Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-ATTACHMENT HAttachment H August 14, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting Public Correspondence Received and City Responses A comment letter dated March 16, 2018 was received from Rutan & Tucker, LLP on behalf of WTM Tustin Investors, LP, and Lake Union Investors, LP and their property interests at 13852 Red Hill Avenue. This letter commented on the following: 1. Comment: What level of improvements/upgrades to existing structures will trigger application of the Specific Plan requirements? Response: Existing uses shall be permitted to continue and need not comply with the new standards in the RHASP, subject to the provisions of TCC Section 9273, Legal Nonconforming Structures and Uses. When land uses intensify and/or occupancies change, conformance with the regulations, and any other design criteria outlined in the Specific Plan will be required. 2. Comment: The ten (10) percent landscape coverage requirement in the Specific Plan is excessive. Response: Landscape coverage requirements are specified in Chapter 4 of the RHASP and include a minimum of ten (10) percent of the total commercial gross lot size that must be permanently landscaped. Landscaping shall include a variety of live landscape, hardscape materials, and other design elements such as rooftop landscaping (i.e. green roofs), fountains, sculptures, planters, decorative rock, etc. The proposed ten (10) percent minimum landscape coverage for mixed-use projects is desirous to achieve the vision for the area and necessary to enhance livability for future residents within the Specific Plan area. The City's current landscape coverage requirement does not address mixed-use projects. 3. Comment: Are drive-through restaurants not allowed in the Specific Plan? Response: Table 4-1 on page 4-5 of Chapter 4 of the RHASP identifies that drive- through, drive-in and drive -up facilities are permitted in the RHASP with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Drive-through businesses have additional design considerations related to on-site circulation, noise impacts, vehicular access, outdoor seating, landscaping and other parameters and this is provided in Chapter 5 - Design Criteria. The goal and objectives of the RHASP include a combination of different types of uses within the area including commercial, retail and residential that creates a sense of place and new identity while still balances the vehicular and public transit needs along Red Hill Avenue. As a result, a proliferation of drive-through businesses is not encouraged. 4. Comment: How does the height limitation of light poles within the Specific Plan apply to existing shopping centers within the Plan area? Response: For new mixed-use projects, the installation of new light poles shall not exceed a height of sixteen (16) feet and any new light poles installed on the rooftop of any parking structure located on a lot adjacent to any residential zone shall not exceed a height of eight (8) feet. For existing shopping centers within the Specific Plan area, the existing light poles may be non -conforming relative to the RHASP requirements. As a result, and in accordance with the RHASP, the TCC Section 9273 relative to Legal Non -Conforming Structures and Uses would be applicable for the RHASP. When land uses intensify and/or occupancies change, conformance with the regulations and any other design criteria outlined in the Specific Plan may be required. 5. Comment: Who is responsible for the costs associated with undergrounding overhead utility lines? Response: Costs associated with undergrounding overhead utility lines on private property would be required to be paid for by the individual property owner. Undergrounding overhead lines within the public right-of-way may be required through a project's conditions of approval and the subsequent payment of those costs may be determined through a fair -share arrangement between the City and project applicant. 6. Comment: Is shared parking allowed within the RHASP? Response: Shared parking within the RHASP area is included and adressed in Chapter 4 of the RHASP. 7. Comment: Will freestanding retail remain a permitted use within the Specific Plan and are supermarkets allowed? Response: Permitted, conditionally permitted and prohibited uses are identified in Table 4-1 within Chapter 4 of the RHASP. Table 4-1 includes a variety of retail, service, hospitality & entertainment, residential and mixed-use, civic, cultural & public uses, medical and automotive -related uses. Grocery stores are classified as "Food Service" and are a permitted use within the RHASP. Freestanding commercial as well as mixed-use are permitted within the RHASP. 8. Comment: When will public improvements and dedications be required? Will re - tenanting an existing structure with standard tenant improvements trigger this obligation? Response: The dedication of right-of-way to achieve a width of 60 feet from the centerline of Red Hill Avenue will be required at the time of development or redevelopment. Public improvements within the public right-of-way may be completed by the City of Tustin as part of a future Capital Improvement Project or they may be required to be made by a project applicant through conditions of approval for a project when a nexus exists or they may be made through a fair - share cost arrangement between the City and project applicant. 9. Comment: Will existing shopping center agreements and long-term leases be impacted by the RHASP? Will the RHASP require all properties to become mixed- use? Response: Existing shopping center leases are not within the purview of the City and are agreements between tenants and property owners. Existing commercial uses may continue to operate and remain. All new development or mixed-use projects must comply with the standards and requirements of the RHASP. 10. Comment: How will the parking be addressed with the proposed residential development project on the north side of Red Hill Avenue? Response: Parking for the pending mixed-use project at 13751 and 13841 Red Hill Avenue is required to be provided on-site, unless alternative shared parking is proposed. For approval of alternative shared parking, a parking study is required for both commercial uses and mixed-use development projects in accordance with the RHASP. The parking study would be subject to review by the City. Additional measures to address potential future parking shortages will also be made a condition of approval. 11. Comment: Please confirm the development standards for mixed-use projects on pages 4-15 through 4-19. Please clarify the meaning of "non-residential'. Response: The General Development Standards on page 4-15 through 4-19 apply to mixed-use projects. "Non-residential' includes stand-alone commercial development that is not part of a mixed-use project.