ! [.__._h.... 'B.. i i //'.' I. (: " .:~ I ;r .// I ,.J ,~ '.- ".. d ti~ rT i r ,;1 ; !f !-J, ~)tv y ! I '.r'",~ ';1 / ..1 :1 ! I .__-..':::> I r? i'V y I I . . I' , i.':' i ".L, 1..,' '" / ill . i: i , . ! I 1 _ li'l !:', : ! : I ' ' , I I, , I , . ! / i~I', '_wuJ --L--..~--L-.----------~ L._, -="'~_'~f-L._- ' 'L ---------.- ~-----."...~, . .P'.._.....__ I "......u._ - -.. .. -,-. ". . _ ".. ,::: c:.., - ___1_' ,'<1:;; J n <' I I o~i: .~ -- , -. .. ". ./ <: I ',~. J - I L '1 f " '-. ' 1. :.../1 ---- -- -~-i-~---- ---- '?IQ -0 I ! j i I ~ . ; f . : i I : I j I . .Llli-r- rrrT ! ii' \ ! I ! -~ t I ! . ]: I I - .~. - ....... '---". --..-.. .-- "- ";-l~-~) '~:,iTT5"\i} .f--.... ..-.... - .. i L7i.l -\)~L ,hli-' L.u ! _ , -" --.--..-.-.-. --.----..--..--- YlfTS-'" 'tJ.-, Hl.rTC'SUU'~ . '.' ------- -- ..,..... " -. .LJ-'~i yt"O^---..-J-~n~) \ I dj" --- - -.....- - -.. ...- "?J17J'M T5 z I I~ ~ .~. D~I a Oi - \ I ,I ~~I I'~. ~/! ~ ~f ~ \~ \ --..: 'V') 9 I ' J.\ /,1 / / =- L., . ~ 9.j":' " .-;1 ~[ 1 --:z., OJ ~\ ~\ \..U ! -.J ! \llI i :c.i (-! ~! C)( =<1 i . ~ . . x . ""') \'\) .. D I ; I i I : I I i I i ~ I 1: ---~'-----~~-'" -) "- ...... .*> " ~;~. ,\.x'~ ~~1l I I t I ,f I / ( ! .0 (/'''\ f --.1.. it 'J ; ~ '. ~.. ! I (,-) f } j I i \ \ ; ~_.-.- j "7 ,;-..... /-4' *-J ;/ I) t;/ C!..L // (;J) a ~ ., ;'- i. _1r I \) -. .,.~,., i 1 II 1 , t l . J . I \ ~ I ; \ i I u41 ~II \~ ~ b ~al ~~ 1~~~ ~~.i\ '-l 1~ ~--1. ~~ ~~ ~~ &1~ ~~l~ ~ v; ! , I l I ~. -z" " ~ a'" '-> ~. ~ .. ~..cl ,_ . "v' a Q". ".~ 1.-..... c:I '\1) 3\ - ~ ~.t - <;:i.. ~. ' ,~ ~~I J ~ ~ ....~ .#\:-. V oJ e: .".J>( .. \ft.,"cl I o~ - 1 ' t .........""3"" - -..... t .~t oj sl :::>1 ~\ tn t . .1 . i. -..--... -_._----_..~- ..._..~:--- . i!! TI: ~. rT'( ,I; :-1i-r' . 'II I; t f i, ! f I ~ i , . t \! ; i" ! ! I . - -r 'l'l'\ ::.! I . l !. ;" I I, . r l : ~ I ., tf / ./ _~_.__. _:.....1 .~.. --....,........~.-o:-- ~ : : i 1 \ ; : "to j . ~ i' ~ . , ': ' ~ t t I t I I I t .J ",V ~, U;\ ~:. ... ~ ; ~ "~; ~ ,--",,:, ,,' ~ ~" ~ :>>1 }' .~ OC q" '. \.Ui " . ~ ~ -i~ iil~' I.. ....-...~. - """" , I . - , '. - )( .. ~ \,\:~ ~ I / I I . i I :_- I _'? I \ ~ << C) t-== ~ Uj ~ ~ \--: Vl ~ ATTACHMENT D PROPOSED SIDING Proposed Unpainted Fibercement Siding Approved Unpainted Redwood Siding Proposed Painted Fibercement Siding Approved Painted Redwood Siding "to ..,0.:.>: '. '" '''.' " '. . .:........: };:;;.: ~ ", ..~; "" /. :,,: S ::. .:: .:" -' '. .' ;":~:,.':.: ..<;.: : .: - '. .. .... e .': ',"::.:, ...' '. .. ,'. '>' <: I,. '" c'.:>: c' c',. ..;- ".,.; ,-. -- ".." . " ;-,~"~t' - .' -:~ ',,' . . : :; .,;.'. . .. > . ";'- .-. '.-'"' :..... ;-,c' .,~; c':: -.'. . .,'j;:;'" -' ,'. :.~ . "'"1..': . ",,-,- ,~} ."'. .... . , ":'J e:, :"'):~>; ;, ;j. .c' " . <,:;::>...:;"< _, ,~;~ .'. .' ,. '. "-"";'~:,e " ,-.,;~,~,>;:,:,; J . } ..,.: " >. "';,{ ;;:Yf .'0 '-,^'<-\ -.:- .x- , ..,..' ",> .{:\j . /::, ;..Si'>\ - J, ;,t..: 'c';.c' ---:f:!",,'!>~ .......; ':"':;"'.' .. ,,:,:.-'}< . s.f'}\7/ :-(:/';. . ...::.:. . ". .:'. : '('.: ',,,)'>; . ;/ , ' :.:\';, "::.: "". '., . .:' .', .. ....; ; ,. . ;", "". , ': -.- ..:' : ,i;'; { ":.':-.J. ..: {', ':.'. . -- :>', '.!': y:,;:", '".' . .',-; t '.' , , .' "". ./ .~ "". ',:: " :; ': '/';:~ (..::" " '< ,:j;:;~~ .r", " : :~ -~ :. ::'~! ~;, ,,, >. '.:. . ;;.' : :'I~ ,,,;;:,: ~/ ,"L' e';:' ": :~~:,}~'~ '~<:.:' ..jtL ,,; :' :- ". .';~.~t .:X; S", :;\ (/". ,;;. { ,e "..,':.. :, .~~ ',' ..', .. ,.{ > ~"i : :' '> - ,,: :f:;.: . .". .)--, " ::;t-.::~;i -- . .', ,>' " ::;' .~~}}!?- '} : }'. r.T' : ',::.< ,; ,'Ii ':'d., :::';, -;;. .'. ", ..... . .. Side by Side Sample Boards Left: Unpainted Fibercement Siding Right: Unpainted Redwood Siding Side by Side Sample Boards Left: Painted Fibercement Siding Right: Painted Redwood Siding ATTACHMENT E CORRESPONDENCE J~:C'll~--;;ut1ity [)eveio~:rne~;t :::e~J:artnl/2r;t -., .':"',......, ,P--. City of 'Tustin 7~"'".,~"", r.."....-"~~. ..,. ~~ J.~~'~~'.'WI.--.''''''''''''''',:~~l.;-~'' 1{$ ~-_ "'-1",(. "~~ September 15, 2006 Drew McCausland McCausland Construction Company P.O. Box 1769 Tustin, CA 92781 300 Centennial 'A!ay Tustin, (;A92780 714.573.3"1 ')0 RE: REQUEST TO USE FIBER CEMENT SIDING INSTEAD OF REDWOOD SIDING FOR THE PROPOSED DETACHED TWO (2) CAR GARAGE WITH SECOND STORY GAME ROOM AT 200 S. "A" STREET, TUSTIN Dear Mr. McCausland: We received your request to utilize Fiber Cement siding instead of Redwood siding for the proposed detached two (2) car garage with second story game room approved by the CitYs Zoning Administrator through adoption of Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 on May 9, 2005 (Attachment 1). In approving the project, the Zoning Administrator made a finding (Finding E) which indicates that the design of the accessory building wilt be consistent with the features of the Colonial Revival style architecture of the existing main residence by matching the materials and colors, roof pitch, wood siding, and gabled dormers on the second floor with slant-cut wooden shingles and multi-paned windows. Substituting the proposed garage exterior material of Redwood siding with Fiber Cement siding while the existing home is improved with Redwood siding would contradict with the adopted Zoning Administrator's findings. In addition, the site is located within the City's Cultural Resources Historic District which requires new improvements be harmonious in terms of appropriateness of materials, scale, size, color in relationship with existing structure(s). Therefore, the request to use fiber cement siding instead of redwood siding for the proposed new detached garage is hereby denied. If you wish to appeal this decision, you may do so by filing an appeal to the Planning Commission in writing with the Community Development Department stating the reason for said appeal and accompanied by an appeal fee (to be reimbursed at the actual cost of processing the appeal) as established by City Council Resolution 06-85. If you should have any questions, please call me at 714-573-3115. sin,"'k.'..' rely, / I.?r ~ it /, vW tUa~ l {I JtMtina Willkom Senior Planner c: Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director Dana Ogdon, Assistant Director of Community Development BJ Azarvand, Plan Checker ,~.(~.jd,.JU:3TINACljrmnt pfanmru.:j\lC'ttels-Memt:lA200 S A 'lid'I"g,doc December 6, 2006 Dear Justina and Elizabeth, Thank you again for meeting with us regarding my new garage construction. As you can see from the brochures and the attached website, www.certainteed.com. tiber cement siding is very attractive, used in very high-end homes and is designed to resemble \\iood siding. It is a wood siding imitation without all the maintenance problems. I am requesting to use fiber cement siding instead of wood siding because it is a superior product but retains the look .I want to achieve. It is fire proof and termite proof. It also comes with a product guarantee from the manufacturer. Fiber cement siding was developed about 18 years ago and has been increasingly becoming the product of choice by bllilders throughout the US because of its durability and look. Several companies market a version of the product. I plan to use lap siding from CcrtainTccd.. a prenlier US manufacture of building products. Contrary to wood that needs nearly yearly repainting touch ups and care (dry rot and termite damage), fiber cement has a projected life of25 years'before repainting is necessary. Termites will never be an issue. As Lisa Yargeau, Territory Manager for CertainTeed lnentioned, it is replacing \vood siding throughout the US and it has been permitted in many historical areas of Los Angeles County with building guidelines similar to Tustin. I certainly appreciate the desire to maintain the look of Old Town Tustin's historical district. I painstakingly have spent many hours in designing my garage to follow the intentions of the City. I have lived here for 26 years because I like the environment9 therefore I certainly would do nothing to deviate from the look of the neighborhood. I wish some of my neigh,bors would do half of what r am doing! From a distance oftive feet.. no one could tell the difference between wood siding and fiber cement siding. Since the garage is 50 feet away from the house and 75 feet back from the street, the differences even further diminish. It certainly maintains the integrity of the Old Town look-it just does not require the necessary upkeep. COlne walk with me through my Ileighborhood and observe the wood stnlctures and see the condition of the wood siding. Many homes are in disrepair, termite damaged and in desperate need of painting. My garage will never have these issues with fiber cement siding. It will still look new after several years. I urge the City to recognize the benefits of these new products and how they can be llsed to enhance and maint~ill the look of Old town Tustin. Perhaps you can encourage nlore homeowners in the area to use them. I encourage you to visit my home and view my property. When you see how my garage and hOlne sit on the property, you can get a realistic perspective of the negligible visual differences of tIle siding choices will really be. [ realize I am requesting a variance to my current bui~ding permit in place. I hope you can now see why I am requesting this variance. /\s the homeowner \\lho will need to maintain this 110me over the next several years" I want to have so best possible prodllct for mainte11ance and beauty. Thank you, December 7, 2006 Mic'helle Young 200 South "A" Street Tustin, CA 92780 RE: SECOND REQUEST TO USE FIBER CEMENT SIDING INSTEAD OF REDWOOD SIDING FOR THE PROPOSED DETACHED TWO (2) CAR GARAGE WITH SECOND STORY GAME ROOM AT 200 S. "An STREET, TUSTIN Dear Ms. Young: On September 15, 2006, the City sent you a letter informing you that your request to use fiber cement siding instead of redwood 'siding for the newly constructed detached garage was denied. During the week of November 20, 2006, you met with me and Justina Willkom to discuss the matter and indicated that you will submit material brochures to justify the request. On December 5, 2006, you, Drew McCausland, Contractor, and Lisa Yargeau, Territory Manager for CertainTeed (manufacturer of fiber cement siding), met with Justina Willkom and presented the City with manufacturer brochures, pictures of other projects throughout California, and sample material boards. On December 6, 2006, we received your letter which describes and explains your intention further and substantiating your request to use fiber cement instead of redwood siding for the new detached garage and game room. . The newly constructed detached two (2) car garage with second story game room was approved by the City's Zoning Administrator through adoption of Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 on May 9, 2005 (Attachment 1). In approving the project, the Zoning Administrator made a finding (Finding E) which indicates that the design of the accessory building should be consistent with the features of the Colonial Revival style architecture of the existing main residence by matching the materials and colors, roof pitch, wood siding, and gabled dormers on the second floor with slant-cut wooden shingles and multi-paned windows. . We have reviewed the submitted letter, brochures, and material boards. As we indicated in the previous letter, substituting the proposed garage exterior material of Redwood siding with Fiber Cement siding while the existing home is improved with Redwood siding would contradict the adopted Zoning Administrator's findings. In addition, the site is located within the City's Cultural Resources Historic District which requires new improvements be harmonious in terms of appropriateness of materials, scale, size, and color in relationship with existing structure(s). Therefore, this second request to use fiber cement siding instead of redwood siding for the proposed new Young 200 S. uAn Street Page 2 of 2 detached garage is hereby declined. If you wish to appeal this decision, you may do so by filing an appeal to the Planning Commission in writing with the Community Development Department stating the reason for said appeal and accompanied by an appeal fee (to be reimbursed at the actual cost of processing the appeal) as established by City Council Resolution 06-85. If you should have any questions, please call Justina WiUkom at 714-573-3115. Sincerely, I ,;1-.;' . 7~"<" ~ Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director c: Dana Ogdon, Assistant Director of Community Development Henry Huang, Building Official Justina Willkom, Senior Planner S:\Cdd\JUSTINA\current ptanning\letters-Memos\200 S A siding2.doc January 17, 2007 ., '.; r: Michelle Young 200 South "A" Street Tustin, CA 92780 ... . . ) RE: DENIAL OF A REQUEST TO USE FIBER CEMENT SIDING INSTEAD OF REDWOOD SIDING FOR THE PROPOSED DETACHED TWO' (2) CAR GARAGE WITH SECOND STORY GAME ROOM AT 200 S. "A" STREET, TUSTIN Dear Ms. Young: This letter is sent to you re-affirming the City's denial of your request to use fiber cement siding instead of redwood siding for the newly constructed detached garage (see attached letter dated December 7, 2006). If you wish to appeal this decision, you may do so by filing an appeal to the Planning Commission in writing with the Community Development Department stating the reason for said appeal and accompanied by an appeal fee as established by City Council Resolution 06-85 within seven (7) days from the date of this letter. If you should have any questions, please call Justina Willkom at 714-573-3115. Sincerely, ,1 )~., ~i/./ I ,I' :./ -' ..",.~~!.~-r t '''';::':',,If' :1~.,' ..,' ,? .r . / . -,,~ r ~ '-'~_ .' .' ,.... ,1:.' tIY '",# .:<. -c.:...... '" ....". '.~, ,,0" ',_' ~ V '- -7./ ",__~/.7 " .,_ ........ -.. Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director c: Dana Ogdon, Assistant Director of Community Development Henry Huang, Building Official Justina Willkom, Senior Planner S'\Cdd\JUSTINA'lcurrent pfannmg\letters-Memos\200 S A slding3.doc ATTACHMENT F APPLICANT'S APPEAL JUSTIFICATION January 20, 2007 To: Planni11g Conlmission, City of Tustin FroIn; Michele Y Oll11g, Homeowner, 200 South A Street Tustin, CA 92780 RE: ~~PPEAL to the denial to my request for substituting redwood siding with fiber cement siding on my newly'constructed detached garage at 200 South A Street. REQUEST to use an alternate (Tllstin approved) exterior siding material for my new detached garage. Backe:round: 1. The Construction Documents for my garage were approved in May 2005. Construction began in April 2006. 2. While visitillg New Orleans in June 2006, I discovered that the reconstruction of the wood strnctllres (residential and commercial) in the city's downtown historic area was being rebuilt with fiber cement lap siding versus wood siding. Unless I was within 3 feet of the buildings and carefully examined it, the siding appeared identical to wood lap siding. 3. I confirmed that New Orleans Historical Redevelopment Committee favored the fiber cenl~nt siding because of it durability, lifetime guarantee, low maintenance costs and fire resistance . feature. Furthermore.. it did not deter from the City's desire to maintain the hist.orical"'wood siding" appearance. 4. Through research, I found fiber cement siding has also been approved for use in several llistorical districts throughout the US including Laguna Beach, California. 5. I decided fiber cement siding was the best choice for the siding on my new garage. Its low Inaintenance costs, and fire and termite free composition was significant to me as a homeowner. AJso the product is environmentally friendly, as it does not require lumber. 6. McCausland Construction (my contractor) submitted a request to use fiber celnent siding instead of redwood in September 2006 per my request. 7. On September 15, 2006 my request was denied, citing the Zoning AdmiI1istrator Action prepared for my permit. 8. In November and December I resubmitted my request via meetings.. mail, documentation and sanlples. My request was refused again for the same reason: '''Not confomling to the submitted plans." I was told I needed to file a formal appeal if I wanted the Planning COlTIlnission to reconsider my request. January 20, 2007 . Page2of2 j 9. This letter constitutes my formal appeal to modify my siding choice on my 5uilding plans. I have enclosed a check payable to Tustin for $175.00 (price quoted to me by Justina). Discussion: I understand the City's desire to maintain a Cultural Resources Historic District. I respect the idea that improvements need to be harmonious in appearance in appropriateness of materials, scale size, and col~r in relationship with my existing structure. My request conforms to these criteria. Over the years, the construction industry has developed new products that provide a substantial improvement over 19th century building materials. Despite their material changes, they retain the harmonious design to the historic period. Vinyl windows, fiberglass asphalt shingles, and fireproof, metal garage doors are examples of exterior materials that are permitted in Tustin's Cultural Resource Historic District. They are all products that were not materials in the early 20th Century. They are approved products because they do not conflict with the cultural intent of the District and are better quality. . Fiber cenlent siding is a relatively new product (18 years old), and its popularity is growing rapidly due to its durability and inherent benefits (termite free, fire resistant, environnlentally friendly). It is an approved product for new construction in Tustin. Fire resistance and termite free features are extremelv important to California's communities and their homeowners! Environment friendly is an added bonus. Fiber cement is not an inexpensive option. It is priced similarly to wood siding. Its long- term benefits are worth the initial cost. My new garage is detached from my house and sits on my property 25 feet away from the house. [t is set back 50 feet from street. No one can distinguish the difference between the siding materials on the two buildings. I am NOT modifying my home's siding-just my new garage. There are already homes in -my neighborhood that have used fiber cement products in remodeling projects. I am not the first! I invite the Planning Commission members to visually see a sample of fiber cement siding on my garage and compare it to my current home's siding. You will see how similar it is to my home's siding and how it dt1eS not deter from the cultllrallook of my property. Conclusion and Request: Permit me to modify my building plans to substitute fiber cement for redwood siding. sinc:e:Y';i./ ItJ'~!~~~'.~~ .' //! ,,) ATTACHMENT G SUPPLEMENTAL SYNTHETIC SIDING PRODUCT INFORMATION .;..~~ ~....."<<.......,.,.,,:.... '.~....'H....,~......:".......,., ."~.' .. ..... }.# '~II":":"".::"'::""". . .......... '..,.. .:.:.~l"':;. /~ ,~,~ . composIte SIelIng VS. James HardIe sIdIng Page I of I Choosing house siding from James Hardie makes sense. It provides low maintenance, while resisting shrinking and swelling, so it holds paint much longer than wood composite siding or engineered wood. No wonder it's protecting over 3.5 million homes in North America alone. Guaranteed for up to 50 years, even in the most severe climates on earth. Resists shrinking and swelling so it holds paint longer than wood. Resistant to termites and other pests known to cause damage. James Hardie Wood Based Sidin~ Rot caused by severe moisture exposure IS a common problem In composite siding. Shrinks and swells when exposed to moisture which causes paint to crack and flake. Wood Siding is subject to decay and pests. http://www.jameshardie.com/homeowner/prodcomp/vhardboard. php Weather Resistance Paint Durability Pest Resistance 1/22/2007 f 'f 4 f. "''', :'.:-i f' ~: 011'- '} , ' '. 'i',~f2 ,~-"'-c~~~~/ ~ ,,~-- ;1.1 /-/ ;" ,~r III ,;;;rT' REC:E( . ~4.-... . _A. jd ~ t~ '\ I _":.-<0.,.. ':' :::w;' t; ~;H"t.~!!: ~ ~;.~;t.i~j~ """,...,,,, . - -.-- - i... fll.- I... '~ (l1li- rIll III ~._.....---..,,-_. ---- -- -----...~......,.,:-..__......-:--._............~_.. ~" ..", ',. "', '!J' '\ 1 --...-- '"'\ ,-h).'_; ~ i ~. .., The planned construction in large remodeling prOjects, is normally ti,~ne-consuming, ~lld complex enough, vvii.h~ut additIonal factors ham- pering progress. Unearthing some major problem during construction is every renovator's nightmare, So it vvas probably surprising to the people of Lake Forest, IL, to hear that design-build company Airoom vvanted so fervently to use a particular product, it took its case to the local authority, despite the fact that it \vould hold up the design Trendsideas.com/go/3414/info ~:-'.- ! ----. -- ~ -- . t.::~~~~, ~ [ .~. ;If.~.~~~~~~~;J:::~C':~ '~~;'t;;1 ., ';;:~:~~!i~~~ .~ ~: ~ - :;'7~~.~.;~. and construction processes. Airoom senior vice president Rick Ehrensaft savsthev wpre CQm,mi~~i.-tll~d to. extensively extend-and refit an older house in a very traditional and staid community, The ovvners wanted a New England style home - something colonial and homey, he says, They vvere very particu- lar about their requirements and offered intricate design ideas. Inside, these con- tributed to the large, new colonial-style kitchen, a new master suite and the reno- vation of the children's bedrooms and bathrooms. As far as the ('xtl'rinl' \\.1 concerned, the homeowners i 111 I1lt.d i.1! t ,I. Ll-lose jdl1te~H~rdie's iar sidi.,:", till. I, play in Airoom's showroonl, "In Lake Forest, there \Vl'n' ~I rit I II'" I : lations about the confornlity of .11 I 1'1'11'" I and about how each hOl1ll' dllt" 11,,1 II" esthetic of the comnlunitv," 11111'11 i I says. liAs such, the hOI1H'S 1\'I)it .111, II I, I brick, wood or cedar shinglt' "it/Ill,:'. A supporter of Hllnlil)I.IIlI, IJi, cement lap siding, Airnoll) \1111'", II, , ,i ' its case to those v\'ho could I 11.111' 'I ! , regulations. Because the local authority members did not know the product, the company took ~long a scale model of how the home would appear and outlined the product's history and characteristics. It was not only its durability, insula- tion properties and life-time guarantee that caught the attention of board mem- bers, but also its fire-rating - an important factor in a heavily wooded community. "Hardip lank la p siding was overw helm- ingly accepted by the board members. They were all very impressed," Ehrensaft says. The project proceeded wi th Hardi plank lap siding pre-stained in a custom yellow hlc~d ln~t~ n~d on ~h€ 62C030 ft hOU5~. Wooden eaves, copper downpipes, period style light fixtures and other colonial style detailing complement the siding. "The pre-staining process saves a lot of time in the final preparation of the home," Ehrensaft says. "And, other contractors were equally impressed at how easy it was to work around." Hardiplank lap siding resists rotting, cracking, damage from rain, hail and ..---- -------- --=----------- ---- , ~~-- -------- -------- -~- -------- -.-------- -------- - ------- -------. ------- ------- --------..- Preceding page: This home has been extended from 3700sq ft to 5200sq ~ by Airoom Design & 3...i;d. It includ:s &; c~~:::nd ;evel and a compk~c refit in~;de, Facing page: Hardiplan~ lap siding contributes to the home's colonial look. Because it is made from fiber cement, it does not succumb to the elements as many wood products can. Lighting fixtures kindly supplied by Artistic Lighting Designs. Above: As there were only certain siding products accepted by the local authority, Airoom's first challenge was to get the regulations changed. See related inforrn2tion ?t Trendsideas.com/go/3414/info I 1 I I , I I Facing page: James Hardie also offers' shingles, panels, soffits and trim for exterior use - all with the same properties as Hardiplank lap siding. There is also Hardibacke'" for use in wet areas inside, and Hardipipee for civil work. flying debris, and is non-combustible. It can be color matched to any shade. 1# Aifuort+-:gi"'/~s' a lell-year guarantee on its work and a IS-year guall-'.ntee on ail structural components. The reason we rec- ommend Hardiplank lap siding is because it matches what we offer," Ehrensaft says. Contact James Hardie Building Products, phone (888) JHARDIE (542 7343), fax (949) 3671294. Email:info@jameshardie. com. Website: www.jameshardie.com. Or, contact Airoom, phone (847) 763 lIDO, fax (847) 763 1101. Website: www.airoom.com. .---- =:::--:::: .'1 ~ ?~~..... ~ ~ ----- ~ '.' ...."-- - .' "~"""" -.---- Above: On this home, pre-stained Hardiplank lap siding was specified. It was a custom yellow blend produ~ed by Jamp~ H1irliie. All pre.:;tained .Jamp.A -- Hardie siding products are dvailable with a 15- year paint warranty. Since the regulation change, Airoom Design & Build has used James Hardie fiber cement products on many other homes in the neighborhood. See rel2tec' information a~ Trendsideas.com/go/3414/info ~ ~ James Hardie. ~ i I. Siding Products - ~6300 La A.ameda, SUile-250 Mission Viejo, California, 92691 Telephone: 1-866-4-HARDIE www.jameshardie.com ATTACHMENT H FEBRUARY 12, 2007, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION ITEM #3 .~V .. :S~' i ~' ~t.: ': I"..~ . i.. ,~..:' Q$-~' Report to the Planning Commission DATE: SUBJECT: PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANTI APPELLANT: LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: ENVIRONMENT AL STATUS: REQUEST: FEBRUARY 12,2007 APPEAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DESIGN REVIEW DECISION MICHELLE YOUNG 200 SOUTH "A" STREET TUSTIN, CA 92780 200 SOUTH "AU STREET LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R..1) WITH CUl rURAL RESOURCE (CR) OVERLAY DISTRICT IF THE DECISION IS UPHELD, THE ACTION IS STATUTORILY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15270 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA DOES NOT APPLY TO REJECTED PROJECTS). IF THE DECISION IS REVERSED, THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 (CLASS 3 - CONSTRUCTION OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, INCLUDING THEIR RESPECTIVE BUILDING MATERIALS). AN APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DISALLOW THE USE OF FIBERCEMENT SIDING ON A DETACHED TWO CAR GARAGE WITH SECOND STORY GAME ROOM THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON A PROPERTY IMPROVED WITH AN "A"-RATED DWELLING IN THE CULTURAL RESOURCE OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE PROJECT WAS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT AND APPROVED WITH REDWOOD SIDING BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION 05-007. Planning Commission Report Appeal of Community Development Director Decision February 12,2007 Page 2 RECOMMENDA TION That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4051 upholding the Community Development Director's decision disallowing the use of fibercement siding on a detached garage structure approved by Zoning Administrator Action 05-007. BACKGROUND The site is located at 200 South "An Street and is surrounded by a single family residential neighborhood (Attachment A - Location Map). The property maintains a general plan designation of low density residential and a zoning district designation of single family residential (R-1) in the Cultural Resource Overlay district. The property is improved with a Colonial Revival dwelling constructed in 1907 that is identified as an "A"-rated structure in the City of Tustin Historical Survey (Attachment B - Property Survey). Structures listed on the Historical Survey are given ratings of "Au through UO" with "A" rated structures being the most important in regard to biographical. historical. or architectural significance. The existing dwelling is described by the Historical Survey as the finest Colonial Revival home in Tustin based on very few modifications, original architectural details, quality of materials used. excellent preserved condition, and association with William Shatto, a carpenter who helped build many Tustin buildings. The Historical survey states that the structure may be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. On May 9, 2005, the Zoning Administrator approved Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 for the construction of a 1,328 square foot accessory building that includes a 764 square foot two-car garage below and a 564 square foot second story consisting of a game room, two walk-in closets. and a bathroom (Attachment C - Zoning Administrator Action and Project Plans). In approving the garage and game room project, the Zoning Administrator considered the proposed new structure, the existing dwelling, the site with respect to its location being located in the CR district, the residential design guidelines for structures located in the CR district. and the significance of the structure as described in the Tustin Historical S~rvey. The approved plans proposed the use of redwood siding on the garage and game room structure to match the existing dwelling. On May 10, 2006, a building permit was issued for the project and substantial construction was underway. In September 2006, Drew McCausland, the general contractor, submitted a request on behalf of Ms. Young to use CertainTeed WeatherBoards™ Fibercement Siding instead of the approved redwood siding on the proposed detached garage/game room (Attachment D). In a letter dated September 15, 2006, (Attachment E - Correspondence) staff denied the request since the use of fiber cement is not consistent with the intent of the CR District findings and the residential design guidelines (See Discussion section of the report for further information). Planning Commission Report Appeal of Community Development Director Decision February 12, 2007 Page 3 to review the fibercement siding in detail. Following the meeting Ms. Young provided a letter (Attachment E - Correspondence) requesting a variance to allow the use of Certainteed WeatherBoards ™ Fibercement Siding. In response, on January 17, 2007, the Community Development Director denied the second request for the use of fibercement siding and confirmed the previous decision allowing the use of redwood siding on the garage and game room structure (Attachment E - Correspondence). On January 23, 2007, Ms. Young filed an appeal of the Director's decision. Meanwhile, no progress has been made in completing the detached garage since October 2006. DISCUSSION The project involves the construction of a 1 ,328 square foot accessory building that includes a 764 square foot two-car garage below and a 564 square foot second story consisting of a game room, two walk-in closets, and a bathroom. The detached garage building is located behind the main structure at a height of 20 feet, which is 10 feet shorter than the main structure. The structure has a 5 foot side yard setback from the south property line, a 67 foot front yard setback, and an approximately 43 foot rear yard setback. The structure also is 24"feet from the main residence. The project is located in the Cultural Resources Overlay District. The existing home on the site is designated as an "A" rated structure by the Tustin Historical Survey Report because of its significance individually and to the District as a whole. When approving the project, the Zoning Administrator specifically conditioned the project to ensure that the detached garage exterior materials would match, protect, and preserve the existing historic residence and the District as a whole (Condition 2.9 of Zoning Administrator Action 05- 007). Approval of ZA 05-007 was based partially on the applicant's plans indicating that redwood siding would be used to match that used on the exterior of the residence. In addition, prior to issuance of a building permit as required by the Zoning Code, the project was granted a Certificate of Appropriateness which confirmed that the proposed garage and game room structure complies with the intent of the CR District and follows the Residential Design Guidelines for the Cultural Resources District. Staff has thoroughly reviewed Ms. Young's appeal including the submitted brochures and material boards for Certainteed WeatherBoards™ Fibercement Siding. While fibercement may be a product of acceptable quality, staff does not believe that the fibercement provided would be an appropriate substitute for th'e redwood siding approved for the project in that: . The existing historic home is improved with redwood siding. The Residential Design Guidelines for projects located in the CR District indicate that new accessory structures should be compatible with the style, quality, dimension, texture, and color of materials used on an existing historic building to the greatest extent possible. The Guidelines also indicate many of Tustin's architecturally significant houses are clad in wood siding, and that the appearance of wood- sided houses helps define the historic character of the District. In making the Planning Commission Report Appeal of Community Development Director Decision February 12t 2007 Page 4 texture, and color of materials used on an existing historic building to th'e greatest extent possible. The Guidelines also indicate many of Tustin's architecturally significant houses are clad in wood siding, and that the appearance of wood- sided houses helps define the historic character of the District. In making the decision to approve the project, the Zoning Administrator carefully considered the applicant's plans proposing the use of redwood siding and specifically conditioned the project to match the existing home. · The proposed substitute product would contradict the adopted Zoning Administrator's findings; and, · Tustin City Code (TCe) Section 9252f requires the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for construction of improvements in the CR district and TCe 9252h requires findings to be made for construction of improvements in the CR district as follows: (a) The proposed work must conform to the Municipal Code and design standards which may be established from time to time by the Historic Resource Committee. The City has established Residential Design Guidelines for the Cultural Resource District to "preserve, protect and enhance the existing historic character and culturally significant structures within the Cultural Resources District." The existing dwelling has a Colonial Revival architectural style that exhibits typical character-defining features including narrow clapboard siding which is identified in the Design Guidelines (Attachment F - Excerpt from Residential Design Guidelines). Staff does not feel that fibercement siding would be a superior character-defining material to the wood siding used on the dwelling. The Residential Design Guidelines specifically provide several examples of non-wood siding that should be discouraged, including materials that may be similar to fibercement. The Guidelines specifically identify wood siding as an example of an appropriate feature. In addition, the "Additions and New Accessory Buildings" section of the Guidelines state that the exterior appearance of new accessory buildings should be compatible with the style, quality, dimensions, and texture of materials on the existing historic house. The section specifically emphasizes the importance of matching the wood siding used on historic buildings. Staff believes that the fibercement board dimensions and style would not maintain the beveled or rounded edge characteristics or gradation in width typical of the wood siding used on the residence. (b) The proposed work must not adversely affect the character of the District or any designated cultural resources within the District. Planning Commission Report Appeal of Community Development Director Decision February 12.2007 Page 5 Staff believes that the approval of fibercement siding for the project could set a precedent requiring the City to approve it for use on other properties, including properties designated on the City's Historical Survey. Again, the Design Guidelines emphasize that the appearance of wood-sided houses helps define the historical character of the District (Attachment F). If fibercement siding were allowed, several properties could be subject to inconsistent development with wood, fibercement siding or other materials which could affect the character of the District or resources therein. (c) The proposed work must be harmonious with existing surroundings. The extent of harmony must be evaluated in terms of the appropriateness of the materials, scale, size, height, placement, and use of any new building or structure in relationship to existing buildings and structures and the surrounding setting. The Design Guidelines specifically state that "the exterior appearance of additions and new accessory buildings should be compatible with the style. quality. dimension, texture and color of materials on the existing house" (Attachment F). Any departure from the use of wood siding as used on the existing on-site dwelling and on survey-listed dwellings throughout the District may damage the integrity of the District. Based on the above findings. staff recomm~nds that that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4051 upholding the Community Director's Decision to disallow the replacement of redwood siding with fibercement siding for the project. Since filing the appeal, Ms. Young has indicated to staff that she may present alternate materials to the Planning Commission at the appeal hearing. She also included publications for James Hardie siding products with her appeal application (Attachment G - Publications Submitted with Appeal). Since staff has not had the opportunity to review or investigate the quality or appropriateness of the James Hardie siding or alternate materials not yet submitted, it is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the current appeal and remand any alternate material proposals received at the hearing to the Community Development Department for review and action. 40g~ Chad Ortlie Associate Planner a-~-dIAB;,~ Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Attachments: A. Location Map B. Property Historical Survey Planning Commission Report Appeal of Community Development Director Decision February 12, 2007 Page 6 c. Zoning Administrator Action and Project Plans D. Proposed Siding Sample Boards (sample boards will be available at the meeting) E. Correspondence F. Excerpts from Residential Design Guidelines G. Publications Submitted With Appeal H. Resolution No. 4051 S:\Cdd\PCREPORT\2007'APPEAL OF DIRECTOR DECISION 2 (SIDING).doc RESOLUTION NO. 4051 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, REVERSING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION AND ALLOWING THE USE OF ALTERNATE FIBERCEMENT SIDING ON THE DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 200 SOUTH "A" STREET The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper request was submitted by Michelle Young, requesting to appeal the Community Development Director's decisjon to disallow the use of fibercement siding on a detached two (2) car garage with second story game room that is currently under construction on a Single Family Residential (R-1) zoned property improved with an A-Rated dwelling in the Cuftural Resource (CR) Overlay District located at 200 South HA" Street; B. That the project was originally submitted with plans showing redwood siding matching the siding used on the historic residence and the plans were approved by Zoning Administrator Action 05-007; C. That in May 2006, construction began and in September 2006. Drew McCausland, the general contractor, submitted a request on behalf of Ms. Young to use CertainTeed WeatherBoards™ Fibercement Siding instead of the approved redwood siding on the proposed detached garage/game room. In a letter dated September 15, 2006, staff denied the request since the use of fibercement is not consistent with the intent of the CR District findings and the residential design guidelines; D. That in November 2006, Ms. Young met with the Community Development Director to discuss the fibercement board request further and on December 5, 2006, at the request of Ms. Young, staff met with her, the project contractor, and the territory manager for Certainteed to review the fibercement siding in detail. Following the meeting Ms. Young provided a Jetter requesting a variance to allow the use of Certainteed WeatherBoards™ Fibercement Siding. In response, on January 17,2007, the Community Development Director denied the second request for the use of fibercement siding and confirmed the previous decision allowing the use of redwood siding on the garage and game room structure; E. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and he"rd for said appeal application on February 12, 2007, by the Planning Commission; F. At the February 12, 2007 J Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission considered the subject request and an alternate fibercement siding material brought to the meeting by the project proponent. The Resolution No. 4051 Appeal of Community Development Director Decision Page 2 Planning Commission indicated that they would support the appeal and use of the alternate fibercement siding because: the material is proposed to be used on an ancillary building and not an existing historical structure; the detached garage is set back 67 feet from the street; and, the proposed alternate fibercement material. to the greatest extent possible, would be comparable with the style, quality, dimensions, texture, color. and materials of the existing home. The Planning Commission, however. clarified that fibercement siding may not be acceptable for all structures in the Cultural Resource District and/or properties improved with structures designated on the Historic Resource Survey. Consequently, the Planning Commission determined that, due to the unique circumstances of the project, the proposed alternate fibercementsiding would be an appropriate substitute for wood siding on the accessory structure approved by Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 in that 1. The proposed project conforms to the Tustin City Code and design standards which may be established from time to time by the Historic Resource Committee in that the project meets all setbackJ height. and lot coverage requirements for the zoning district and meets the spirit and intent of the design review criteria of the zoning code and Residential Design Guidelines. Specifically, the detached garage implements character-defining features of the Colonial Revival architecture of the main dwelling as intended in the Design Guidelines, and the detached garage is an accessory structure ancillary to the main structure and does not need to attempt to incorporate the level of detail and decoration as the house. Therefore, the aJternate fibercement siding on the new accessory structure does not need to have the same level of detail as wood siding on the existing dwelling which exhibits beveled or rounded edge characteristics or gradation in width. In addition, the proposed detached garage is setback 67 feet from the front yard setback, maintains approximately 43 feet from the rear property line, and is detached a distance of 24 feet from the main residence. Therefore, the use of painted alternate fibercement siding on the accessory structure would not be distinguishable from wood siding as viewed from the public right-at-way and would be appropriate. 2. The proposed work would not adversely affect the character of the District or designated cultural resources within the District in that the accessory structure has been evaluated by the Planning Commission for design consistency with the existing Colonial Revival dwelling on the property and with other historically desig~ated properties in the surrounding cultural resource district Since the alternate fibercement siding would not be used on an existing structure listed on the historical survey, would not be associated with an addition to a structure listed on the historical Resolution No. 4051 Appeal of Community Development Director Decision Page 3 survey, would only going to be installed on a new detached garage significantly setback from the public right-af-way which would not be distinguishable from wood siding to the untrained eye, no adverse impact to the character of the Cultural Resource District is anticipated. 3. The proposed work would be harmonious with the existing surroundings. The project has been evaluated in terms of its appropriateness of materials, scale, size, height, placement, and use of the new building or structure in relationship to existing buildings and structures and the surrounding setting in that the architecture of the detached garage has been determined to be complementary of the existing Colonial Revival dwelling on the site and is compatible with structures in the Cultural Resource District. The use of alternate fibercement siding on a detached garage setback 24 feet away from the main structure and over 50 feet from the public right-at-way will appear to be representative of appropriate wood siding used on properties identified in the historic survey. G. This project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303 (class 3) of the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act). II. The Planning Commission hereby reverses the. Community Director's Decision and allows the use of alternate fibercement siding on a detached accessory structure located at 200 South "Au Street. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting on the 26th day of February, 2007. BRETT FLOYD Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BIN SACK Planning Commission Secretary Resolution No. 4051 Appeal of Community Deve~opment Director Decision Page 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) City of Tustin ) I, Elizabeth A. Binsack, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California' that the Resolution No. 4051 was dury passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 26th day of February, 2007. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary ATTACHMENT I FEBRUARY 26,2007, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT RESOLUTION NO. 4051, AND MEETING MINUTES ITEM #2 ~V :,'g~' !',~ :. ,,'{~; .O~~, Report to the Planning Commission DATE: SUBJECT: PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANTI APPELLANT: LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: ENVIRONMENT AL STATUS: REQUEST: BACKGROUND FEBRUARY 26, 2007 CONTINUED, APPEAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DESIGN REVIEW DECISION MICHELLE YOUNG 200 SOUTH "A" STREET TUSTIN, CA 92780 200 SOUTH "A" STREET LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) WITH CULTURAL RESOURCE (CR) OVERLAY DISTRICT THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 (CLASS 3 - CONSTRUCTION OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, INCLUDING THEIR RESPECTIVE BUILDING MATERIALS). AN APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DISALLOW THE USE OF FIBERCEMENT SIDING ON A DETACHED TWO CAR GARAGE WITH SECOND STORY GAME ROOM THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON A PROPERTY IMPROVED WITH AN "An.RATED DWELLING IN THE CULTURAL RESOURCE OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE PROJECT WAS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT AND APPROVED WITH REDWOOD SIDING BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION 05-007. At the February 12, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously (3-0) to continue the item to the February 26, 2007, meeting and directed staff to present a revised resolution and findings reversing the Community Director's Planning Commission Report Appeal of Community Development Director Decision February 26, 2007 Page 2 decision and allowing the use of alternate fibercement siding on a detached garage structure approved by Zoning Administrator Action 05-007 (Attachment 1 ). DISCUSSION At the February 12, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission considered the subject request and an alternate fibercement siding material brought to the meeting by the project proponent. The Planning Commission indicated that they would support the appeal and use of the alternate fibercement siding because: the material is 'proposed to be used on an ancillary building and not on the existing historical structure; the detached garage is set back 67 feet from the street; and, the proposed alternate fibercement material, to the greatest extent possible, would be comparable with the style, quality, dimensions, texture, color, and materials of the existing home. The Planning Commission, however, clarified that fibercement siding may not be acceptable for all structures in the Cultural Resource District and/or properties improved with structures designated on the Historic Resource Survey. Consequently, the Planning Commission determined that, due to the unique circumstances of the project, the proposed alternate fibercement siding would be an appropriate substitute for wood siding on the accessory structure approved by Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 in that: 1. The proposed project conforms to the Tustin City Code and design standards which may be established from time to time by the Historic Resource Committee in that the project meets all setback, height, and lot coverage requirements for the zoning district and meets the spirit and intent of the design review criteria of the zoning code and Residential Design Guidelines. Specifically, the detached garage implements character-defining features of the Colonial Revival architecture of the main dwelling as intended in the Design Guidelines, and the detached garage is an accessory structure ancillary to the main structure and does not need to attempt to incorporate the level of detail and decoration as the house. Therefore, the alternate fibercement siding on the new accessory structure does not need to have the same level of detail as wood siding on the existing dwelling which exhibits beveled or rounded edge characteristics or gradation in width. In addition, the proposed detached garage is setback 67 feet from the front yard setback, maintains approximately 43 feet from the rear property line, and is detached a distance of 24 feet from the main residence. Therefore, the use of painted alternate fibercement siding on the accessory structure would not be distinguishable from wood siding as viewed from the public right-of-way and would be appropriate. 2. The proposed work would not adversely affect the character of the District or designated cultural resources within the District in that the accessory structure has been evaluated by the Planning Commission for design consistency with the existing Colonial Revival dwelling on the property and with other historically Planning Commission Report Appear of Community Development Director Decision February 26, 2007 Page 3 designated properties in the surrounding cultural resource district. Since the alternate fibercement siding would not be used on an existing structure listed on the historical survey, would not be associated with an addition to a structure listed on the historical survey, would only going to be installed on a new detached garage significantly setback from the public right-at-way which would not be distinguishable from wood siding to the untrained eye, no adverse impact to the character of the Cultural Resource District is anticipated. 3. The proposed work would be harmonious with the existing surroundings. The Planning Commission has evaluated the project in terms of its appropriateness of materials, scale, size, height, placement, and use of the new building or structure in relationship to existing buildings and structures and the surrounding setting in that the architecture of the detached garage has been determined to be complementary of the existing Colonial Revival dwelling on the site and is compatible with structures in the Cultural Resource District. The use of alternate fibercement siding on a detached garage setback 24 feet away from the main structure and over 50 feet fram the public right-at-way will appear to be representative of appropriate wood siding used on properties identified in the historic survey. ACTION That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4051. ~Qkfr Associate Planner &~A~JC Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Attachment A: Resolution No. 4051 (revised) S:\Cdd\PCREPORT\2007\REVERSAL OF DIRECTOR DECISION (SIDING).doc RESOLUTION NO. 4051 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, REVERSING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION AND ALLOWING THE USE OF ALTERNATE FIBERCEMENT SIDING ON THE DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 200 SOUTH "An STREET The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper request was submitted by Michelle Young, requesting to appeal the Community Development Director's decision to disallow the use of fibercement siding on a detached two (2) car garage with second story game room that is currently under construction on a Single Family Residential (R-1) zoned property improved with an A-Rated dwelling in the Cultural Resource (CR) Overlay District located at 200 South "An Street; B. That the project was origina1ly submitted with plans showing redwood siding matching the siding used on the historic residence and the plans were approved by Zoning Administrator Action 05-007; c. That in May 2006~ construction began and in September 2006, Drew McCausland, the general contractor, submitted a request on behalf of Ms. Young to use CertainTeed WeatherSoards™ Fibercement Siding instead of the approved redwood siding on the proposed detached garage/game room. In a letter dated September 15, 2006, staff denied the request since the use of fibercement is not consistent with the intent of the CR District findings and the residential design guidelines; D. That in November 2006, Ms. Young met with the Community Development Director to discuss the fibercement board request further and on December 5, 2006, at the request of Ms. Young~ staff met with her, the project contractor, and the territory manager for Certainteed to review the fibercement siding in detail. Following the meeting Ms. Young provided a letter requesting a variance to allow the use of Certainteed WeatherBoards ™ Fibercement Siding. I n response, on January 17, 2007, the Community Development Director denied the second request for the use of fibercement siding and confirmed the previous decision allowing the use of redwood siding on the garage and game room structure; E. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said appeal application on February 12, 2007, by the Planning Commission; F. At the February 12, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission considered the subject request and an alternate fibercement siding material brought to the meeting by the project proponent. The Resolution No. 4051 Appeal of Community Deve~opment Director Decision Page 2 Planning Commission indicated that they would support the appeal and use of the alternate fibercement siding because: the material is proposed to be used on an ancillary building and not an existing historical structure; the detached garage is set back 67 feet from the street; and, the proposed alternate fibercement material, to the greatest extent possible, would be comparable with the style, quality, dimensions, texture, color, and materials of the existing home. The Planning Commission, however, clarified that fibercement siding may not be acceptable for all structures in the Cultural Resource District and/or properties improved with structures designated on the Historic Resource Survey. Consequently, the Planning Commission determined that, due to the unique circumstances of the project, the proposed alternate fibercement siding would be an appropriate substitute for wood siding on the accessory structure approved by Conditional Use Permit 04-022 and Design Review 04-020 in that: 1. The proposed project conforms to the Tustin City Code and design standards which may be established from time to time by the Historic Resource Committee in that the project meets all setback, height, and lot coverage requirements for the zoning district and meets the spirit and intent of the design review criteria of the zoning code and Residential Design Guidelines. Specifically, the detached garage implements character-defining features of the Colonial Revival architecture of the main dwelling as intended in the Design Guidelines, and the detached garage is an accessory structure ancillary to the main structure and does not need to attempt to incorporate the level of detail and decoration as the house. Therefore, the alternate fibercement siding on the new accessory structure does not need to have the same level of detail as wood siding on the existing dwelling which exhibits beveled or rounded edge characteristics or gradation in width. In addition, the proposed detached garage is setback 67 feet from the front yard setback, maintains approximately 43 feet from the rear property line, and is detached a distance of 24 feet from the main residence. Therefore, the use of painted alternate fibercement siding on the accessory structure would not be distinguishable from wood siding as viewed from the publi~ right-at-way and would be appropriate. 2. The proposed work would not adversely affect the character of the District or designated cultural resources within the District in that the accessory structure has been evaluated by the Planning Commission for design consistency with the existing Colonial Revival dwelling on the property and with other historically designated properties in the surrounding cultural resource district. Since the alternate fibercement siding would not be used on an existing structure listed on the historical survey, would not be associated with an addition to a structure listed on the historical ResoJution No. 4051 Appeal of Community Development Director Decision Page 3 survey, would only going to be installed on a new detached garage significantly setback from the public right-at-way which would not be distinguishable from wood siding to the untrained eye, no adverse impact to the character of the Cultural Resource District is anticipated. 3. The proposed work would be harmonious with the existing' surroundings. The project has been evaluated in terms of its appropriateness of materials, scale, size, height, placement, and use of the new building or structure in relationship to existing buildings and structures and the surrounding setting in that the architecture of the detached garage has been determined to be complementary of the existing Colonial Revival dwelling on the site and is compatible with structures in the Cultural Resource District. The use of alternate fibercement siding on a detached garage setback 24 feet away from the main structure and over 50 feet from the public right-af-way will appear to be representative of appropriate wood siding used on properties identified in the historic survey. G. This project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303 (class 3) of the California Code of Regulations (Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act). II. The Planning Commission hereby reverses the Community Director's Decision and allows the use of alternate fibercement siding on a detached accessory structure located at 200 South "A" Street. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting on the 26th day of February, 2007. . ,/ .4 ~~4 ~~~L ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Resolution No. 4051 Appeal of Community Development Director Decision Page 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE City of Tustin II Elizabeth A. Binsack, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California' that the Resolution No. 4051 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 26th day of February, 2007. a~~L ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary i I l. _ lJ' ~?t ~.._-- .>; 'If ,:'II' . . _ . ...Y_'11 iJlr._." 7:00 p.m. Given Staff present None Approved Adopted revised Resolution No. 4051 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 26, 2007 CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Present: Chair Floyd Chair Pro Tern Puckett Commissioner Kozak, Lee, and Nielsen Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Jason Retterer, Deputy City Attorney Dana Ogdon, Assistant Community Development Director Justina WilJkom, Senior Planner Chad Ortlieb, Associate Planner Eloise Harris, Recording Secretary PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 2007, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak, to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING 2. CONTINUED APPEAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DISALLOW THE USE OF FIBERCEMENT SIDING ON A DETACHED TWO-CAR GARAGE WITH SECOND-STORY GAME ROOM THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON A PROPERTY IMPROVED WITH AN "All-RATED DWELLING IN THE CULTURAL RESOURCE OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE PROJECT WAS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT AND APPROVED WITH REDWOOD SIDING BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION 05-007. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED AT 200 SOUTH A STREET IN THE SfNGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) WITH CULTURAL RESOURCE (CR) OVERLAY DISTRICT ZONING DISTRICT. Minutes - Planning Commission February 26, 2007 - Page 1 7:02 p.m. Ortlieb Nielsen Floyd Ortlieb Ms. Young Ortlieb Ms. Young Floyd Nielsen Ortlieb Bill Hankins, 220 South A Street 7:08 p.m. Retterer Nielsen RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to the Planning Commission's direction at the February 12, 2007, meeting, staff has included Resolution No. 4051 to reverse the Community Development Director's decision disallowing the use of fibercement siding on a detached garage structure approved by Zoning Administrator Action 05-007. The Public Hearing opened. Presented the staff report. Asked for a closer look at the fibercement sample. Suggested that the only noticeable difference is the lack of beveling on the fibercement. Stated that one of the primary differences is the rounded edge; there is also a gradation on the redwood siding where the wood is a little thinner on one end than the other. Asked if the sample was the second or the' first that she provided. Answered that it was the second sample. ,--- ~ ! i Stated she would have preferred the sample with paint on it had been provided. Indicated the sample provided was fine. Asked for clarification whether or not the color scheme was the same. Answered in the affirmative. Commented that his observation of the process and outcome of this appeal was a good learning experience for him; the appellant and staff are to be commended. The Public Hearing closed. Stated that, since two of the Commissioners were absent from the last meeting, it might not be appropriate for them to participate in a decision on this item. Indicated that he had reviewed the minutes and spoken to the applicant and felt well informed as a result. [' Minutes - Planning Commission February 26, 2007 - Page 2 Lee Confirmed that he had also read the minutes. spoken with the applicant, and visited the property. Floyd Thanked the City Attorney for raising the question. Nielsen Indicated that he had a discussion with Ms. Young today, drove by the site over the weekend, and had a conversation with a neighbor who was not in favor of the project. Retterer Stated that, if both Commissioners felt properly informed, it would be acceptable for them to participate in the decision. Nielsen Noted that after looking at the material, reading the detailed minutes, and talking to the two individuals, both for an against, his feeling was that the issue came down to where the line should be drawn regarding the Guidelines in the Overlay District; since the garage structure is not the primary structure or on the Historical Survey, it would seem to be a judgment call as to how the standards are applied; this will be an ancillary structure that maintains the spirit of the Overlay District, is setback 67 feet from the street, and 24 feet from the original structure, the difference will not be noticeable and therefore an exception should be allowed. Suggested that it would be a good idea for the Planning Commission to review the Cultural Resources Overlay District, perhaps in a workshop, including the rules and regulations that are in effect for the residential homeowners in that District either by legal obligation or by voluntary participation. Lee Stated he had a telephone conversation with the appellant and also drove by the property; complimented Ms. Young for keeping the property in such good condition; and, added his support for the use of the fibercement which blends well with the original structure. Koza k Indicated that he supports the action; thanked staff for bringing back the alternative resolution; stated the minutes fairly represent the discussion; and, added that the intent of the Guidelines is being met. Agreed that arranging for further study of the Overlay District by the Planning Commission should occur; however, it will be necessary to first understand the rules and regulations of the Overlay District within the context of the Design Guidelines and the City's Zoning Code and also the work plan of the Historical Resources Commission, the Fiscal Year 2007-08 Budget, and the proposed realignment of committees and commiss.ions. With those facts in mind, he would suggest to his fellow Commissioners that the Commission request staff to report back with the topical items that would need to be considered in making a decision regarding an update to provide a better understanding of what would be involved Minutes - Planning Commission February 26,2007 - Page 3 Puckett Floyd Director None Director in the review and also to help prepare the Commissioners for such a decision. Indicated this result is a good example of staff and government working together to reach a good solution; and, complimented Ms. Young on her persistence, perseverance. and the fine job she did in pursuing this action; this is one of the prettiest homes in Old Town, and this addition being 67 feet back will enhance the area. Agreed that the appellant has done a fine job on the original structure and that it is one of the nicest homes that Tustin is fortunate to have in Old Town; the Guidelines were created when Commissioner Puckett was on the City Councilor Planning Commission more than ten years ago; at that time such products were not available; the Guidelines need to be revised to determine what will be allowed in the future and how to avoid opening the floodgates for other projects; it is important that Tustin change with the times and consider the use of new products in the Overlay District; a Design Guidelines workshop as soon as possible would be appropriate. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Lee, to adopt Resolution No. 4051. Motion carried 5-0. Noted that this approval is an appealable item; the appeal period ends one week from today unless a member of the City Council appeals the item; in that event, the appeal period would end a week after the Council's March 6th meeting. REGULAR BUSINESS STAFF CONCERNS REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN AT THE FEBRUARY 20. 2007, CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Stated the Assistant Director would comment regarding Hangar 29. Indicated that the City Council asked staff to look at possible opportunities for minimizing impacts on the City's resources speCifically relating to City Boards, Commissions, and Committees. City staff researched the issue and made a recommendation to the City Council regarding the Parks & Recreation Commission, the Planning Commission, Historic Resource Commission, and the Tustin Community Foundation. Staff recommended that the Parks & Recreation Commission- would serve as a liaison with oversight and/or coordination with various groups within the community, such as the Senior Advisory Board, the Youth & Adult Sports Facilities Association, Tustin Pride, the Minutes - Planning Commission February 26, 2007 - Page 4 Tustin Community Foundation, and Special Events Committees. The Commission would also be renamed the Community Services Commission. The Planning Commission would accept the responsibilities of the Historic Resource Committee. The Tustin Community Foundation would accept the responsibilities of the Community Development In-House Citizens' Participation Committee. The Tustin Community Foundation would make a recommendation related to the Public Service Category Projects for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) dollars which are allocated by the City to various community groups. The Historic Resource Committee has a work program that is examined annually, which the Planning Commission may now be doing. The Planning Commission may want to look at what the work program would be. The City Council recommended the initiation of an ordinance and proceedings that would include the Planning Commission, the City Council, or the Director; there is a process that has to be gone through; public hearings would be held aJJowing individuals to speak before the Commission and appropriate recommendations made; the City Council requested that the Planning Commission initiate an ordinance that would consolidate that function; staff will be bringing that ordinance to the Commission in March. Nielsen Asked if the ordinance will include a recommendation to the Council. Director Answered in the affirmative; and, added that an ordinance is required because these changes are part of the Zoning Code and an amendment will be required; if it were only in the Tustin City Code it would not necessarily come before the Planning Commission. Nielsen Suggested this seems a conflict of interest and might be better handled at the City Council level. Director Responded that this is a procedural issue required by law and must come to the Planning Commission first. Assistant Director Stated the former MCAS-Tustin was closed in 1999; because it was a Navy disposal of property action and a community reuse planning effort, the environmental document that was prepared included a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and a California Environment Quality Act (CEQA); that the EIS/EIR identified a worst case scenario which included the potential that the hangars could not be saved; there are two National Registered blimp Minutes - Planning Commission February 26, 2007 - Page 5 hangars at the Base; the environmental documents considered the possibility that those hangars could not be saved; the Navy was obligated as part of that effort to identify potential mitigation for the loss of those hangars; the Navy had to negotiate with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, which is the Federal equivalent to the SHPO; negotiations also included the County of Orange because the northerly hangar is promised to the County as part of an urban regional park; the City of Tustin participated as the potential owner of the southerly hangar; the outcome of those negotiations was an agreement that laid out the strategy to market both hangars; the County was to market the northerly hangar and the City the southerly hangar. ~ At the last City Council meeting, a staff report was brought to the Council that reported the marketing effort for the southerly hangar. Four expressions of interest were submitted to the City. Fallowing the guidelines that were included in the Navy's agreement with SHPO and the Advisory Council, the marketing effort was intended to identify whether or not the firms that submitted proposals had the financial resources to rehabilitate the hangar and place a business in the hangar that would be a viable reuse. The businesses had to be able to pay for infrastructure, pay for seismic retrofitting, pay for fire code upgrades, building code upgrades, etc. It has been reported that the Navy's own analysis of the hangar required improvements that ranged between $13 and $26 million just to bring it up to code. The conclusion reached in the City Council staff report found that none of the four proposals was economically viable, and a recommendation was brought to the City Council to reject all four; the Council concurred with staffs recommendation; the Council also authorized the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the Tustin Legacy Partners to lease the hangar and also to begin the effort needed to comply with the Memorandum of Agreement concerning the mitigation that must accomplished. Even though the Council rejected the four proposals, the Council also indicated the desire that at least one of the hangars would be preserved and every effort made to preserve one hangar if possible; the County of Orange has moved forward with one of the proposals that was made to the County for the northerly hangar and is in negotiation on a potential economically viable reuse; nothing will happen immediately to the southerly hangar; it is still undergoing remediation by the Navy and still owned by the Navy; the City is leasing the hangar from the Navy, and it will probably r"- take five years of remediation before the property can be conveyed by deed to the City and subsequently to the Tustin Legacy Community Partners. Minutes - Planning Commission February 26. 2007 - Page 6 Nielsen continued Lee Kozak Puckett Offered his prayers and condolences go to the Egan family and suggested that the meeting be adjourned in Mr. Egan's memory. Added his apologies for missing the last Planning Commission meeting. Stated that the rapid changes in technology and the ability to hide cell towers in ways that make them almost impossible to notice would suggest that making a suggestion to allow for revisions to the Residential Design Guidelines to allow for new products and innovative designs may be the wave of the future. Expressed his condolences to the Egan family and agreed that the meeting should be adjourned in Mr. Egan's memory. Thanked staff for this evening's presentations. Indicated his thanks and appreciation to Ms. Young for the work she has done to maintain the historic structure, beautify the property, and work to build the new structure in keeping with the spirit and appearance of the Overlay District. Thanked staff for working through the issue with the applicant and the Commission. Stated he looks forward to the proposed workshop regarding possible revisions to the Design Guidelines. Thanked staff for their reports on Council actions. Noted that he, too, was happy to see Chipotte open, particularly due to the improvement that has been brought to that comer. Offered his sympathies to the Egan family for their terrible loss. Noted that he is looking forward to moving the Planning Commission meetings to Tuesday. Indicated that he also attended the ribbon-cutting at Roderick's; when he moved to Tustin in 1975, that was a Chuck's Steakhouse; this is a very nice restaurant on Red Hill just south of the 1-5 freeway in the Stater Bros. shopping center; the executive chef is from PJ's Abbey. Stated that he was one of the founding members of the Tustin Community Foundation in 1994 which floundered until an Executjve Director could be found; that Director left and things have not been going as well; however, once a new Executive Director is found, perhaps within the next month, things will be on track; there is Board with about 15 new members and community leaders Minutes - Planning Commission February 26, 2007 - Page 8 committed to getting the Foundation back to making a difference in Tustin. Asked if there would be any way to organize a tour of one of the hangars~ Assistant Director Answered that the chances are not good, but he could perhaps put Commissioner Puckett in touch with the right people~ Puckett Indicated he would like to go. Assistant Director Suggested that Commissioner Puckett give him a call. Floyd Reminded everyone that the Chipotle ribbon-cutting takes place tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. Agreed that, per Commissioner Lee's remarks, progress requires change and the City needs to keep up. Shared in the other Commissioners' condolences to the Egan family; the Tustin Police Department is one of the finest in the County but also in the State; as a police volunteer, he knew it would be only a matter of time before the perpetrator would be caught; the Tustin Police Department deserves our congratulations. Asked for a motion to adjourn in Mr. Egan's memory. 7:47 p.m. ADJOURNMENT In Memory of Tom Egan The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held Tuesday, March 13, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way~ g~fLA~) Elizabeth A~ Binsack Planning Commission Secretary f I 1 Minutes - Planning Commission February 26. 2007 - Page 9 ATTACHMENT J EXCERPTS FROM RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ATTACHMENT.I EXCERPTS FROM RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES CJ) ~ ~ ~ ~ en ~ ~ C1J <: ~ ... ~ .,J ..w ;:) r: a.I G ,~ t:Q t:: f-4 ..... ....... c :::: .911'4 ...... U cu ,..,,; 0 ~ <: l-f cu ....J ..... tJ <: <': ...... ;... E-- n:: ".. Z ..... '-=J U Q ....., CJ') ~ y ..... u ..... ~ ..... 0 ~ :n ..... .,... ..... 1) ~ ~ -... 1) ~ ..... ....J < > ...... > r.=J ~ ~ < t-4 Z o ~ o u . - , .J tlt#bl_' ~l~~ · ~~ 1j'~I:i~~~)~lo~~~t 'f[iJlJJJJ r ..~I' I~~ A~(~" ~~ J, I ~. .' ~ ", ~~ ~ S. ..1' I , ~ "1\ ~ Ioooi...- ~~ ,~~ h. ~ ~ , '1' ~.s t~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ' ~"~ . .....""'''1j 11 TTI 11 ~ ~~ , I . ~~ ~~ I - rI!iiiIii . -.., f :~... · n ~ ~~~ a::~ ~ t .~~~~~:. ~ ,~r~ 1 ~!~.~.~ t ~'-- Al1:J J~ = .1 .. ~.i~ : r ii, JJl..:. M-r-= l .~~& ,; r f'jf'" , ~I; : LC 1 ~~~i I~ A,)) l. rr . Ft"~~ >- , ~;t, V 11/ . II ~ - ~~ijr u.~ f.IL ~ ~~:_~ ~I ~ ':~. ._. 1 .~~ \ ~~~ ~ o. ~ &~ S"~~~~' ~r '---U .l~~ ~~ ~ l I -~.~~:~ - - -"" - - "..~ - - -:'"" ffTTU. ." ;.'~ .-- -' - - ~~ --- C I ~1I1J-= I ~=:).: ~,... ';-^~r.. ~ ~~- ~\.rtP'/\N · '~~~r! 01- -''-' -- -- , ~~~ \~ filII] @.)~~ ^'- "" ..~ ~ .' llT/lIfIIITf, I~ ~~~ . ~~o~v ~ 0,"" ::1..""""" ioW'., i "I!" ~ .~~ o~. ~i. ~~ ~ o.::=. L( , . .~' l tE 1~:S" ~8 · ~ 4~ ~ ,... ~ -= CI) E .~ ~ ::J 0 ..., en ~ ~ '.. s:: t: 0.0.':: '"' ~ ~ E .~ C:,... -a...aJ::t ~ ~ :a '"P E 0 8..... ..w en"'" ..... 0.. .... 0 J,.., o OJ.Cii ca ::: .... ~ U tU 2 '\j \j ~ CIl cu ,.., OJ ~ ~ ~ t'C J,.., ra 1J ~ a 0.. Q) QJ . vtJct:C: --- t:,..~ OJ (]J ct: 0 ~ ~ f-c..... 'Z ~ CIl ~ &:::: .0 ~ ..0 E 8'~ ::s t; oz: c.~ 0 g. ~ f-t s... 8.~ k _~ .c ~ .....u ~ .0 0 ~ ID M 0.. c= --;;: s.....;:: :: en \:J.... cod-" ....1 0 OJ ~,,~ ca d Q U::S C'l <u S b ~ ~ ~QJ ~ .~. ~ ~ ~ ~ . L.:C 5 ~. ~ cu~. Q. ct) E~ cu 0... ctS o ct1 ~ ~ ;.." ~.~ o..~. ::s E u ~ co en ~ CJ \j ~:a u @ ~.Ui ~ . . . . . . . . . ~ - _. - - - - --; ~ -. -.1 \ , \ , \ \ \ \ ) .. - ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ CJ) ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ tI) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ !' -., ,.... ..J >c ~ tf.> ...J < ~ ...... ? ....c tJ t.:J :.... ~ ~ ~ u ".., ~ <: -J < ~ ..... Z f-' ..... o ...... en t:J ~ ~ U ...c ,..; ..... p ..... en ..... ...... .,.;.... en "" Z :-' --- ~ ~ r ..... - -- - - - - - ... .... '--- ....... Q) o E o o o -oE ~.2 - _ a :::~ ~-o c: .!~ -8s ~~ s:: Q). ctJ Q) ~ aj ~ ~ ~ ' '1j' ~~~~~ ~~~~ o~ ~ ~~ i~~~~~~~~~~ 5! ~ =~~ > ti a; ~ :; .2 ~ ~ ~ Ui Z _~ .E' ~ Q) ~ .C t:: t: en ~ tJ . ~ ..... Q) - > 0..;:1..0 CI) ~~~~ h~Q)~~~~V ~r:~~aoo ~ ~ ctS ~ ~ ~ ~ d d U .... ~CJ ~ 0 v~ ~ .eJ . bO ~ t:; .......-4 ~ ~ J..c CI) Q) d ~ M ~?; ..;,..J ~ ~ Q) (tS ~ S ~.t:: ~ ..J.J ~ Et:: M Q)..=.9 ~...-( ~ "'0 ..... ~ ..r: t: ~ ,.... ~ i-'-4 ~ ~ {) 0.. tt: ;........... \J:;:: OJ Cl> ~~o~~~~o~o ~r^_~~~ ~~ tI) ~...... Q) fC QJ ,,~ 0.. :.::: Q) ;:s ~ ~ \of ~ - \J d C ~ ':::: ..... Q) --- '" u Z --- Q) --.......0 ~ c= ~ X CJ ~ .::= t:1 ~....... ~...... d QJ ""'......... u > Q) ...., CI) 0 ...... U-4 t:) ~ Q) :j C/) ..-4 c....... ~ u...-4 0 ~. t: Q) I-c ~ 0 ...... (t1 ~ 0 tI) t-c :::: ~ u ti t-c ~ ~ CO Q) d........ '-'e 8 ,- ~ Q) res =' 0 as..... Q) ~ r" ,.....c --. bO CI) u ~ f:u t: M Q) U 0 --. U .iJ'" \.~ a.::: ~ Cf.) = Q) 0 ~ 0 ctS ~ ~ 8 QJ.9 ~] ~ bO ~ ~ CJ.~..!:: 0 .- __ 0 ....., ~ 0 ..0.::: 0 Q)...,.-of C)...... CJ ,- t;) u (J) ~ ~Cf.)~~Q) , d ......\J~~>~ M~~ .::: ("j ~ 0 t-c tI') ~.5 t""\ tf) tI):: ...,.-.( 0 -.. Q) 0 Q ro ~ ..... Q) Q) " , __ ....... .... ~ CI) \J U ..... > r"\ ct1 ......, CI) ~ ,- '-',,~ d.... co ;.... CJ · - ....... J-4 C E ~QJ J-4 c:...s bD~ U d CI),- ~ 0 > ~\j Q) co U 0 l-e CI) 0 0 d ~ --= .c u r;.::: 0 ...... Q) e ~ .:: ~~~I~~~ ~~=~~~>o~~~ ~=~~= ~u~~ -~ ~ ~~ro ~~~uxw~~,-~~~o~o~~C/)o~oc~ ~ ~ >~o~~< ~~~ ~~~<~ ~Uu~~Z~O~ '~u~u~~~~ u ........". o .,... ...... C"\ f':,-.( .:; 0 >waJ () ~ o o ......~ ~ ~ ....., :: :s o 0 o~ U~ :a '0 c -0 ~ o Co. 1J ~ C ~ o Q.. ~ ~ __ Q) \J ..~ 0 ~ d .8 o.:::~\je co--<~.3 UCI) ceCl) ~ ~ 2 u Cl) 0.. · 5 ~.... -.... ~~~o~~ ~ ou~ ~ "@.>g CJ ~ <l) CJ :... ..:: t:: --< > ~. U) ] .~ ~ ] (;. ~ Q) <lJ ~ '-"-<< .;:: · (; ~CJ:JroO~~ t1)gro8..9~ r:,-~l o~ .!:~<CjU~ t:~ 15"-:>- ..::: .e.E u ;> tf) ~ t:: E :; L'J ~~~r;:",~ E-e ~ c./) CD - ~ ") :J 7" -4 ~ J :.1 J ~ ) j ., -4 ) -c .... ~ .... -4 J ... ~ ~ ~ ... :.. ~ ~ ~ ::) 7 A ~ 7' ~ ) -c -c ~ > ~ -c J ") J ~ .... ... ~... d et:: 55 \j ~ Q) .... c: t: .0 ~ 52 -I.J d QJ .~ .... 0 ~ 0 ~ '0# ..!: ~ ~...., ~ ~ ..!:: <1J c s........~...,jt:: 0 =>O'--t:; o '-l.t c: e .... 1-4 ~ ..... QJ (l) .~ 0 ~ -'..0 ~ i3 QJ ..... t5 -r:: Qj ~ ~ 0 0 ~ (J ,.. ~ t'""""" ....... ...... ~ -- t:: E.~ -::: ~.= ~ 0 x ca..c.~ ca QJ QJ.b c: d . M Q) -.. E 0.. ~..c,- {:f 0.. ~ 0.. QJ CIl <lJ .... > -- ~ QJ <l) ~ . H...... ::s eo ..c 0 J;> 8 ~ ".. ...., cu ..... ..::: ~ ~ ~ ...... QJ <1J ~ .~ ... ~ c.: <lJ ...... C..J ~ "'0 t.O -U .-. <tS...... ClJ ~ = Qj ~ 0...... c: 0 ~..c ~ ~ <lJ Q) -< QJ :3 ...... a1 -::: ~ en.......... eo \j -:5 en ~...... ~~.:: ~::1 ~ C ~ QJ ....; P"I""'f t\S> ~ c:: T-! ra r'\ ...... . ..... ~ ,- t:: v ~ "0 0........ (J ~ ~ ........ (J -::::.... ~ ~ ~ t: .... <l) '-'" :: <1J ~<U~~ .<ucaC::~>2d..o en C 0.. eo~ u ~,... ~ <tS ce U c:...... eo ~ cu ~ -' .= <:..c: $-t 0 ..9 .- e ~.i: > M tJ ~ ......9 <1J " $.c..... QJ 0 ~ QJ'- "... $.c ;... CI) ..... Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-- Q) ~ rei (I) ..... CI) CI') c 0 ~ tJ.- 0.0...... <lJ .:: Q) .x:=: ~ 0 Q)."" OJ QJ <lJ ~ ~ <:1..0 ~ ~ u .9 ..!: ,5 "0...0 ~ o "t] :.. 0 o Q Q" $ s tICS \J. '- - 0 V) Q.. "0 Q C Q... Q 0 .Q c: g. ~ - :: (; CQ t:l oS 1) t;; "0 o o ~ a .s u o Q. ~ \ 't] :: ~ -'= u Q \u :( .; "0 ~~ 0... '~ ~ t.O\j = "'~ .~ ~ d cil :i o CBd~ ~ v s::~ ~ .;:. en E C ~ tV CU 0 \:j ..c: ru...... u . :.:: QJ ~ en.~ CI) C) o..~.!: ~ 0 ~~.~ ~ ~ "'d '"- 0.. tf) 0 ~ ~ QJ U .......... ~ ......, => CJ ca...... ~ tf)~~O~~Ud <1J ~>~en CIl~CIl 8"2 O:E ;;S.~ 0..-:2 ~ '5 -0 g"O:2 -g ~ 0. ~ -d c >.;!: 3: u 0.. ~ C:.o u ~ ~ (jj U o.~ as (j ~ c;S.o <U -:S eo 0 ~ as -0 c: ~..c as ;!: -5 -0 0::] (J U Cf.)..c ....... c: ~ ~ ~ PP""f 10." ... ~ ..... e CO 8 .... ~ ~ -en ~ t:O~ t"a ~ ~ r:' t:~ ~ t"a CU U .::: ~ ~ .~ "0 .~ -ci .S ~ -g 3 ~ as'g; ~ ~ m ~ -0..0 ~.5 QJ E <:J "'O.~ tJ .c ~'::> <<: t;>' J-. ..... . · ..... 0 J..4....... = U .~ ~ ~ QJ ;> t;>;> ct: 0.. - CI) J-. 0 J.... -.... ~ t"i:S Cf) Q) --- ~ ~ ct: ;> ClJ en -~ ~ 0.. -c 0 ~ 0 0.. \:j s:: g..... ~ 12 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 r: . 0 ~ 2 .i: ~ (I) <V 0 2 J..4 eo en tJ Q). ~ ~ ~ ~_~ ~ 0 E QJ (1) ~;... 0 ~ ..., C ~ CC > OJ ':::: .... ~ 0.. eJ ~ ~...... ~ tJ ~ ~ 'W...... tJ ,.. 0 ~.... ~ ,;> ~ . c: __ d ~ ;> "" ~ '"0 tt: -- .- -::: ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ;> 0...... ~~ s........., ...., .-.,... QJ to ;> ---e ---e ~ ~J-.UU ~uoo~~ ~ ~~c $0 c QJ ~ 0 Cf.) s-' --0 o.~ ...... ~ <'a Z a > 8::: <u-2 :: .(ii a:; .s := ~ tt) 3 8 P... ~ ~.!: 5 :... O.s ca ~.o 'oJ.~ > tU ctS c.'C ~ 0 Q) <U (1)......-::: 0."'" 6 0... t:: ~ .~ en E m ~ ~ b..!S i5 .~ -5 .0.. 2 ~ J::: a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '-- CJ -5~ ('.).8 ~ t'C CJ s..... ..co~ ~-i: ~ v~rO ~ CJ ..~ -0 \j 1- CJ ,.QCI).-..J ~ co: ~~ :J 3CJC:: r- u >- C t't: CJ 2 '-t: OJ u~~-: o (Tj . \j en ,... -<lJ-~ ~ ~ ro.9 ='=--0 ~ ::i ,- CJ en U ::1 '--t C s.... 0 0 o c-: r- s- U' ~ u; n.. - ~-- u ~ ..... QJ M c:: -?Q) ~CO o s- ~~ 0\0 · en (":") U) CJ ~ eo C.I) ~ ce :! ~ 0.. cT ,- Q) 0 S -5= (J o ~~ ....., ,- ~ 0 1- CJ CI) r:: ""-~o.. ~ E 2 - - <lJ ~ c---~ s:: ~O:::~<lJ ...... .- > ~ ~ ~ o.o~;>- Q)~ ~o.. ~~"Ou o c-=~--.~o Q) t;,- s... ~ ..... rE ~ 0.= ~ 0 ~ M <1J.....,J::~~~CIlO ,- CIl 0... ..... t: --- "tj Q) ~ :... ClJeooOIl'-'-o.c Qj~O""";<'::::~~ .... =a ;!: G' 2 .::: ~ 2 ~.;;: Q) ~ r, ~ d c:a '"'4 ,- ..0..... 0......; t: ~ -= ~ CI).O U ~ ::: o 0 ..-.c ..... ~ ..... ~ .~ 0.. 0 i!l E-c ~ ....., ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ..2.~ e ~= .-- ~ eo ~ QJ;.... 0 ...., 0.0 0 :: .8 oc...... CJ CI) c: l-4 - - X ..... C\S ~..... o.~ 0... ~ <:J U) J-. 0 ct: .., cu (1)0 0 E (J ~ ~ --' t"'\...... ~ (J <Uu.......v.......wO.. <U <5.;:: (": 0 QJ .8 ....... ti '-,....---e<:JO""QJO;... E=: o...;e ~ ~ E=: \J t:: ~ ~<1JO "'0 0,... ~ QJ en 00 __ (l) -== ..a \:j CJ ~ C\S U <lJ .....: U t: ~ - s: I- t: c: u....... ~ ~ ..J ....... :J t'tS -.......... :J . _CJl 0 C': c: ...... H "';;': ~ 0 \j ,... s... _ _ -- t'tS '*" ..... CJ ~ CJ-:j ~ QJ~_:2..c > ctS ~ QJ ~ ~ U 0... r"\ U1 0 f"\ s:; - '-' C'C r'\ CI) ~ '" t'\ ,.~ 0 ~ ~ - ,., ~ 0... '-V c:: \J~ _ - u ;:: ca.-. CJ r- I:; ...... en CI).;: ~ <1J <lJ...c -::: QJ O U ........ -u <:J .., ,......c ...... u . ~ -<" $......... ....... ~ ...... ,- ,... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CI) 0 ~ ~ C:dOCO: o~QJ cc -2 _ ~ r.J) ~ ,- (J CI) ~,\j.c -... c-:: CO ....,... en - · i: ::s ClJ 0 ~ 0.. > t:.:: ~ co..., 0 U 0 s- (l).- ~ 0 ~ CI) ~ _ > ~ u :> ::J CI) ~ 0 --.-. ~ ;;:...::: xCJ~~-~O""O~ ,-,- <lJ e::: ~ ~ ......!: en (lJ..c c e OJ ._~c~QJ""Ouo - ,... -cc c 0 cc U .- U) U -0 -=.~ 1- u. ~ Ul,U ~ Q) QJ t:: 0 ~ ~ 00:1 u -i: QJ ,... (J ,- 0 '"'- --,... 0 0.... - C'\: "Z _:=: ~ c:.:: en 0 ~ ~ -~ - :;: 0 ~ c-= eo U (1) 0 en -- ..... 0.. ;:> U cJ E -u; -en ~ ~:c -= 2 ~ eo ,,- ~ .~ u .~ en --0 o o ~ .,.' .--.,,' . .... ... - -.. C'!"') C1j o~ ~ me g~~ U ~ ~ I > OJ .5::s ~ CJ ~ 0 .t:; c:: "'Nct)~.-,...(~ \j~ -.-.- - ~ ~ ~ CI) ,- .;: CI) ,0.. OJ . ,- c= ~ ...; -= Ui <1J tD tI) :.::: "0 eoz: ~ ~ .;: ...... E ::: ~ 0... OJ <1J QJ > t..O_ ;>- - -- > 0... be U) r:~"O d(tS~::3~O co,... CI)..... d ~ M <1J 0 en ~ ~ 0.. OJ (I) ~ ~ :] ~..c: .J.J :::: - - CI) ,............... ct: 0 u 0 ,u r: Z ~ "0 u OJ ~ C ~ -c;; ,~-_ g u.~ -0 -= ;::: co 0 co- QJ ~'-, ~ ~ u,- .- < ...... ~ ro C 0.= co' ;; (J) -; 0 E -~'" 0"'0 CJ .r:;.- ~ QJ ~ >.U; :> QJ -ci x bO {J) :J C -i: ,.... <l)..c OJ ~ ~ ~....... ::s 0 t.O ~ ,,""" to ,-,.~ 0 ~ M en ~ = OJ ~ - ~-..... > ro - ~..... , ,..., en.~....., to .u~ C -- c-= :: eo en ro.~ c: ~ ~.~ o~ ~ ~ c~_~ ~ 0 ~ -,... 0.. 0.- 0 - 0 - ,- ~- (J) ~ u~ o..~ a CJ..2E ~~ ..c ~ c5 ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~c-.: U)uU;>~~-,-~ --- ,... -- IIIIa' . -- Cf.) (j z ~ o ...J ~ ;::> ~ ~ ~ o C/) tt:J t:J U U -< ~ t:J Z Q Z <: en Z o ~ ~ ~ o o < - Cf.J ~ o ~ ~ ..... .~ ~ ~ ::: ~ CI) .... ca .~ ~ QJ ...... ~ 0 ,.. Q) oo~ t.O~ 0 \j = 5J.C tU ~ 0 en c~ => O.i::::: ~ ~.~ 0 ~QJ(1)te~o~CJ en ......QJ,... --. QJ ,...c ct: 1-. -::: c: <V ~ CI1 ..... E u ~ M ,... ...... ::1 ~ t: .::: ~ -= CI) o :: '"'0 QJ ~ ............. C!J '-d""'---,cUO"" ...... ;...."'-" ca ~ ~ U~t'tS~M'-'QJ:: .... CI) QJ Q) ..., N r:: O~ ca ~ "'C c: r::.U; <l) ....,CI)~QJQ)QJ E Cf.) . ...., c: CO ~ OJ ..... \j en..... ~,... QJ ~ 8 ,ca Q) QJ-=:-... Q)"QJ'-U 0.. .= ~ ~~ E=:.;g~ E en >-.""" QJ . 0.. c:'a 0 ~=~.oa?::au o ~ 0 ~..... 0..... "'0 QJ ~ QJro:;.~"d 0:; ~ .t: c: c: 0 woo ~ > 0 ~ > QJ..... ,... ~ ..... ,... 0 ;> bO ~ tii C\1 ::: .9 Cii ..::: en E o ~ "t) o ~ o o ~ '- ~ o "tJ S ~ .. Cf.) .... o o o ,... ..... ...... ..... ..e.J ..... ~ u ~ ~::::....; .~ ~ ~ CJ o ~ --c ~ ...... CJ ..oJ 0 ......0 ~ .= C1) ..... ='...... '" CI) .;: ~ > 0....., ~ ........... Q) ,... !'CS en cu (C '-L..f ~ Cii 0.. QJ ~ ~ 0 0.. e" ..... ~ CI)~Q) o ~ en C 0 CI) E > ~ 0 u =' 0 ~..::: QJ.':= en o. ;... o ~ ~..... ~...c: ~ o u .c-\:i 0 QJ ....,.~ CI) "'0 0 Q)--c v~ ......~.!::..o J,.., c:....... ~ ...... ..... 0..... ~ Q) ~ .~ .C <U ~.o d 0 ~ . ~ :: --'u OJ 0;'" QJ <l) -,,~ ..c ~... ~ QJ ~..... ~ ~ C\S en..... s... t.... CJ) ~:3~~8OJ~ ~~~QJt::..c.c ~...... ra ~ ..... -+J ......, tf.) ,....... r: ----c ~ CJ ...... r: ~ .CI)~ ~ ~ --.. ...... 0::]::: ..::: 0 C'tS .9 ..... ,... ::s..... roc;; oeo ~ \j en's... ~ ca QJ - ~ oo~ 0 0 . o c: ~o ~ QJ ~ :a ti u bO:O U == Q) ~ C.en c: =='...c ~ ..::: res ~ ..a ..oJ <a .~ ~ ctS >.. ~ ClJ X .., CJ s...:::: ~ QJ ~ o...O~::SCJQJ ~~ x..cx <-:: QJ Q) QJ ~ QJ s..,.u::o......c...... o u..... '0 CI) - ~ ...... ~ .s... ~ 0 (I) 2 2 ~ ~.- ...... ~ x OJ E ~ .~ OJ ~.co<lJ~bo ~\juE~CJ - c OJ.- ,- ,- ~r:...Quc:= c.n,.. oJ 0.0 OJ CJ QJ ~o C1J;-. en OJ C ..::: ~ ..c 1""'\ N ~ ..... ..c ._ ..., ~ .., ...... CJ.U; ~ ~ '"'0...... 0...... >... N ...... ~ ~ s... 0 c.:.Ui ct: OJ 0 c:t: · --........ ,... ctS OJ CI) ~ ,- , '"' ~ en...... --- ...... ..c E U ~. t:: -= ~ ....Q)S~u~ Q)O<lJ 0 ~ .!: <lJ 0 ~ ~ ~ \j ._ ..... ..... OJ ~ ~.- en ~ C ..... ,.. 1"\ __ en · CI) ..J Q) ...... <c u V4J r- ::l ~ · c ..... ~ -... ClJ . ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ .~ ~ ~ .8 G 2 ..... c: QJ C <V..... C ~ c:: rrj ~ 0 CI) ~...o <'C ~ ~..... ~ (l) --C U ,.c ...... ~ "'0 ...... M ::t. C) "0 >. co u ~ QJ..... ~ QJ 0 ,- "0 8 ~.:: Cj - s... en c: ~'",= := ~ U). u 'U > u OJ ... 0..... en ~ ~ ~x ~..... ~ CJ)..o ~.- ~ "" 0 ;. <:J CI) ,........ ~ ~ ~ v,- co Q) ~..-4 ,- >. d C c: ~ CI) ~ :.a ~o<<Scnu~~Cl)~UCi> · - ..... ~ ~ ..,e..J ,- U c....... 0 c: ~ U') ..... C co: c: ... t:; > ~..= ~ :J ~ .~ OJ E on x :a;> OJ u:-g c ,-:1~l: cClJ U)~oo OJ .~ 0 U.- C oJ.o ;j s... > N ..c ~ OJ U ~ a CJ ~ OJ CJ .8 ~.i: :> .- ~ c: x ,- ,- ~ CI) s.... ,- G 0 > U -::: ~ CJ c: -= en :J c-:.:: __ ~ ....... o ~ ...... -~ .-.4 ...... ,..a -..-4 ...... r= 0.. ~ ..... o U - - - - - .. - - 0. t: ;:) :x:: . Q) :Q ~ o Q 1] CD ~ L.&.. \ l.() \.0 .... c: Q)- E cu ..,.. o U eo en t!),.... c.- ~ .-.5 0 ~.- ~ 0 ~ o..J u..... OJ ~ ~ ..... '--e ~ ~ ~ CO 0 - ~ 0 OJ :z= ~ --.. ..... ,- 0 ...J ..... CI) t:: ~ 0.. \j ~~~~8::sCJ .(l)U '-QJr--."'O -s...~ U ,- t.O ~ 0 .9 S:! .~ s... CJ c: ,- ~ _ s... QJ ,- o ce.t: ;. Q) (l) ..... 2 -a -::: ~ C.I) ti <lJ' 0.. == ~ ~.U; ,- ct: QJ - s:: ~ - 0 c ,.... .... ,- X ..... 0 ~ ~ CJ <lJ ..-.. QJ ClJ \j;.... 0'- :> ...... r-'...... _ <l) ..u U ~ tt:""'" CJ ~ d :J ~ ('j ~ ,-~.cM..c:OO..r::O........ ....... ...., 0 :: :> "'*-I ..... ~ 0 (f) en ,- ~ - .... CJ..... 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ OJ en C ~ .C C1 (I) :0 ~ o.s ;J ~ blJ ~ ~ r: ca -U; ~...... ~ c. ~ CJ - :::: c 0.0 en ::: 0.':: roo ~ ..c:.~ ~ 0 c.~ ~ ~.~ <lJ - ~.~ > u.~ ~ ~'~ x~ ~ ~ CJ ~ ,- ~ - U')" ~ 0 OCJ- .... ~:J~ 0 o r:......o OJ :>...c ~ CJ ~ > ~ ~ 0 , 0 ,.... ~ ~ 0 C C -= u :;..!: c::::.~ - - - - - ..