The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-24-99 PC PACKET I AGENDA' TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION 40 REGULAR MEETING MAY 24, 1999 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chairperson.Pontious ROLL CALL: Chairperson Pontious, Browne, Davert, Kawashima and Kozak PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to.3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda.) At this time members of the. public -may address the Commission regarding any items not on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of. the Commission (NO action can be taken off-agenda items unless authorized by law). IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS, THE COMMISSION ON ANY MATTER, PLEASE - FILL OUT ONE OF THE CARDS LOCATED ON .THE SPEAKER'S TABLE SO THAT YOUR REMARKS ON THE.TAPE RECORDING OF THE MEETING CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO YOU. WHEN YOU START TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. IF YOU REQUIRE SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING-COMMISSION SECRETARY AT- (714) 573-3106. CONSENT CALENDAR: (ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.) CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minutes of the May 10, 1999 Planning Commission Meeting. I Planning Commission Agenda May 24, 1999 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2 . Public Hearing For Zone Change 99-002 And Conditional Use Permit 99-005 a request to amend the zoning district regulations for the East Tustin Auto Center to allow ancillary banquet facilities as conditionally permitted uses and to allow _establishment of an ancillary banquet facility as part of an existing auto show room/museum site. The project is located at 36 Auto Center Drive within the Planned Community Commercial (PC-C) Zoning District. APPLICANT! PROPERTY OWNER: MACPHERSON PROPERTIES Recommendation 1. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3672 recommending that the City Council certify as adequate the Negative Declaration for Zone Change 99-002; and, 2. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3673 recommending that the City Council approve Zone Change 99-002 • to allow ancillary banquet facilities as conditionally permitted uses in the East Tustin Auto Center. 3. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3674 recommending that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit 99-005, a request to establish a banquet facility within the East Tustin Auto Center. Presentation: Minoo Ashabi, Assistant Planner REGULAR BUSINESS: 3 . Status Report on Design Review 97-026 has been agendized to report on the construction of Phase 11 of Congregation B'Nai Israel's religious and educational facility at 2119 Bryan Avenue within the. Community Facility zoning of the East Tustin Specific Plan. APPLICANT: CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL PROPERTY OWNER: CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL Recommendation Receive and file staff report. Planning Commission Agenda May 24, 1999* Page 3 ; 4. Status Report Presentation: Karen Peterson, Acting Senior Planner STAFF CONCERNS: 5. Report on Actions taken at"the May 17 1999 Ci J Council Meetings Presentation: Elizabeth A. Binsack, Director of Community Development COMMISSION CONCERNS: ADJOURNMENT: A regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held on June 14, 1999 beginning at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. I' ITEM # I i MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION ; REGULAR MEETING E^ MAY 10, 1999 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Kawa'shima INVOCATION: Commissioner Davert ROLL CALL: Chairperson rPontious, Browne, Davert, Kawashima and Kozak Commissioners: Present: Chairperson Pontious Vice Chair Kozak #, Davert Kawashima Absent. Browne Staff: Elizabeth A. Binsack, Director of Community Development Rita Westfield, Assistant Director of Community Development Karen Peterson, Acting Senior Planner Lois Bobak, Deputy City Attorney Scott Reekstin, Associate Planner Bradley Evanson, Assistant Planner Minoo Ashabi, Assistant Planner Doug Anderson, Senior Project Manager Kathy Martin, Recording Secretary PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda.) No Public Concerns were expressed. I` CONSENT CALENDAR: 1.- Minutes of the April 12 1999 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Davert moved Commissioner Kawashima seconded, to approve • the minutes. Chairperson Pontious abstained due to her absence afthe April 12, 1999 meeting. Motion carried 3-0. Planning Commission Minutes May 10, 1999 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2. Conditional Use Permit 99-008 a request for authorization to establish a specialty veterinarian office for imaging and treatment within building 14 (Planning Area D) of Jamboree Plaza. The project is located at 3047 Edinger Avenue within the Planned Community Industrial (PC-IND) zoning district. APPLICANT: VETERINARY NUCLEAR IMAGING ATTN: MICHAEL AND LISA BROOME PROPERTY OWNERS: JAMBOREE PLAZA HOLDINGS, LLC Recommendation That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3669 approving Conditional Use Permit 99-008. The Public Hearing opened at 7:02 p.m. Minoo Ashabi presented the subject report. • Commissioner Kawashima noted that he visited the Irvine Ranch facility and spoke with the applicant. Chairperson Pontious asked the applicant if they were in agreement with the conditions. The applicant answered affirmatively. The Public Hearing closed at 7:04 p.m. Commissioner Kawashima asked how often the radioactive materials license is regulated. Chairperson Pontious stated she assumed it would be on an annual basis. The Director indicated that the applicant.could also lose their license or not be relicensed,. Commissioner Kawashima asked who would be responsible for picking up animal waste since it could be radioactive. The Director indicated thaf the animal's owner would be responsible but she would assume the applicant would also take some responsibility. Commissioner Davert noted that the city code addresses the issue of animal waste. • Planning Commission Minutes May 10, 1999 Page 3 Commissioner Davert moved. Commissioner Kozak seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit 99-008 by adopting Resolution .No. 3669, as amended. Motion carried 4-0. 3.- Use Determination 99-001 and Conditional Use Permit 99-006 a request,to operate a music school at 1077 East Main Street. The project is located within the Planned Community Commercial (PC-COMM) zoning district. APPLICANT: STELLA VOLDMAN KEYNOTES MUSIC SCHOOL PROPERTY f OWNERS: -MAX LEGRAND REALTY 1 Recommendation That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution Nos. 3670 and 3671 ._approving Use Determination 99-001-and Conditional Use Permit 99-006 to allow a music school within, the Planned Community Commercial (PC- Commercial) retail/office center bounded by Newport., Avenue, Bryan • Avenue and_Main Street. The Public Hearing opened at 7:07 p.m. Bradley Evanson presented the subject report. Commissioner Davert asked if the-applicant could obtain a temporary permit for recitals or concerts. Bradley responded that the applicant .would need to apply for a special permit and he further noted that`the-applicant has indicated they have permission to .use a building in Santa Ana for recitals. - Commissioner Kozak asked staff if they were' concerned about the occupancy as it relates to the parking. Bradley noted that the .occupancy is limited to students and instructors and does not include parents or observers. Doug Anderson, Senior Project Manager — Traffic, noted that there is available on street parking to accommodate any overflow. Commissioner Kawashima asked how the issue of noise would be addressed if it were found to be too loud. Bradley responded that it would depend on the nature of the complaint.-but might include reducing hours or installing sound insulation. Planning Commission Minutes May 10, 1999 Page 4 Commissioner Kawashima asked if the applicant was currently operating.' Karen Peterson noted that the applicant was currently operating with the expectation of approval this evening. Chairperson Pontious inquired-if the hours could be expanded to allow the applicant more flexibility. The Director noted that the applicant could ask for an adjustment to the hours at a later date.or the Commission can make. the change now. Chairperson Pontious suggested,the hours be changed to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. The Public Hearing.closed at 7:15 p.m. „ Commissioner Davert moved. Commissioner Kawashima seconded, to adopt Resolution No..3670 approving Use Determination 99-001. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Davert moved. Commissioner Kawashima_ seconded, to adopt • Resolution 3671, as amended, approving Conditional Use Permit 99-006. Motion carried 4-0. , REGULAR BUSINESS: 4 Design Review 99-007 a request to establish. the Tustin commuter rail station including: a parking lot to accommodate 318 vehicles and loading platforms on a 3.66-acre site: The project is located at 3075-3097 Edinger Avenue within the Planned Community Industrial (PC-IND) zoning district. APPLICANT: CITY OF�TUSTIN PROPERTY OWNER: CITY OF TUSTIN Recommendation That'the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3667 approving the environmental documentation for the project; and, 2. Adopt Resolution No. 3668 approving Design Review 99-007. Commissioner Kawashima stepped down due to a potential conflict of interest. , Scott Reekstin presented the subject report. i Planning Commission Minutes May 10, 1999 Page 5 Chairperson Pontious stated her pleasure at seeing the project coming to fruition. Commissioner Davert noted his concern about the possibility of a parking structure in the future. The Director indicated that for reasons of aesthetics and cost the. structure is not likely, but may be.required if demand exceeds capacity. Chairperson Pontious noted that the structure could be underground. Commissioner Kozak stated the project was exciting and noted the potential to display public art at the station. Chaff person Pontious acknowledged the potential for advertisement and the display of city banners. Commissioner Davert moved, Commissioner Kozak seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3667 approving the environmental documentation for Design Review 99-007. Motion carried 3-0. Commissioner Kawashima abstained. Commissioner Davert moved. Commissioner Kozak seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3668 approving Design Review 99-007. Motion carried 3-0. Commissioner Kawashima abstained. STAFF CONCERNS: 5. Report on Actions taken at the April 19' and May 3, 1999 City Council Meetings Elizabeth A. Binsack, Director of Community Development reported on the subject agendas. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Kawashima - Congratulated Vice Chair Kozak for a good job at the last Planning Commission meeting. Noted that the volume of the loudspeakers at the Tustin Auto Center seems to be increasing. Karen Peterson responded that staff is preparing a letter to the abto center dealers and McDonalds to address the issue. Planning Commission Minutes May 10, 1999 Page 6 . - Stated that he attended an OCTA traffic symposium and found it very enjoyable.- Commissioner njoyable:Commissioner Kozak Noted that the Old Town sign,.on the eastbound side of Main Street was covered with stickers. Commissioner Davert Stated that Vice Chair Kozak and City staff did an excellent job at the last Planning Commission meeting. `ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Davert moved. Commissioner Kozak seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 7:34 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. A regular meetingof the Planning Commission will be held on May 24, 1999. beginning at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. • • I port to the Planning Commission DATE: MAY 24, 1999 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR ZONE'CHANGE 99-002 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-005 APPLICANT! PROPERTY 7 OWNER: MACPHERSON PROPERTIES 23 AUTO CENTER DRIVE TUSTIN, CA 92782 ATTN: JOE MACPHERSON LOCATION: 36 AUTO CENTER DRIVE ZONING: PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL(PC-C) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: . A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN • CONFORMANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). REQUEST: ' AUTHORIZATION TO AMEND THE ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR THE EAST TUSTIN. AUTO CENTER TO ALLOW. BANQUET FACILITIES AS CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES AND TO- ALLOW ANCILLARY ESTABLISHMENT OF A BANQUET FACILITY AS PART OF AN °EXISTING AUTO SHOW ROOM/MUSEUM SITE. , RECOMMENDATION 1. That the'Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3672 recommending that the City Council certify as adequate the Negative Declaration for Zone Change 99-002; and, 2. . That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution`No. 3673 recommending that the City Council. approve Zone Change 99-002 to allow banquet facilities as conditionally permitted uses in'the East Tustin Auto Center. s 3. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3674 recommending that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit 99-005, a request to establish a banquet facility within the East Tustin Auto Center. Planning Commission Report Zone Change 99-002, CUP 99-005 May 24, 1999 Page 2 BACKGROUND The proposed zone change is a request to conditionally allow banquet facilities as ancilliary uses within the East Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Development. The zone change would be applicable to the area north of the 1-5 Freeway between Tustin Ranch Road and Myford Road known as the Tustin Auto Center. The applicant is proposing to establish a banquet facility in an existing three-story structure developed for auto showroom/museum and auto services at 36 Auto Center Drive (see Location Map). Plans for construction of the automobile showroom and service facility .were approved by the Planning Commission on November 24, 1997. The project has been constructed and is currently being used as an auto storage facility. DISCUSSION Zone Change The applicant is requesting an amendment to the East Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Regulations to allow ancillary banquet facilities (6,000 square feet in gross • floor area) in the area known as the Tustin Auto Center. A variety of auto sales and auto service uses are permitted and conditionally permitted by the East Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Regulations. Typically, assembly .uses such as social halls are conditionally permitted to ensure adequate review of potential impacts related to parking, traffic and noise. Staff recommends that banquet facilities be conditionally permitted to ensure adequate review of associated potential impacts. Approval of the zone change would amend Section V(C) of the East Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Regulations to permit ancillary banquet facilities (less than 6,000 square feet) subject to a conditional use permit -and -set forth provisions related to parking, temporary uses, and signage (see Exhibit A of Resolution No. 3673). A decision to approve the zone change is supported by the following findings: 1. The proposed zone change to conditionally permit ancillary banquet facilities is consistent with the Tustin General Plan in that the site is located within a Planned Community Commercial/Business land use designation. This land use designation provides for a mixture of uses and activities such as commercial, service, and office uses. 2. Banquet facilities are compatible with the commercial character of the East Tustin q P , Auto Center. i Plan ning•Commission Report Zone Change 99-00.2, CVP 99-005 May 24, 1999 ' Page 3 3. As a conditionally permitted use, the impacts of each ancillary banquet.facility would be:evaluated on case by case.basis. Conditional Use Permit The proposed banquet facility would be located on-the ground level of an existing three level parking structure/auto museum. The ground level would contain the seating area for the banquet facility,. food preparation area, offices, gift shop, -restrooms, and auto display/museum area (see Floor Plan). The second and third levels would provide parking for the facility and car storage for the existing sales operation. Access to the site is provided from Auto Center D_rive.which connects to Tustin Ranch Road and EI Camino Real (see Site Plan). The applicant is proposing to use the banquet facility for events with a maximum of 375 persons up to four (4) times a week. The facility would`-have varied operating hours with events occurring from several hours to�all-day depending upon the demand. All food and beverages served in .the facility are proposed to be provided by catering services. No cooking facilities are proposed. Catering service providers are required to obtain all applicable permits from,the Orange County Department of Health and State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control requires a permit for every catering event. A condition-has been included to ensure that the. caterers hired by the applicant or patrons are in compliance with all applicable regulations and a permit is obtained for each event. Parking and Traffic Access to the banquet facility is provided by a driveway aisle which extends from Auto Center Drive to the surface parking on the west and the main entrance to the parking structure to the south. A total of 332 parking spaces are existing on-site including 226 parking spaces in the parking structure and 106 surface parking spaces. Parking provided on site is allocated as'follows: Customer Parking 6 spaces Employee Parking 44 space's Museum and Office Parking 151 s aces Total Required 201 spaces Total Provided 324 spaces Excess Parking.Available For Banquet Events 123 spaces . i Planning Commission Report • Zone Change 99-002, CUP 99-005 May 24, 1999 - Page 4 Assembly uses generally require one (1) parking space for,every three (3) persons. Although the applicant is proposing a maximum of 375 persons, given a total of. 123 excess parking spaces, a maximum of 369 persons could be accommodated at a banquet event. Condition Nos. 3.1 and 3.7 are included to require compliance with the maximum number of 369 patrons 'at each event and to ensure that adequate on-site parking remains available for event parking. In addition, in the event that insufficient parking or traffic capacity is observed on site or at-the intersections and streets serving the area, Condition No. 3.9 requires the applicant to conduct a parkingltraffic analysis and address any deficiencies identified by the study. . The applicant has indicated that, on occasion,.there may be as many as 600 to 700 people attending. one event. Based on: the limited number,of on-site parking, large indoor or outdoor gatherings could be considered on a case by case basis with 'approval of a Temporary Use Permit(TUP). Four times a year (one per calendar quarter),the applicant could request to use the facility for banquet events that may exceed-the 369 persons limit. On those occasions, the applicant would be required to provide either parking on adjacent properties or valet parking to accommodate the�additional patrons. ENVIRONMENTAL Attachment C is the Initial Study/Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Notice of the Negative Declaration public comment ,period was provided from April 29, 1999, through May 21, 1999. No significant impacts were identified and no public-comments were received. ANALYSIS In determining whether to approve the Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission must determine whether,or not the proposed-banquet facility will be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing in or working. in the neighborhood or whether it will be- injurious or detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity or to the welfare of the City. A decision to approve this request could. be supported by the following findings: 1) That operation of the proposed banquet facility, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor be injurious or detrimental to-the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin,- as evidenced by the following findings: • Planning Commission Report Zone Change 99-002, CUP 99-005 May 24, 1999 Page 5 a) The proposed facility,.as conditioned, would not be detrimental to, or have a negative effect on, surrounding properties in that the proposed facility is located within a commercial business center where sufficient traffic capacity and parking is available. b) The proposed use, as conditioned,,will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood in that all activities would take place within an enclosed building. Requests for outdoor events would be considered on a case by case basis and would be limited to four times a year (one per calendar quarter). c) All food and beverage services are provided by catering services and operate in accordance with the requirements of the applicable regulatory agency such as the Orange County Health Services and the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Minoo Ashabi Karen Peterson Assistant Planner Acting Senior Planner ma:Zc99002pereportdoc Attachments: A- Location Map B - Site Plan/Floor Plan Initial Study Resolution Nos. 3672, 3673, and 3674 i. LOCATION MAP.,��r� J e r m I e�ITEL TUSTIN ANNEX TUSTIN MARKET PLACE i NORTH n. ----------------------- !L CAu,NO REAL I e I � u � �•. eeu z �� J 1 0 sue � � �� PARKMC 3 .;ia ri:rti n=:i S rU5 !N AUTO C NTGr`{ I +I 2W i -------- yes _ i TUSTIN MARKET ] ! ... u - ,�' SOUTH Cem- " Cl.%SANTA AHA FREEWAY --- NO SCALE �� oirdai'vn r • uz� I I I { I I I I I Y I I �iuXdro•o.errdi I I I I I I I I I I I I S I j I I _-- f ..., .® I :r£e'T i I I I 1q�i. I r � � I I i I I -anE•�. uwr � lO I .-1�4��IC 'a I it I••I •" ' I i .•..}};:}•::.:.: :.:^•: :•�: ,:� 3 1] I•:•:•I' I •3 5. 1- rrus dr srcr ud . I wro osrur uc+ ]:•:I I I I . t I I •� fl+a :; :I. .. E�;:;i— '....''''' ,. I �•.. :'I'. til.• :•�': �_ til:• �•rr.•: i r-rawuer ••1•: rom rrrtr I I .1 E I..............I....... . �h I I 1.•.•.Ij 1�.;:;1 I. �:•'•''•'•' I � ::....:.5.:.: r •:..:...:..:.......:::.:.:. . I:� (,:>a'::7:e,..l I4' I• rusrmu, •I I 01- , ;i➢�:•�•:`:•r•:•:•.•:•••:fl,•.•• .•....:y.,..m•:•.•:•.•: ... :• .n I�none —� .ao"`"a I +r I- � � �`• — ••�•'L•LI••i�-,;,}a'.•:' vacr ... I 1 I i � .,...e•e. •ter . i i � ' � ....... .. s I sra<eu. r, ,I 71, - - I I I I .•I I ' �-t- • • --4 . , `I�s. --- I I S I- - -i - - I- --I ' - -j- - I I I I I I I I I I I •~ I I _I •��_; • �• • _I„ _ I ^;a! I vary: Sys:'pay IS � Ti� 3^eta s� I ala` L' OVERALL GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLANr,••.- 04 Joe's Garage LP.n OVERALL _. GflOUr1D LEVEL sr a�_u+.e a_ •i tef \` JJ I u I FLOuR PLAN I^^. Ta' snn �� —� _ _ _ mom.•,��,, I N71d SAS _ — _J esu' 01"V uowy�oyy .= 11111 vdZ a8nan f) s"O f LO o- NV'Id 3135 - - dLa - S 31 b1 S d 31 N I . . • •••R•l�3dWlSW r••�•• • .. d b M 9 3 a d b N b V 1 N y S 31]a17A OaI151M733V- 313H �ON145013 =aI LH 14 - -41-14A I— o bi3lo 1]»egJISA� _ ,•. 'I I'III"�'I I I'I hl'I'I'I'I'I'I I'1'I'I'I 103ealsWa � s�as Mnu».1_: r 3sraols DiU.— aimuml.m ; ' � 71w3A ol3ssa3 I — . n...0..+r..n —�nnl uuan•»+Au-r�i1°�;,»�1 4, 'aiwi;eroau `ate a,�r;a, � d . Al J i 1 RESOLUTION NO. 3672 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY rOF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN CERTIFY THE FINAL 6 NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR ZONE CHANGE 99-002 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-005 AS REQUIRED 7 BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. s 9 The_Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as.follows: 10 I. The Planning Commission finds and determines'as follows: 11 A. That Zone Change 99-002 and Conditional Use Permit 99-005 are 12 considered "projects" pursuant to the terms of the California 13 Environmental Quality Act; and 14 B. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review from April 29, 1999 to May 21, 1' 1999. 16 C. Whereas, the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin has 17 considered evidence presented by the Community Development Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject 1s Negative Declaration. 19 D. The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed final 20 Negative Declaration prior to recommending action on the project. 21 II. A Final Negative Declaration, attached hereto as Exhibit A, has been 22 completed in compliance with CEQA and state guidelines. The Planning Commission has received and consideredthe information contained in the 2; Negative Declaration prior to recommending approval of the proposed 24 project, and found that it adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed project. Further, the Planning Commission finds the project 2' involves no potential for any adverse effects, whether individually or 26 cumulatively, on wildlife resources; and, therefore, makes a De Minimis Impact finding related to the California State Department Fish and Game 27 Code Section 711.4. 02 2s 9 ' Resoldtion 3672 1 Page 2 _ 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning 3 Commission, held on the 24th day of May, 1999. 4 6 LESLIE PONTIOUS Chairperson, 7 8 9 ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary 10 11 12 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 13 COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) 14 15 I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned,.Hereby certify that I,am the Planning • 16 Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3672 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of .the Tustin Planning 17 Commission, held on the 24th day of May, 1999. is 19 20 21 ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary 23 24 25 26 27 2s 29 r � • I • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT S T .300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 INITIAL STUDY A. BACKGROUND . Project Title: Zone Change 99002, Conditional Use Permit 99-005 Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Minoo Ashabi Phone: 7141573-3126 Project Location: 36 Auto Center Drive Project Sponsor's Name and Address: MacPherson.Properties 23 Auto Center Drive Tustin, CA-92782 General.Plan Designation: Planned Community Commercial/Business Zoning Designation: Planned community Commercial, East Tustin Auto Center Project Description: A request for a zone 'Change to allow banquet facilties as a.conditionally permitted use in the East Tustin Auto Center Planned,Community. Surrounding Uses: North: Auto dealership East: Auto dealership South: Interstate 5 West: Auto dealership Other public agencies whose approval is required: Orange County Fire Authority F"] City of Irvine Orange County Health Care Agency E City of Santa Ana [] South Coast Air Quality Management E] Orange County District EMA [] Other: EXHIBIT A �, B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. Land Use and Planning Hazards []Population and Housing Noise Geological Problems RPublic Services Water DUtilities and Service Systems 7Air Quality Aesthetics Transportation& Circulation RCultural Resources Biological Resources FIRecreation QEnergy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ® I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 7 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. F] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Preparer: Title Date Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director r 1 D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Directions 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact"answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question.. A "No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved(e.g.,the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact"answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors and general standards(e.g.,the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take into account the whole action involved, including off-site,on-site,•cumulative project level, indirect,direct,construction,and operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that.a particular physical impact may occur,then the.checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant,less than significant with mitigation,or•less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact"is appropriate if there is'substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there.are one or more"Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made,and EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated"applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"to a"Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level(mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses,"may be cross- referenced). Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,.or other CEQA process,.an effect has been adequately analyzed.in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (6)'(3)(D). In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. . b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and.state whether such.effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are"Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. } 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts(e.g.,general plans,zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or-outside document should, where appropriate,include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information,Sources: A source list should be attached',,and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form,and lead agencies are free to use different formats;however, Iead agencies normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. The explanation of each issue should identify; a) the significance criteria or threshold,if any,used to evaluate each question;and, b) the mitigation measure identified, if any,to reduce the impact to less than signif cance. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Less Than. Significant Potentially JVith Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: Impact Incorporation Impact No lmpact a) Have,a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ [] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,but not Iimited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ❑ ❑ ❑ II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects,lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model(1997)prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non- agricultural use? ❑ ❑ ❑ 20 b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Involve,other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? ❑ ❑ ❑ III. AIR QUALITY: Where available,the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ ❑ ❑ ZO e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ❑ ❑ ❑ Less Than Significant Potentially Il'ith Less Than Significant Alitigation Signifcant IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: Impact 'Incorporation Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or regional plans,policies, or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? ❑ (] ❑ c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,but not Iimited to,marsh,vernal pool,coastal,etc.) through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,'or other means? ❑ ❑ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? ❑ ❑ ❑ Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to§ 15064.5? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [] ❑ ❑ d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ❑ ❑ GEOLOGY AND SOILS: -Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss, injury,or death involving: Less Than Significant Potentially IFith Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Inr i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ❑ ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 El Z iii) Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? El El El 0 iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, Iiquefaction or collapse? ❑ d) Be Iocated on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life o' property? ❑ ❑ IK e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 0 ❑ E VII.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,use,or disposal of hazardous materials? ❑ El b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? ❑ ❑ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? F—I ❑ d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? ❑ F-I ID e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ❑ L f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? n n n Less Than Significant Potentially 11'ith Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? ❑ ❑ ❑ VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER UALITY: —Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ❑ ❑ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(e.g.;the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site 4 0osion area,including through the alteration of the course of a am.or river,in a manner which would result in substantial or siltation on-or off-site? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. ❑ f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ 11 Z g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? ❑ h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? ❑ ❑ i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? ❑ ❑ ❑ QXInundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ . LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? El 0 El Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including,but not limited to the general plan,specific plan, local coastal program,or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ X. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,specific plan or other land use plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ XI. NOISE— Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise Ievels? [] ❑ ❑ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ d) A substantial-temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excess noise levels? ' ❑ ❑ ❑ XII.POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: a) Induce substantial population gro��th in an area, either directly(for example,by proposing new homes and0 businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? ❑ ❑ ❑ CK b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ ❑ ❑ N Less Than i Significant • Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact c) Displace'substantial numbers of people,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ ❑ ❑ XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ IR iV. RECREATION— a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?, ❑ ❑ ❑ XV.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic Ioad and capacity of the street system (i.e.result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively,a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e,g. arp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ® ❑ 0 I Less Than Significani Potentially TVith Less Than • Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impacl g) Conflict with adopted policies,plans,or programs supporting alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ❑ XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS— Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? E b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? El z4 d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment • provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? E ❑ g) Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future projects)? zo c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either. directly or indirectly? El IK ATTACHMENT A EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSi' ZONE CHANGE 99-002 AN AMENDMENT TO THE EAST TUSTIN AUTO CENTER ZONING REGULATIONS TO ALLOW BANQUET FACILITIES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE BACKGROUND The "project" is an amendment to,the East Tustin Auto Center to allow banquet facilities as a conditionally permitted use. This .evaluation' .considers impacts of the proposed banquet facility as well as any-impacts that may result from the proposed zone change. The current permitted and conditionally permitted uses .in the East Tustin Auto Center zoning regulations are as follows: Permitted uses: 1. Auto, truck, and recreational .vehicle sales, leasing and service (dealership and/or independents). Service industries may include, but are not limited to the following: a. Repair, maintenance and servicing of appliances or component parts of • tooling. otor vehicles. b. . C. Testing shops (excluding noise producing, or noxious performance testing). ' d. Repair, maintenance and servicing of above listed items provided that said industries are not the point of customer delivery or collection. e. Diagnostic labs. f. Experimental automobile assembly and fabrication. g. vehicular storage areas(exclusive of impound-yards). B. Uses Permitted subject to granting a-CUP by the Planning Commission if not . included in Auto Dealership: 1. Tire, battery and accessory shops and accessory indoor .installation facilities. 2. Auto and vehicle glass shops. 3. Auto and truck rentals. 4. Paint and restoration shops.(independent of dealerships). 5. Body Shops (independent of dealerships). - 6. Service industries that provide a service to uses listed in Section A. above. • C. Uses permitted subject to granting a CUP by the Planning Commission: 1. Car wash. 2. Service stations. 3. Motorcycle sales. r AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005' Page 2 t The amendment would allow establishment of banquet facilities within the -planned development of Tustin Auto Center with approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission.The amendment would apply to 55 acres of land containing twelve parcels included in the East Tustin, Auto Center Planned Development bounded by Interstate b to the south, EI Camino Real to the north, Tustin Ranch:Road on the west and Myford.Road on the east. The,proposed facility would be part'of an existing three,level structure containing an auto showroom/ museum and auto service. The museum, offices and-,auto services ,are located at ground level. Level two and three provide parking for the facility in addition to car storage. There is no physical development as part of the amendment. The banquet facility,would be provided in the area designated as auto museum at the ground level of the existing structure approximately 5,500 square feet in area. A food preparation area andt public restrooms would be available for patrons. No cooking facilities are proposed. Caterers will provide all food and beverages served on site. Catering services. are required to obtain all applicable permits from the Orange county Department of Health and State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. 1. AESTHETICS Items a throe- h d — "No Impact' The project is,located in a developed urban area and will not have a substantial adverse .effect on. a scenic vista nor will it 'substantially damage scenic resources, including, 'but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway, nor will it substantially degrade the existing visual: character.or quality of the site and its surroundings. The proposed facility is located in an existing building and no new development 'is proposed. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally allowed by the zone change would be considered' on- a case by case basis for aesthetics impacts. Sources: Submitted Plans Site observation Tustin City Code Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Items a through c — No Impact!': The East Tustin Auto Center is located in an urban area, where there would be no impacts on any farm land, nor will it conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Willamson Act contract. The project will not involve any changes. in the existing environment and could not result in I' AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts, ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005 Page 3 r conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally allowed by the zone change would be considered on a case by case basis,for impacts.to agricultural resources. Sources: Submitted Plans Site observation Tustin City Code 1 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required 3. AIR QUALITY Items a through e — "No Impact":_ The-proposed banquet facility will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable air plan, violate any air,quality standard, result in a cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant as applicable by federal or ambient air quality standard, nor will it expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or create objectionable odor affecting a substantial number of people. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally allowed by,.the zone change will be considered on a case by case basis for any impacts to air quality. Sources: Tustin City Code Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Items a through d — "No Impact": The East Tustin Auto Center., affected by the zone change, and the proposed facility are located within an urban area developed, as an auto center. The site is free from any unique, rare, or endangered species of plant or animal life identified in'local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally allowed by.,,-the zone change would be considered on a case by case basis for impacts on biological resources.. Sources: Site observation Tustin City Code Mitigation/Monitoring Re uo ired: None Required AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 99-002,.CUP 99-005 Page 4 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Items a through d — "No Impact": The East Tustin Auto Center and the proposed banquet facility are not within an area identified as an archaeological site, nor will the zone change or establishment of the facility cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource or archaeological resources.The project will not destroy or disturb a unique paleontological resource, human remains or a unique geological feature. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally allowed by the zone change would be considered on a case by case basis for impacts on cultural resources. Sources: E I R 84-2, Tustin Auto Center Field Observations Mitigation/Monitoring Reg uired: None Required 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Items a I a (ii), a (iii), a (iv), b, c, d and e — "No Impact": The proposed banquet facility is located. in an existing building. The project will not expose people to potential substantial effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, landslides, soil erosion, or loss of top soil, nor is the project on unstable or expansive soil. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally allowed by the zone change will be considered on a case by case basis. Sources: Preliminary Seismic Map Uniform building Code MitigationlMonitoringRequired: None Required 7. HAZARD AND HAZARDOUS,MATERIALS Items a.through h — "No Impact": The proposed project will not result in significant hazards (i.e. explosion, hazardous materials spill, interference with emergency response plans, wildland fires, etc.), nor is the area affected by the zone change located within an airport land use plan, or vicinity of a private airstrip. Banquet facilities typically do not have any impacts associated with hazardous materials, however, future proposals would be reviewed on a case by case basis. Sources: Field Observations Proposed Plans AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005 Page 5 Tustin City Code Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required 1 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER.QUALITY. Items a through j -- "No Impact": The East Tustin Auto centesis located within an existing commercial area, and is not located near any standing or moving-.bodies of water. As a result, the amount of surface water and direction of water movement will not change. Future proposals for' banquet facilities conditionally allowed by the zone change would be considered on a case by case basis for impacts.on hydrology and water quality. Sources: Field'Observations Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING Items a through c "No Im act": The proposed facility is located in an area designated by the General Plan Land Use Map as Planned Community. Commercial/Business.The Planned Community Com mercial/Businessdesignation . provides opportunities for mixture-of uses compatible with activities permitted with commercial, office and industrial development when all location, land use and building standards are within the character of the surrounding and standards are governed by a planned community district regulations. Banquet facilities are consistentwith uses in the Commercial/Business land use designation in that they area service-oriented activity serving a community wide area. The proposed zone change does not conflict with the City of Tustin General plan. The amendment to the East Tustin Auto Center planned community regulations would allow banquet facilities with approval of a conditional use permit, therefore, future proposal would .be considered'on a case ,by case basis. The project will not physically divide an , established community nor _it conflicts with any applicable habitat conservation plan. Future proposals for bangQet facilities conditionally allowed by the zone change would.be considered on a case by case basis for impacts on land use and planning. Sources: Tustin General Plan East Tustin Auto Center Regulations Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required a AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005 Page 6 10. MINERAL RESOURCES Items a and b — "No Impact": The proposed zone change and the banquet facility will not result in loss of a known mineral resource, or availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on the general plan or other applicable land use maps. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally allowed by the zone change would be considered on a case .by case basis for impacts on mineral resources. . Sources: Tustin General Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required, 11. NOISE Items b, e, and f - "No Impact": The proposed banquet facility is located within the Tustin Auto Center. The project will not expose persons to noise levels in • excess of standards established in the general.plan, noise ordinance, or excessive groundborne vibrations, nor will it create a substantial permanent increase in the existing ambient noise levels. Future proposals for banquet facilities allowed by the zone change would be considered on a case by case basis. The East Tustin Auto Center including the proposed banquet facility is not located within an airport land use plan or vicinity of a private airstrip. Sources: Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Reg uired: None Required Item a, c and d —"Less than Si-gnificant": The proposed banquet facility may result in utilization of the site for longer hours with more patrons attending events that could potentially increase the ambient noise level in the vicinity of the project. However, since all activities will take place within an enclosed building, no significant ambient noise will be generated. In addition, the proposed banquet facility site is located within a large commercial site adjacent to the 5- Freeway with substantial auto related and traffic noise that any noise generated would not have any impacts on the residential. neighborhoods in the vicinity of the project. Conditions of-approval will include a condition ensuring that no outdoor gatherings Would be associated with the approval of the proposed facility. Future proposals will be considered on a case by case basis for any potential noise impacts to the neighboring properties. • AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005 Page 7 Sources: Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Mitigation/Moni_t_o ring Required: All banquet events are to be held completely within the enclosed building. No outdoor activity other than loading and-unloading associated with catering services and valet parking is allowed, unless approved by Community Development Department. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING Items a, b, and c — "No Impact": The proposed banquet facility will not increase substantial population in the area, displace substantial number of existing housing, or people. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally permitted by the zone change would be considered on a case by case basis for impacts to population and housing in the area. Sources: Proposed hours and number of operations Tustin General Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Re ug ired: None Required 13. PUBLIC SERVICES Item a — " No Impact": The proposed banquet facility will not create demand for alteration or addition of government facilities (fire and police'protection, schools, parks, etc.); where construction or alteration of such facilities could cause significant environmental impacts. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally permitted by the zone change would be considered on a case by case basis. Sources: Tustin General Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Reaulred: None Required 14. RECREATION Items a and b - "No impact": The proposed banquet facility and zone change will not have increase demand for neighborhood parks or recreational facilities. Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally permitted by the zone change would be considered on a case by'case basis for impacts to recreation facilities. i AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005 Page 8 Sources: , Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Mitigation/MonitoringReguired: None Required 15. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC Item a and f) — "Less than Significant Impact With Miti_atg ion": Access to the proposed area affected by the zone change is provided by Auto Center Drive, with Tustin Ranch Road as the major intersection adjacent to the project. All potential traffic impacts related to this facility have been identified in a previous EIR 84-2 for the auto center certified in January, 1985. The proposed site for the banquet facility has been additionally reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer for potential traffic impacts. No impacts have been identified. Parking impacts were considered based on the number of on-site parking. The parking structure contains 226 parking spaces. The parking provided on the site is allocated as following: Customer Parking 6 spaces Employee Parking 44 spaces Museum and Office Parking 151 spaces Total Provided 324 spaces Excess Parking available For Banquet Events 123 spaces Assembly uses generally require one parking space for every three persons. Therefore considering the excess on-site parking, a maximum number of 369 people can be accommodated in a banquet event_ A condition has been included to ensure compliance with the maximum number of 369 at every event. Four times a year, the applicant can request to use the facility for banquet events that may.exceed the 369 persons limit. On those occasions, the applicant would be required to provide either parking on adjacent properties or valet parking to accommodate the additional patrons. Conditions of approval would ensure that adequate on-site parking would be available. In the event that insufficient parking or increased traffic to the intersections and streets serving the area is observed, the applicant would be required to conduct a parking/traffic analysis and address any deficiency identified by the study. Sources: Submitted Plans East Tustin Auto Center Regulations Tustin City Code i AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental impacts ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005 Page 9 Tustin General Plan Miti atic n/Monitorin Re uired: • The number of patrons of the banquet facility is limited to 369 accommodated by the parking analysis of the site (123 excess parking available for banquet facility), unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Department. • Four times a year, the applicant can request to use the facility for banquet events that may exceed the 369 persons limit.. On. those occasions, the applicant would be required to provide either parking on adjacent properties or valet parking to accommodate the additional patrons. Temporary Use Permits would be reviewed on a case by case basis. • If, at any time in the future, the City is made aware and concurs that a parking problem exists at the subject site as a result of insufficient on-site parking availability, then the Community Development and Public Works Departments may require the property owner to submit a revised parking demand analysis • prepared by a California licensed traffic engineer and/or a civil engineer experienced in preparation of these documents, at no expense to the City, within the time schedule stipulated by the City. If said study indicates that there is inadequate parking, additional mitigation measures shall be provided subject to the review and approval of the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Said mitigation may include, but not to be limited to, the following: a. Reduce the demand for parking by a decrease in the number of event participants. b. Provide additional parking as needed, up to minimum number required for the use consistent with standard parking requirements by purchase and/or lease of property within 500 feet of the property or provision of the needed parking on site. The securing of off-site parking would require approval by the Community Development Director. Items b, c, d and e —"No Impact": The proposed banquet facility will not result in a change in air traffic patterns, inadequate emergency access; nor will it exceed a level of service standards established by the county congestion management agency for designed roads'or highways or conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation. Future proposals for banquet facilities would be considered on a case by case basis. i Sources: East Tustin Auto Center Regulations Tustin City Code AttachmentA-Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 99-002,CUP 99-005 Page 10 Tustin General Pian MitigationlMonitoringRequired: None Required 16: UTILTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a through g - "No Impact The East Tustin Auto Center is located in an area where all utilities are available to the site. No other impacts to water treatment, water supply, wastewater treatment, solid waste disposal are identified: Future proposals for banquet facilities conditionally permitted by the zone change would be reviewed on a case by case basis for impacts on utilities and service systems. Sources: Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan MitigationtM_ onitoring Required: None Required MA:n egd ec-ZC99-002.doc RESOLUTION NO. 3673 2 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL 4 APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 99-002, AMENDING THE EAST TUSTIN AUTO CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT 5 REGULATIONS TO DESIGNATE ANCILLARY BANQUET FACILITIES AS CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES AND 6 ESTABLISH PARKING REQUIREMENTS, SIGN AND SOUND 7 STANDARDS FOR BANQUET FACILITIES. a The Pianning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: 9 I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: 10 A. That a proper application was filed for Zone .Change 99-002 to 11 amend the East Tustin Auto Center District Regulations to designate ancillary banquet facilities as conditionally permitted uses and 12 establish parking, signage and sound attenuation standards. 13 B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said 14 application on May 24, 1999 by the Planning Commission. 15 C. That the proposed Zone Change 99-002 is consistent with the policies of the General Plan, in that: 16 17 (a) The proposed zone change to permit conditionally ancillary banquet facilities is consistent with the Tustin General Plan in 18 that the site is located within a Planned Community Commercial/Business land use designation. This land use 19 designation provides for mixture of uses and activities such 20 as commercial, service, and office uses. 21 (b) Ancillary banquet facilities are compatible with the commercial character of the East Tustin Auto Center. 22 23 (c) As a conditionally permitted use, the impacts of each banquet facility would be evaluated on case by case basis. 24 25 D. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for certification for this project in accordance with the provisions of the 26 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 27 ]I. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Zone Change 99-002 amending the East Tustin Auto Center 102Planned Community District Regulations attached hereto as Exhibit A. 249 Resolution No.3673 2 Page 2 3 PASSED AND'ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at,a 4 regular meeting on the 24th day of May, 1999. 5 6 LESLIEA-. PONTIOUS 7 Chairperson 8 ELIZABETH A. BINSACK 9 Planning Commission Secretary 10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 11 CITY OF TUSTIN' ) 12 , I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK,the undersigned,hereby certify that I am the Planning 13 Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3672 was duly passed and adopted at a regularmeeting of the Tustin Planning 14 Commission, held on the 24th day of May, 1999. 15 16 ELIZABETH A. BINSACK 17 Planning Commission Secretary 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 EXHIBIT-A OF RESOLUTION 3673 . EAST TUSTIN AUTO CENTER PORTIONS OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS SECTION V. USES PERMITTED A. Uses Permitted 1. Auto, truck, and recreational vehicle sales, leasing and service (dealership and/or independents). Service industries may include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Repair, maintenance and servicing of appliances or component parts for motor vehicles. b. Tooling C. Testing shops (excluding noise producing or noxious performance testing). • d. Repair, maintenance and servicing of above listed items provided that said industries are not the point of customer delivery or collection. e. Diagnostic labs. f. Experimental automobile assembly and fabrication. g. Vehicular storage areas (exclusive of impound yards). B. Uses Permitted Subject to Granting of a CUP by the-Planning Commission if Not Included in Auto Dealership. 1. Tire, Battery and accessory shops and accessory indoor installation facilities. 2. Auto and vehicle glass shops. 3. Auto and truck rentals. 4. Paint and restoration shops (independent of dealerships). ® 5. Bodysho s (independent of dealerships . I ' 6 I 6. Service industries which provide a service to uses listed in • Section A., above. C. Uses Permitted Subject to Granting of a CUP by the Planning Commission 1. Car wash 2. Service station 3. Motorcycle sales 4�-� Ancilary !Banquet}sFacl�ttes fi DOOS square I ximum grosstfloorare_ainpcon unction iths�an autorelatedfacil :r that it does not exceed the height and length described in Section V111.F., paragraphs 2 and 3 of this document, subject to Planning Commission approval. B. Building Heights 1. Buildings shall be a maximum of 30' in height to top of ridge line. 2. Automobile display and signage shall not be allowed on top of any building. 3. Automobile storage in the second level of a building shall be allowed only if fully screened from view, including the line of sight from the second story of any structures which may be built across Jamboree and Laguna Roads. C. Parking 1. Each auto dealer shall provide, a minimum of eleven (11) off-street parking spaces per net buildable acre which shall be reserved for employee parking only. 2. In the event that employee parking is provided in a common parking lot, each dealer shall provide separate parking space on his/her premises for any demonstrator automobiles which are driven by a company employee. 3. If employee parking is provided in a common facility shared by several merchants, a recorded document shall be filed with the Building and Planning Departments and shall be signed by the Owner of the common site, stipulating to the permanent reservation of use of the site for employee parking purposes: 4. Each automobile dealer shall provide a minimum of six onsite parking spaces reserved exclusively for customers' use. Additional customer parking shall be allowed at curbside where appropriately striped. 5. Onsite handicapped parking shall be provided as required by the governing agencies. 6 y Banquets=facilrties >shall" provide ajspace,ne s1} parking afor `every' lire (3}}patronsQn srte�parkrngsh`a!I rernarn open ;avar(ab{e at�all4f>,mes#hat:banque�kseryrces�aC�:��rovded 12 i i 3. Auto dealers adjacent to EI Camino Real may not open service bay. doors toward EI Camino Real unless the doors are higher than the perimeter wall which screens them from EL Camino Real. 4. Air compressor exhaust stacks shall contain a muffling device. 5. Exterior loud speakers shall be directed away from the perimeter streets which surround the Auto Center and shall be mounted no higher than 12' above the immediate finished grade. 6. Air conditioning units may not be mounted on top of any building which is less than 65' from a rear property line. �M �All�banquetactivf#�es��s ail Abe{pro�idedin_ ani encvsetlarea�only equests for otatdooreventswould be�considered�or��as�case�by case as�sas a tem ora . uses ermitr.andarelimrtedto fou 4 �mes er calentlaryear. H. Signage 1. Signs shall be allowed subject to the provisions of the Tustin Auto Center Sign Criteria, as approved by the City of Tustin Planning Commission. 2. Project developer shall supply signage adjacent to the freeway and at both entrances to the project announcing the Auto Center location. Additionally, the developer shall supply freeway directional travel signs at the nearest freeway off ramps. 3. Roof-mounted signs shall not be allowed. 4. Billboard signage shall not be allowed. Signs related t 'oar quet fac Mie qct}re an amendment td .o to Tustin v�uto Center SignCCxtena Such arnendrraent shall_notIlow arty signs t'sitiJ6Jfom` the freeway`;ands'oor the —a or Ysery ce ri ads such'E:as E�,.: ._ �, .Q=. pLa h Ranch-'Roac�Jand=EI;Ca".ino alI I. Storage and Loading Areas 1. No materials, supplies or equipment, including firm-owned or operated trucks, shall be stored in any area on a site except inside a closed building or behind a visual barrier or service area which. screens the equipment from view of all public streets. The singular 16 i sexception shall be any vehicles which are a part of the merchant's customer display. 2.- Neither the loading dock rior the offloading operations for automotive parts and other supplies shall be visible from any public streets. J. Refuse Collection Area 1. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually screened from . access streets, freeway, and adjacent property by an opaque screen. 17 I° RESOLUTION NO.-3674 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 3 99-002 TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ESTABLISH AN ANCILLARY 4 BANQUET FACILITY WITHIN AN EXISTING AUTO SALES/MUSEUM AND AUTO REPAIR BUILDING AT 36 AUTO CENTER (TUSTIN AUTO 5 CENTER). 6 The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: 7 1. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: 8 9 A. That a proper application, Conditional Use Permit 99-005, was fled by MacPherson Properties requesting authorization to establish an ,ancillary 10 banquet facility (approximately 5,500 square feet gross floor area), within an 11 existing building in Tustin Auto Center. 12 B. That the Planning Commission recommended approval of Zone Change 99-002 to conditionally allow ancillary banquet facilities within the East 13 Tustin Auto Center Planned Community. 14 C. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said application • 15 on May 24, '1999 by the Planning Commission. 16 D. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will 17 not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or 18 working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced- by the 19 following findings: 20 a) The proposed facility, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to, or 21 have a negative effect on, surrounding properties in that the proposed facility is located within a commercial business center 22 where sufficient traffic capacity and parking is available. 23 b) The proposed use, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the 24 health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood in that all activities would 25 take place within an enclosed building. Requests for outdoor events would be considered on a case by case basis and would be limited 26 to four times a year (one per calendar quarter). 27 c) All food and beverage services are provided by catering services 28 and operate in accordance with the requirements of the applicable 29 regulatory agency such as the Orange County Health Services and S the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. f f • I Resolution No. 3674 Page 2 ; E. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for 4 certification. for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 6 F. That the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval of CUP 997 005 is contingent upon approval of Zone .Change 99-002 by the City 7 Council. s 9 _ II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of CUP 99-005 to establish a small banquet facility at 36 Auto Center Drive, subject to the conditions 10 contained in Exhibit A, attached hereto. 11 i2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the` Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at-a regular meeting on the 24th day of May, 1999. ` 14 • 1:5 LESLIE PONTIOUS 16 Chairperson 17 is ELIZABETH A. BINSACK 14 Planning Commission Secretary ,0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 21 COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 22 CITY OF TUSTIN ) 1, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning 24 Commission Secretary of the 'Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3674 was duly passed and adopted. at a regular meeting of the Tustin 25 Planning Commission, held on the 24th day of May, 1999. 26 27 • 28 29 ,9 ELIZABETH A. BINSACK. Planning Commission Secretary I EXHIBIT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-005 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 3614 GENERAL {1) 1.1 The proposed use shall substantially conform with the. submitted plans for the project date stamped May 24, 1999 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 Comm unity'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 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 are issued within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit and substantial; construction is underway. Time extensions may be granted 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 99-005 is contingent upon the applicant- and property owner signing and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed"form as established by the Director.of Community Development. (1} 1.5 The applicant shall hold harmless and defend the City of Tustin from all claims and liabilities arising out of a challenge of the City's approval for this project: 1.6 Approval of Conditional Use Permit is contingent upon approval by the City' Council of Zone Change 99-002. 1.7 Amendments to Conditional, Use Permit 99-005 may be considered and approved by the Planning Commission: SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (2) CEQA MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS • (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODEIS (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (4) DESIGN REVIEW (7) PCICC POLICY EXCEPTIONS i • Exhibit A-Conditions of Approval Cup 99-005 ! Page 2 PLAN SUBMITTAL (5) 2.1 At the time of building permit application,-the plans shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform" Building Code, other related codes, City Ordinances, and State and Federal laws and regulations.. (1) 2.2 If interior improvements.are proposed, in compliance:with the Uniform Building Code (Application for Permit), the applicant, designer, Architect or, Engineer must submit construction.drawings (building plans) to the Building .Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. USE RESTRICTIONS (2) 3.1 Parking spaces designated for the banquet facility in the approved parking analysis and. site plan shall be unobstructed and available during all banquet events. 3.2 Banquet and assembly uses shall be associated with and accessory to the . Auto Museum use. (2) ' 3.3 All banquet events are to be held within the enclosed building. No outdoor activity other than loading and unloading associated with ,catering services and valet parking is allowed, unless approved by Community Development Department. (5) 3.4 All regulations of the Uniform Building,Code- and the Fire Department regarding assembly occupancy classification,, fire rating and exiting - standards shall be met during all events. *** ' 3.5 No outdoor event or live entertainment is permitted' unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Department. 3.6 Banquet events.shall be held only on the ground level of the structure as designated on the approved Floor Plan. 3.7 A maximum of 369 persons may attend an event at the banquet facility based on the availability of 123 parking spaces available exclusively for banquet facility, unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Department. • ** 3.8- Four times a year, the Community Development Director`may approve a Temporary Use Permit for events.that exceed the 369 person limit if sufficient parking is provided. E Exhibit A-Conditions of Approval • Cup 99-005 Page 3 (2) 3.9 If,' at any time in the future, the City is made aware and concurs that a parking problem exists at the subject site as a result of insufficient on-site parking availability, then the Community Development and Public Works Departments may require the property owner to submit a revised parking' demand analysis prepared by a California licensed traffic engineer and/or a civil engineer experienced in preparation of these documents, at no expense to the City, within the time schedule stipulated by the City. If said study indicates that there is inadequate parking, additional mitigation measures shall be provided subject to'the review and approval of the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Said mitigation may include, but not to be limited to, the following: a. Reduce the'demand for parking by a decrease in the number of event participants. b. Provide additional parking• as needed, up to minimum number required for the use consistent with standard parking requirements by purchase and/or lease of property within.500 feet of the property • or provision of the needed parking on site. The securing of off-site parking would require approval by the Community: Development Director. FIREDEPARTMENT (5) 4.1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall;submit plans for any required automatic fire sprinkler system in any structure to the . OCFA for review and approval. This includes any alteration or addition to the sprinkler system. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, this system shall be operational in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire Chief. (5) 4.2 Plans for.review and approval shall be submitted to the Fire Chief as, indicated on the OCFA Plan Submittal Criteria form. Contact the Orange County Fire Authority at (71.4) 744-0403 for a copy of the Fire Safety Site/Architectural Notes to be placed on the plans prior to submittal. Occupancy separations will be required, between the proposed A2.1 Occupancy and the existing occupancy. (5) 4.3 Prior to the issuance of a. building permit, plans for the fire alarm system shall be -submitted to the fire Chief for review and approval. This system shall be operational prior to the is of a Certificate of Use and Occupancy. i • Exhibit A-Conditions of Approval Cup 99-005 Page 4 FEES (1) 5.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all applicable building plan check, signs, design review and permit fees to the Community Development Department based upon the most current schedule. A. Building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based-on the most current schedule. B. Orange County Fire Authority, plan check and inspection fees to the Community Development Department based upon the most current schedule. (1) 5.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subjectproject the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount ,of $38,00 (thirty eight dollars) 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. f; ITEM # 3 i� y o Oeport to the �Us � Planning Commission' DATE: MAY 24, 1999 SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT APPLICANT: CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL 2111 BRYAN AVENUE TUSTIN, CA 92780 PROPERTY OWNER: CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL 2111 BRYAN AVENUE TUSTIN, CA 92780 i r LOCATION: 2111 BRYAN AVENUE ZONING: COMMUNITY FACILITY- EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (ETSP) RECOMMENDATION Receive and file staff report. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On April 12, 1999, the Planning Commission received and filed a status report on the construction of Phase 11 of Congregation B'Nai Israel's religious and educational facility at 2111 Bryan'Avenue. Design Review 97-026 was approved on Februa y 23, 1998, and construction is underway. At the meeting,the Planning Commission received testimony from the Monterey Homeowners Association on a number of issues including: • The Phase II portion of the building is not consistent with conceptual design for future phases considered during the Phase i approval process; • Residents did not receive public notices for the public hearing on Phase lI (Design Review 97-026);. , •' The contractor for the construction of Phase II was not observing the City's construction hours; • The existing landscaping is not healthy and is not being maintained properly which may indicate that the new landscaping may not flourish and provide suf icient screening; and, • Outdoor events had been held which were disruptive to the adjoining neighborhood. Construction is proceeding in substantial compliance with the approved plans and building permits and code violations.. have been addressed. However, the Planning Commission requested that Congregation B'Nai Israel and members of the Monterey Homeowners Planning Commission Report Status Report May 24, 1999 Page 2 • Association coordinate to improve the condition of the existing landscaping and explore color options for the north wall of the new building to minimize the reflective white stucco surface. Since the meeting, Congregation B'Nai Israel has done the following: • Retained the services of a mediator to improve community relations; • Sent reminder notices to construction contractors and subcontractors regarding the City's construction hours and requested contractors to enter the site from Park Center Lane rather than Bryan Lane to avoid driving heavy trucks along the length of the property; • Retained the services of a landscape contractor to maintain and improve the health of the existing landscaping; • Began discussions with members of the Monterey Homeowners Association regarding potential revisions to the proposed landscaping along the north wall of the new building to increase screening, proposed changes to existing landscaping along the north property line to increase the landscape buffer, and color options for the north wall of the sanctuary; • Began internal discussions to hold any outdoor events scheduled during the. next year at Calvary Chapel; and, • Began discussions with the Monterey Homeowners Association regarding a proposed modular pre-school unit for which Congregation B'Nai Israel may seek approval in the future. • Attachment A contains letters from the mediator to the Monterey Homeonwers Association regarding the Congregation's actions to date. Doug Wride, President of the Monterey Homeowners Association, reported the following: • The Monterey Homeowners Association is satisfied with the increased communication between the parties; • The" Monterey Homeowners Association agreed that improvements to the- existing landscaping should begin once construction is completed; • Congregation B'Nai Israel had agreed to paint the north wall of the sanctuary two shades darker than what was originally proposed; • Congregation B'Nai Israel' was requesting the Monterey Homeowners Association's comments on the proposed modular unit; and, • They had no further complaints at this time. Karen Peterson Eliza66th A. Binsack Acting Senior Planner Director of Community Development Attachments: Attachment A : Letters dated April 26, 1999, and May 16, 1999 • MALKOFF AND ASSOCIATES. 18456 Lincoln Circle Villa Park, California 92861 Fax (714)288-6210,. (714)288-6200 April 26, 1999 Douglas C. Wride, President Monterey at Tustin Ranch HOA 2052 Burnt Mill Road Tustin, CA 92780 Subject: Congregation B'nai Israel'—Community Relations Dear Doug., It was a pleasure meeting with you this morning at.CBI. I agree that with a Iittle earlier start on a close working relationship between the community and the temple, the current construction issues might have been lessened substantially. Nevertheless, I appreciate hearing that the recent controls on access and hours of operations are working well from the community's perspective.-We will retain the"No Construction Access" sign on our west parking lot until we are completely done with the current project, and we have asked the general contractor, Hoffinan-Finn,to continue to stay on top of their subcontractors as well. As we discussed, I will monitor the existing landscaping efforts, and then see how-the new trees fair in terms of meeting community viewshed concerns. I will also,talk with the . • landscape architect regarding the selection of trees next to the new,west entry., Further,the need to improve the soil conditions in some of the planting islands-in the new parking lot to the east will be looked into. As to the north wall stucco color selection,I Iook forward to your call back next Monday regarding the community's preference. 'I think your notion of taking an initial pass at narrowing " the selection,with your landscape architect's input, of colors to be offered tol the community is a. practical strategy. And, speaking of that north wall,I am relieved to hear that the selection of the cypress trees and star jasmine are good choices in your view. Finally, I look forward to working closely with you on the issue of the modular pre- school unit to erisure that it will be adequately screened from the community viewshed. I will gladly meet with you and others from the community as soon as you are ready, and I-can get samples of the"green wall" approach-we discussed this morning. If you have any questions,:if any new (or even old) issues are raised by your neighbors, or if I can be.of assistance, please do no hesitate to call on me. My commitment is to be the prime contact for any community concerns, on a long-term basis. I look forward to,hearing from you next week. Warm regards, - MALKOFF AND ASSOCIATES 40 Mel MaIkoff, President cc: Rabbi Spitz,.Scott Nathan,Mark Cross 9615 commundy 001.doc . AMMALKOFF AND ASSOCIATES 18456 Lincoln Circle - Villa Park, California 92861 - Faz(714)288-6210 - (714)288-6200 Douglas C. Wride,,President May 16, 1999 Monterey at Tustin Ranch HOA 2052 Burnt Mill Road Tustin, CA 92780 Subject: Congregation B'nai Israel—Meeting regarding Landscaping, Design, and Pre-school Modular Placement Dear Doug: Thank you for meeting with me at CBI on Thursday evening (May 13d'). I also appreciated having Alex Alessandrini and Hans Mize present, since they both live directly north of the temple's new Sanctuary building. They are probably the most impacted by our construction.project. I'm glad that our contractor's control efforts with the trades is working, and that the hours of operations issue seems to have gone away. As for Hans' comment about early morning delivery, he seemed OK with the recognition that 1)most of the bulk materials deliveries have taken place and 2)that,yes, there still may be a few deliveries...but that that is truly a"normal course of construction"issue and not a regular nuisance. I will talk to the project manager and Hoffman-Finn about trying to avoid, to the-extent practicable,very early morning deliveries. 1, too, remember what it's like having an infant awakened and crying at 5:30 in the morning! (It was only a few years ago for my wife and I, as our kids are only 4 and 6.) • It was good to hear that there is concurrence in the community that we will revisit the landscaping and tree replacement details once the building is completed. As you know, the extra nine trees may or may not address all of your neighbors' concerns,but we will try to address those when we walk the site after construction. The soil boring and installation of new vertical drains will certainly help with existing water ponding and will make establishing the new trees easier in this clayey surface lens. As you pointed out when we walked the site, not only has the temple retained a landscaping and tree service on an annual basis, but they have already made some good strives toward reshaping the canopies and growth of trees along our common property line. That, in turn,,should help alleviate some of the tree (leaf) litter that Hans alluded to. I also mentioned that I followed up with our landscape architect about wanting to explore the size and canopy of the tree(s) planned next to the new west entry. I will let you know what tree is planned for that spot, and what size we plan to purchase. As to the landscaping of our north sanctuary wall, your explanation to Alex and Hans about the planned tree placement, and species change,was very helpful—thank you. We will work with our tree service to ensure that those trees become established and are properly maintained, thus serving effectively to provide some visual and practical relief to the appearance of our north building wall. Regarding the color of that north wall, I showed you (using the color swatches) the gradation I am proposing to use in order to soften—and darken—the appearance of that wall, especially from Alex's and Hans' dining rooms and back yards. We will use the same stucco color application on all sides of the building,but then paint an added coat on the north wall that will be approximately two tones darker in the same color family as the planned "sand"colored stucco finish. Doug Wride,Monterey at Tustin Ranch HOA • May 1999 2 Page 2 I am told that this extra paint coat, as opposed to trying to color the stucco different from the west and east walls, is a better solution for two reasons. First, the joint of two differently colored stuccos at the building corners may be hard to finish without overlap and color smear. Second, and more importantly,we will have better color control over the add-on paint coat, and it will represent an extra layer of protection on this wall surface. It takes about 31 days after the stucco is applied for it to cure fully. Once it's ready,we will paint the north wall'as planned. Regarding the planned 24'x60' modular unit for expansion of our pre-school, we spent some time reviewing the"greenwalI" approach I showed you at our meeting. The material, used very successfully at Universal's Citywalk and most recently at the Block at Orange, will dramatically soften the building's exterior. Once grown, the trailer will be hard to recognize, other than the doors,windows and landings. And-even the handicapped ramp area will be landscaped. A few trees, e.g., the two at the north end of the unit,will also provide visual enhancement in terms of vertical relief. And, as promised, we will place HVAC units on the south wall, furthest from and Ieast impactive on your community. Your suggestion to raise the height on the north side greenwall in order to mask any distant views of the modular's roof, as would be seen from our north property line, is readily doable. I will ask the Iandscape architect to prepare a sight-Iine exhibit to determine how high that end panel needs to be so that the second-story views of your neighbors are softened. As part of our discussion of the pre-school expansion, I mentioned our intent to apply for the Conditional Use Permit("CUP") from the City to allow for us to serve more of our community's childcare needs, and to submit our application with the community's support. Once you see our sketches of how the modular will look with the addition of greenwall and landscaping materials, from all four sides, I will ask you to send us a letter of support from the homeowners' association. That should give the City great comfort in seeing that we again are working together, and that we went to you FIRST with the need to expand our pre-school. I thought our discussion about the community's issue with the"home-church"was helpful. It is ironic that on the one hand, CBI's offer to allow them to use our parking Iot alleviates the driveway-blocking and packed-street aggravation and inconvenience you, Alex, and others within your residential street have experienced. On the other hand, I understand that us `hosting their parking-lot' doesn't particularly help you or your neighbors in your desire to have that church relocate to some other place. It is, as we discussed, a fine line our temple walks between trying to help and be part of the community,while not doing things to antagonize our nearest neighbors! Once again, I want to thank you for working closely,with us to restore good communications and help us to be better neighbors. I think the landscaping, color and screening treatments planned for the sanctuary and new pre-school modular will greatly mitigate our `presence' in your and your neighbors' backyards! I personally appreciate your time and attention to the details of this. Warm regards, MALKOFF AND ASSOCIATES Mel Malkoff, President cc: Rabbi Spitz,Scott Nathan,Mark Cross 9815 commumy R,02.tloc ITEM # 4 ATE: MAY 24, 1999 I n t e r- C O m A60S R� TO: PLANNING COMMISSION " FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SUBJECT. STATUS REPORTS RECOMMENDATION Receive and file. 'BACKGROUND Please find attached the monthly status reports related to development activity in the City. There are two reports provided: 1. Development Review.Status Report- Citywide p p � 2. Development Review Status Report- East'Tustin Staff would be happy to respond to any questions the Commission may have at the meeting. Karen'Peterson Acting Senior Planner pereportMztatrepL&99 i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CURRENT PLANNING PROJECT STATUS - NOT INCLUDING EAST TUSTIN PROJECTS PROJECT STATUS LEGEND DATE OF REPORT: May 5, 1999 01 - ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL 05 - PROJECT APPROVED SORT: LEGEND ITEMS 01-07 02 RESUBMITTAL 06 - PLAN CHECK' ' 03 - COMMENTS OUT/PENDING APPLICANT RESPONSE 07 - PERMITS ISSUED/UNDER CONSTRUCTION 08 - PROJECT COMPLETE TENTATIVE HEARING DATES 09 - WITHDRAWN 10 - EXPIRED 04.1 - ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 11 - DENIED 04.2 - PLANNING COMMISSION 12 - REVOKED 04.3 - CITY COUNCIL STATUS RESPONSE CASE A APPLICANT PROJECT ADDRESS DESCRIPTION STATUS DATE DUE STAFF CUP99-009 Willy Paul, Architect 1352 IRVINE BL Law Office 6 School 01 04/13/99 05/05/99 Lori Ludi DR 99-009 Euilon Enterprises 13891 RED IIILL AV Exterior Remodel 01 04/22/99 05/13/99 Mince Aahabi OR 99-010 Media One Power Supply Cabinets in ROW 01 04/22/99 05/13/99 Juntina Wilkhom CUP98-018 Orange County Rescue Mise MCAS PA3 Emergency/Transitional Housing 03 09/03/98 Lori Ludi CUP98-030 Enterprise Rent-A-Car 3097 EDINGER ST Sign Plan Amendment 03 12/15/98 Brad Evanson CUP99-002 Consolidated Restaurants 13922 RED HILL AV New Drive-thru Restaurant 03 04/27/99 Brad Evanson CUP99-007 . American Senior Living 1101 SYCAMORE AV 60-Unit Senior Housing Project 03 04/26/99 Juatina Wilkhom DR 98-018 Orange County Rescue Miss .MCAS PA3 Emergency/Transitional Housing 03 09/03/98 Lori Ludi DR 98-024 ASL Consulting Engineers 235 E MAIN ST Reservoir and parking 03 10/01/98 Lori Ludi DR 98-032 Arther Masaoka 140 A ST Demo/New Residence 03 01/D7/99 Karen Peterson DR 98-034 Debelkas/Jeff Bergsma 765 EL CAMINO REAL Exterior Rehab 03 02/17/99 Lori Ludi DR 98-036 Hal Woods 12569 NEWPORT AV New Building 03 01/19/99 Lori Ludi DR 99-001 Consolidated Restaurants 13922 RED IIILL AV New Drive-thru Restaurant 03 04/27/99 Brad Evanson DR 99-006 American Senior Living 1101 SYCAMORE AV 60-Unit Senior (lousing Project 03 04/26/99 Justin. Wilkhom CPA99-002 American Senior Living 1101 SYCAMORE AV ^ MDR to HDR 03 04/26/99 Justina Wilkhom SCE99-001 Consolidated Restaurants 13922 RED HILL AV Retain Existing Pole Sign Base 03 04/27/99 Brad Evanson VAR99-001 American Senior Living 1101 SYCAMORE AV 60-Unit Senior Housing 03 04/26/99 Justin Wilkhom ZC 96-006 Hal Woods 12569 NEWPORT AV New Building 03 01/19/99 Lori Ludi ZC 99-003 American Senior Living 1101 SYCAMORE AV R-4 to R-3 03 04/26/99 Juatina Wilkhom CUP98-036 Ability Plus 250 EL CAMINO REAL Ability Plus Expansion 04.1 05/10/99 Brad Evanson CUP99-005 Joe.MacPherson 36 AUTO CENTER DR Banquet facility at auto museum. 04.2 05/24/99 Minoo Aahabi CUP99-006 Stella Voldman 1077 MAIN ST Music School 04.2 05/10/99 Brad Evanson Page 10- • • STATUS RESPONSE CASE a APPLICANT PROJECT ADDRESS DESCRIPTION STATUS DATE DUE STAFF CUP99-008 Michael & Lisa Broome 3047 EDINGER ST Vetrinary Nuclear Imaging 04.2 05/10/99 Minoo Ashabi DR 99-007 City of Tustin Commuter Rail Platform 04.2 05/10/99 Scott Reekstin ZC 99-002 Joe MacPherson 36 AUTO CENTER DR Amendment to PC to allow banquet facilities. 04.2 05/24/99 Minoo Ashabi CUP95-001 First Korean Baptist Chur 14272 CHAMBERS RD Church, Amend conditions for sidewalk 05 02/23/96 Minoo Ashabi CUP97-018 Mondu Suzay, Corp 13931 CARROLL WY ABC Type 41/Outdoor SeaCing 05 11/17/97 ,Brad Evanson CUP98-007 Alegre Associates 12972 NEWPORT AV Appeal - Lube/Oil Facility 05 05/03/99 Lori Ludi CUP98-022 Jack Staniland 13011 NEWPORT AV Add parking on vacant ROW 05 04/12/99 Justina Willkom CUP99-028 Dr. Craig/Dr. Lavach 2955 EDINGER ST Veterinary Hospital at Jamboree Plaza 05 01/05/99 Brad Evanson CUP98-029 Larry Smith 14131 RED HILL AV Red Will Restaurant/Lounge/ABC/LE 05 04/19/99 Lori Ludi CUP98-037 David Smith/Bally Fitness 630 EL CAMINO REAL Health Club 05 04/12/99 Lori Ludi CUP99-003 Craig Wasserman 675 EL CAMINO REAL Entertainment Permit 05 03/22/99 Scott Reekstin CUP99-004 Pacific Sell•Wireless 14451 MYFORD RD Modification of existing cell site. as 04/12/99 Minoo Ashabi DR 96-007 Chevron USA 13052 NEWPORT AV Soil Remediation O5 04/D1/96 Brad Evanson DR 96-009 Jack Carland 17421 JACARANDA AV Residential Remodel 05 02/29/96 Brad Evanson DR 98-007 Alegre Associates 12972 NEWPORT AV Appeal Lube/Oil Facility 05 05/03/99 Lori Ludi DR 98-013 McCausland, Charles & Ali 135 S A ST Second Dwelling Unit 05 02/09/99 Minoo Ashabi DR 98-922 William B. Standford O.D. 190 EL CAMINO REAL Remodel 05 05/D3/99 Minoo Ashabi DR 98-025 Media One Power Supply Cabinets in ROW 05 02/17/99 Justina Willkom OR 98-026 Jack Stanaland 13011 NEWPORT AV Add parking on vacant ROW 05 04/12/99 Justina Willkom DR 99-002 John & Dori Radice 180 A ST Porch Addition 05 03/01/99 Minoo Ashabi DR 99-004 Jahangeer Shahidzadeh 465 6TH ST Remodel/Room Addition 05 04/23/99 Brad Evanson DR 99-008 _ Mark Rivera 17821 17TH ST Roof-Mounted wireless Facility 05 04/15/99 Minoo Ashabi GPA99 001 Elmer Tiedje 15500 TUSTIN VILLAGE GPA "UNC" to "HDR" 05 03/01/99 Brad Evanson TPM94-154 Valley Consultants, Inc. 174 E MAIN ST two lot subdivision 05 08/05/96 Brad Evanson TPM97-117 Bennett Architects 535 E MAIN ST Carwash/Service Station/Retail 05 12/01/97 Brad Evanson TT 15707 Warmington Homes 765 EL CAMINO REAL 3B Single Family Detached 05 04/19/99 Lori Ludi VAR98-004 Sullivan Property Managem 16661 MC FADDEN AV Increase Fence Height in Front, 05 11/09/98 Minoo Ashabi CUP98-013 The Meridian Group 3017 EDINGER ST ABC Type 20 06 02/10/99 Karen Peterson CUP98-023 Barbara Krull 1091 BRYAN AV 60 Student Preschool 06 01/11/99 Justina Willkom DR 95-044 Michael A. Murphy &Assoc 2832 DOW AV Parking Lot Expansion 06 11/20/98 - Justina Willkom DR 96-056 The Meridian Group 3017 EDINGER ST Service Station/Cony. Market 06 02/10/99 Karen Peterson DR 97-031 City of Tustin 13331 FOOTHILL DL City Water Reservior Booster Pump 06 06/08/98 Lori Ludi DR 98-006 The Meridian Group 3017 EDINGER ST Service Station/Cony. Market/Drive-thru 06 02/10/99 Karen Peterson DR 90-020 KRULL, BARBARA J. 1091 BRYAN AV 60 Student Preschool 06 01/11/99 Justina Willkom SCE98-003 P13MS 2521 MICHELLE DR Increase sign area 7 06' 10/28/98 Lori Ludi CUP96-011 Kitty & Scott Siino 115 E 2ND ST 1.485 s.f. Office/Commercial 07 10/24/97 Brad Evanson CUP96-019 James Kincannon 14752 HOLT AV 10 Person Rest home 07 04/16/98 Lori Ludi Page 2 STATUS RESPOIISE CASE 0 APPLICANT PROJECT ADDRESS DESCRIPTION STATUS DATE DUE STAFF CUP96-020 Service Station Services 13091 RED HILL AV Time Extension - Station Remodel 07 03/29/99 Minoo Ashabi CUP97-005 Bennett Architect. 535 E MAIN ST Appeal Carwash/Service Station/Retail 07 04/09/99 Brad Evanson..- CUP97-006 Richard Rengel 333 EL CAMINO REAL Office Addition 07 02/09/99 Karen Peterson CUP97-028 Batla Food Group 14601 RED RILL AV Appeal 4,000 B.f. Burger King/Demo vacant Wel 07 03/11/99 Brad Evanson CUP90-001 South Coast Farms 515 EL CAMINO REAL Farm 6 Produce Stand 07 D3/09/90 Minoo Aahiba CUP90-010 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, IN 550 W 6TH ST Appeal - 57 foot mono pole/palm 07 02/22/99 Brad Evanson CUP96-021 IEA 630 E IST ST New monument signs 07 09/28/98 Minoo Ashabi CUP98-024 Ultraneon Sign Co. 17260 E 17TEE ST Master Sign Plan 07 12/14/98 Brad Evanson CUP9U-026 Alex Gaon 500 C ST Medical office use in R-3 one 07 03/24/99 Minoo Ashabi Willko CUP98-031 Akira Takashio - 658 EL CAMINO REAL Restaurant ABC 07 03/29/99 Karen P tersonm DR 95-037 Ralph Turner 235 S MYRTLE ST Remodel/Addition O7 02/05/96 Karen Peterson DR 96-020 Kitty 6 Scott Siino 115 E 2ND ST 1,485 D.f. Office/Commercial 07 10/24/97 Brad Evanson DR 96-031 Service Station Services 13891 RED HILL AV Time Extension - Station Remodel 07 03/29/99 Minoo Ashabi DR 96-044 Kimberly Barnhard 265 S PACIFIC ST Room addition and detached garage - Old Town 07 10/10/96 Karen Peterson DR 96-053 MC WILLIAMS, TRAVIS O 328 W 3RD ST Roof Remodel. 07 01/17/97 Karen Peterson DR 97-009 Bennett Architects 535 E MAIN ST Appeal Carwash/Service Station/Retail 07 04/09/99 Brad Evanson OR 97-010 Alekeandar Mackovski 13472 EPPING WY Room Addition 07 09/25/97 Karen Peterson DR 97-011 Richard Rengel 333 EL CAMINO REAL Office addition 07 02/09/99 Karen Peterson 010/01/97 Karen Peterson DR 97-012 Patrick Mattison 510 S B ST Room Addition DR 97-015 J.M. Consulting Group 900'W IST ST Cell Site in Existing Sign 071 12/08/97 Karen Peterson DR 97-016 California Pacific Equiti EDINGER ST 125,000 s.f Center Buildout 07 06/29/90 Brad Evanson DR 97-018 Julie Chamberlain Archite 158 N MOUNTAIN VIEW D Residential Remodel 07 01/16/98 Brad Evanson DR 97-039 Terry,Tull 165 S PACIFIC ST Room Addition 07 10/05/98 Minoo Ashabi DR 97-036 Batla Food Group 14601 RED HILL AV Appeal 4,000 S.f. Burger King/Demo vacant Wel 07 03/11/99 Brad Evanson DR 98-000 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, IN 550 W 6T1I ST Appeal 57 foot mono pole/palm 07 02/22/99 Brad Evanson OR 98-014 FF Development, LLC 1602 NISSON RD Orange Gardens - Parking Lot/Remove SO Unice 07 10/22/98 Brad Evanson DR 98-017 BORUSKY, THOMAS J 160 N B ST Residential Remodel 07 OB/19/90 Lori Ludi DR 98-021 Warmington Homes 765 EL CAMINO REAL 36 Single Family Detached 07 03/10/99 Lori Lodi DR 98-023 Custom Signs, Inc. 1091 OLD IRVINE BL Neon Sign, Paint/Reface pole sign 07 09/29/98 Brad Evanson DR 98-030 Arnold Surfas 145 IST ST Exterior Modification 07 03/10/99 Minoo Ashabi DR 98-033 office Depot 13721 NEWPORT AV Office Depot/Remodel 07 04/05/99 Lori Ludi 07 03/22/99 Justina Wilkom DR 98-037 Jerry Soxman/Leslie Mitch 13792 MALENA DR Room Addition/Remodel - VAR90-005 E/C Engineering 1452 EDINGER ST Equipment Building encroaching into Streetsid 07 02/17/99 Minoo Ashabi •.. END OF REPORT •.. Page 3 • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CURRENT PLANNING PROJECT STATUS - EAST TUSTIN PROJECTS PROSECT STATUS LEGEHD DATE OF REPORT: May 5, 1999 01 - ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL 05 - PROJECT APPROVED SORT: LEGEND ITEMS O1-07 02 - RESUBMITTAL - 06 - PLAN CHECK 03 - COMMENTS OUT/PENDING APPLICANT RESPONSE 07 - PERMITS ISSUED/UNDER CONSTRUCTION 08 - PROJECT COMPLETE TENTATIVE NEARING DATES 09 - WITHDRAWN 30 - EXPIRED 04.1 - ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 11 - DENIED 04.2 - PLANNING COMMISSION 12 - REVOKED 04.3 - CITY COUNCIL PROJECT LOCATION STATUS RESPONSE CASE N APPLICANT LOT TRACTDESCRIPTION STATUS DATE. DUE STAFF DR 95-045 HOME DEPOT Monitor outside display area 02 06/13/99 Karen Peterson CUP98-025 The Church 7 12870 900 Seat Church/Pre School 03 11/11/9B Lori Ludi DR 9B-029 The Church 7 12870 900 Seat Church/Pre School 03 11/11/90 Lori Ludi DR 97-019 Rielly Homes, Inc. 19' 12870 Add New Recreation Facility 05 02/23/90 Karen Peterson DR 98-031 Frank Bennett - Development of 2 pads in Tustin Annex 05 03/22/99 Lori Ludi TT 15574 Rielly Homes, Inc. 19 12870 Add.New Recreation Facility/Amend Map 05 03/02/98 Karen Peterson CUP91-008 Lewis Homes of California 8 13627 3rd Amend, Cluster Development (LOTS 7/8) 07 11/25/96 Brad Evanson CUP96-004 Lewis Homes of California B 13627 C1UBter Development 07 05/28/96 Brad Evanson CUP97-001 Baywood Development Group 53 sfd cluster development 07 09/22/97 Brad Evanson CUP98-012 City of Tustin Lighting for Roller Hockey and Basketball Cou 07 06/01/98 Minoo Ashabi DR 96-037 Lewis Homes of California B 13627 New SFD Product (Lots 7/8) '07 11/25/96 Brad Evanson DR 96-050 Mr. Mel Mercado 27 13627 162 SFD 07 01/19./98 Minoo Ashabi -DR-96-054 The Irvine Company 24 13627 113 Custom Home Sites, Equestrian Center 07 02/12/98 Karen Peterson - DR 96-057 John Laing Homes 4 12870 75 SFD 07' 04/16/90 Lori Lodi DR 97-001 Baywood Development Group 51 sfd cluster development 07 09/22/97 Lori Ludi DR 97-014 LPA, Inc. Auto dealer/museum 07 D4/09198 Minoo Ashabi DR 97-026 Jeffery A. Matzek 6 Ansoc 15 Office/Classroom Addition - Phase 2 07 12/16/90 Karen Peterson DR 97-030 Kaufman a Broad Coastal, 19 13627 130 SFU 07 04/16/90 Lori Ludi DR 97-035 Warmington Homes 26 13627 44 eEd 07 07/09/90 Karen Peterson ,DR 98-010 The Good Guys 2,700 s.f. addition 07 10/19/98 Minoo A611abi DR 98-012 BrookField Homes 9 13627 114 sfd 07 12/07/98 Karen Peterson DR 98-015 Standard Pacific 24 13627 46 ofd on Tract 15563 07 10/15/98 Karen Peterson Page 1 PROJECT LOCATION STATUS RESPONSE CASE X APPLICANT LOT TRACT DESCRIPTION STATUS DATE DUE STAFF DR 98-027 James H. Parkinson 'Exte'rior remodel/Remove canopy & office build 07 10/01/98 Lori Ludi HR 95-001 Lewis Homes of California 8 13627' 2nd Amend. Hillside Review (LOTS 7/0) 1 07 11/25/96 Brad Evaneon Ilk 96-002 The Irvine Company 24 13627 113 Custom Home Sites, Equestrian Center 07 02/12/98 Karen Peterson LIR 90-001 Warmington Flames 26 13627 111LLSIDE REVIEW 07 06/01/98 Karen Peterson HR 90-002 BrookField Homes 9 13627 114 efd 07 12/07/90 Karen Peterson MA 99-001 Irvine Community Developm Minor adjustment for'gate height. 07 02/04/99 Brad Evanson TT 14396 Irvine Community Developm 24 13627 X113 Custom Home Sites, Equestrian Center 07 02/12/98 Karen Peterson TT 14410 Lewis Homes of California 8 13627 2ND AMENDMENT 171 SFD .(LOTS 7/8) 07 12/16/96 Brad Evanson TT 15380 Mr. Mel Mercado 27 13627 162 SFD, Amend Conditions 07 01/19/96 Minoo Ashabi 7T 15420 John'Laing Homes 4 12870 75 SFD - 07 01/30/98 Lori Ludi. TT 15427 Baywood Development Group Amend Conditions, 53 efd cluster development 07 08/17/98 Lori Ludi TT 15568 Kaufman & Broad Coastal, 19 13fi27 130 SFD 07 04/16/98 Lori Ludi TT 15601 Warmington Homes 26 13627 44 ON 07 06/01/98 Karen Peterson TT 15601 BrookField Homes 9 13627 114 efd 07 12/07/98 Karen Peterson VAR97-002 LPA, Inc., Reduce rear setback/increase height 07 04/09/98 Minoo Ashabi •.. END OF REPORT ••• Page 2 - • I • ITEM #5 Oeport to the Planning Commission DATE: MAY 24, 1999 SUBJECT: , CITY COUNCIL ACTION:AGENDAS, MAY 17, 1999 PRESENTATION: ELIZABETHA. BINSACK, DIRECTOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • ATTACHMENT: CITY COUNCILACTION AGENDAS- MAY 17, 1999 ACTION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY OF TUSTIN MAY 17, 1999 7:03 P.M. CALL TO ORDER GIVEN INVOCATION - Mr.-Steve Garrison GIVEN PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE SALTARELLI ROLL CALL ABSENT' PRESENTED PROCLAMATIONS - (1) Tustin- Pride School Poster Contest Winners, (2)• Tustin - High School United Nations Delegation Team, (3) Kiwanis Club of Tustin, 40th Anniversary, (4) Youth. Action Team, and. (5) Older Americans Month, - PUBLIC INPUT ANTHONY TRUJILLO: REPORTED HE HAD - RECENTLY READ A NEWSPAPER . ARTICLE THAT THE SPEED,LIMIT ON SYCAMORE (BETWEEN SR-55 AND RED HILL) HAD BEEN REDUCED, HOWEVER, HE SAID SPEED LIMIT SIGNS HAD NOT BEEN INSTALLED ON SYCAMORE TO INDICATE THE CHANGE; AND NOTED HIS ATTENDANCE AT A RECENT OCTA MEETING ON THE PROPOSED, RAIL SYSTEM, REMARKED ON OCTA'S SUPPORT OF THE SYSTEM; AND HE ENCOURAGED OPPOSITION TO A LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM. .: LOU ALLARD: REPORTED THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES EXCEEDING THE SPEED LIMIT ON , MAIN STREET AND REQUESTED MITIGATION MEASURES BE IMPLEMENTED. TO REDUCE TRAFFIC AND EXCESS SPEED. - NONE PUBLIC HEARING - None CONSENT CALENDAR ( ITEMS 1 THROUGH 12 ), APPROVED 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MAY 3, 1999 REGULAR MEETING Recommendation: Approve the City Council Minutes of May 3, 1999. Action Agenda —City Council May 17-,, 1999-- Page 1 APPROVED 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS AND `RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL Recommendation: Approve Demands in the amount of $2,625,680.97 and ratify Payroll in the amount of $375,598.66. RATIFIED 3. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONAGENDA — MAY 10, 1999 All actions of the .-Planning Commission become final unless appealed by the City Council or member of the public. Recommendation: Ratify the Planning Commission Action Agenda of May 10, 1999. RECEIVED 4. NISSON ROAD/NEWPORT AVENUE LANDSCAPE AND FILED INSTALLATION Recommendation: Receive and file, subject report as recommended by the Public Works Department/Field Services., APPROVED 5. DENIAL OF CLAIM,NO. 99-16, CLAIMANT: PAUL PINTO Recommendation: Deny subject claim and direct the City Clerk to send notice to the claimant and. the claimant's' attorney as recommended by the City Attorney, APPROVED 6. AWARD CONTRACT — DOCUMENT IMAGING SYSTEM, ARCHIVE AND RETRIEVAL Recommendation: Authorize the City. Manager to execute an agreement with RT Lawrence Corporation, La Mirada, California, for the purchase of a Laserfiche r Document Imaging System, Archive and Retrieval, Phases .1 and I[,.for a. not-to-exceed amount of $72,800 upon review and approval of the City Attorney as recommended by the City Clerk's Office. APPROVED 7.. CONTRACT RENEWAL` FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES WITH. PLANT CONTROL LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE, INC. Recommendation: Approve .the third and final amendment to the contract between- Plant Control, . Landscape Maintenance, Inc. and the City for landscape maintenance services- subject to City Attorney approval as recommended by the Public Works Department/Fieid Services. . Action{agenda --City Council May 17, 1999 -- Page 2 ;' { k APPROVED 8. CONTRACT RENEWAL FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES WITH ACCURATE LANDSCAPE AND! MAINTENANCE, INC. Recommendation: Approve the third and final amendment to the contract between Accurate Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. and the City for landscape maintenance services subject to City Attorney approval as recommended by the Public Works Department/Field Services. APPROVED 9. APPROVAL OF A. CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HILTON, FARNKOPF AND, HOBSON, LLC TO PREPARE SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND RECYCLING SERVICES BID DOCUMENTS Recommendation: Approve a consultant services agreement with Hilton, Fa-rnkopf and Hobson, LLC of Newport Beach to prepare the necessary bid documents for the City's solid waste collection and recycling services contingent upon the approval of the agreement by the City Attorney as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. ADOPTED 10. RESOLUTION NO. 99-36 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY S RESOLUTION COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, NO. 99-36 APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP 15681 TO SUBDIVIDE A 71.8 ACRE SITE INTO 114 NUMBERED LOTS AND 34 LETTERED LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING 114 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON LOTS 9 AND 10 OF TRACT 13627 GENERALLY LOCATED WESTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF PIONEER ROAD AND PATRIOT WAY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 99-36 approving Final Tract Map 15681 subject to completion of Conditions, including but not limited to, 1.6, 1.713, 2.21, 3.1, 3.3, 4.1, 5.4, 6.1, 6.3, 6.5, 8.1 and 10.2 of Resolution No. 98-115 to the satisfaction of the Community Development and Public Works. Departments and the City Attorney prior to recordation as recommended by the Community Development Department. (APPLICANT: BROOKFIELD HOMES/THE IRVINE COMPANY) Action Agenda —City Council May 17, 1999— Page 3 i i ADOPTED 11. TUSTIN LANDSCAPE.AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LEVY OF RESOLUTION ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE 1999-00 FISCAL YEAR . NOS. 99-31 AND 99-35 RESOLUTION NO. 99-3.1 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LEVY OF ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 99-31 approving the Engineer's Report -for fiscal year 1999-00 as recommended by the Public Works Department/ Engineering Division. f RESOLUTION NO. 99-35 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY, COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO PROVIDE FOR AN ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 11999-00 FOR THE IMPROVEMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND SERVICING OF PUBLIC LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING FACILITIES IN THE TUSTIN , RANCH AREA WITHIN- THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT, OF 1972, AND PROPOSITION 218 AND GIVING NOTICE THEREOF Recommendation: " Adopt Resolution No. 99-35 declaring its intention to levy assessments for fiscal year 1999-00 and setting a public hearing for June 21, 1999 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. APPROVED 12. SENATE, BILL 23, ASSAULT WEAPON.BAN Recommendation: Continue this item to the June 7, 1999 City Council meeting as recommended by the Police Department.. REGULAR BUSINESS ( ITEMS 13 THROUGH 17 ) ADOPTED 13. ORDINANCE N0.-,1214— UNIFORM CONSTRUCTION ORDINANCE CODES NO. 1214 Ordinance No. 1214 had first reading by title only and introduction at the May 3, 1999'City Council meeting. Recommendation by the City Clerk's. Offic e. Action.Agenda —City Council May 17,. 1999— Page 4 1. - Have second reading by title only or Ordinance No. 1214. 2. With a roll call vote, adopt the following Ordinance No. 1214: ORDINANCE NO. 1214 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SPECIFIED CHAPTERS OF ARTICLE 8 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE TO ADOPT THE 1997 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM CODES AND THE 1996 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE WITH APPENDICES AND AMENDMENTS THERETO ADOPTED 14. ORDINANCE NO. 1216 — CURFEW FOR MINORS ORDINANCE N0. 1216 Ordinance No. 1216 had first reading by title only and introduction at.the May 3, 1999 City Council meeting. Recommendation by the City Clerk's Office: 1. Have second reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1216: - • 2. With a roll call vote, adopt the following Ordinance No. 1216: ORDINANCE NO. 1216 — AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 6102 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATING TO A CURFEW FOR MINORS APPROVED 15. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — REQUEST FOR FUNDING $5,000 APPROPRIATION The Chamber of Commerce has requested $5,000 for financial . support for the 1999-2000 Chamber of Commerce City map. Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council. CONTINUED TO 16. STATUS REPORT OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY FUTURE MEETING FOUNDATION The President of the Tustin Community Foundation, Mr. Chuck Puckett, and Executive Director, Mr. Bob Kiley, Action Agenda —City Council May 17, 1999— Page 5 will make a presentation to the City Council on the state of the Tustin Community Foundation and their 1998 achievements. Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council. APPROVED 17. TUSTIN MILLENNIUM EVENT COORDINATION The Tustin Millennium Celebration Committee requested an allocation to conduct a New Year's 2000 Event in Old Town Tustin. Recommendation: Defer the "First Night" New Year's Event- to December 31, 2000 as recommended by Parks and Recreation Services. NONE PUBLIC INPUT OTHER BUSINESS/COMMITTEE REPORTS DOYLE: THANKED EVERYONE WHO SPONSORED THE SANTA COP PROGRAM AT THE RECENT CASINO NIGHT EVENT. NOTED HIS DISPLEASURE WITH A TUSTIN PHILANTHROPIC ORGANIZATION CONDUCTING DINNER EVENTS IN THE CITY OF ORANGE. POTTS: REMARKED ON THE NISSON ROAD LANDSCAPING AND WAS PLEASED IT WAS SCHEDULED TO PROCEED. REQUESTED A TRAIL UPDATE. THOMAS: NOTED CONCERN REGARDING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE PICKING FLOWERS FROM THE. CEDAR GROVE PARK LANDSCAPING. WORLEY: REPORTED ON A NEW DEVICE GROCERY STORES WERE UTILIZING THAT LOCK SHOPPING :CART WHEELS WHEN CUSTOMERS ATTEMPT TO REMOVE THE CARTS FROM MARKET PARKING LOTS. CANCELLED CLOSED SESSION - The City Council shall convene in closed session to confer with the City Attorney regarding pending litigation to which the City is a party, Pashalides v. City of Tustin, et.al., OCSC Case No. 801875. 1 Action Agenda.--City Council May 17, 1999—Page 6 I J 7:56 P.M. ADJOURNMENT - The next-regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled for Monday, June 7, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way: i Action Agenda — City Council May.17; 1999—Page 7 _ I ACTION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MAY 17, 1999 �� IE 7:56 P.M. CALL TO ORDER SALTARELLI ROLL CALL ABSENT REGULAR BUSINESS ( ITEMS 1 THROUGH 2 ) APPROVED 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — MAY 3,, 1999 REGULAR MEETING Recommendation: Approve the Redevelopment Agency Minutes of May 3, 1999. APPROVED ' 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS Recommendation: Approve Demands in the amount of $35,730.91. • NONE OTHER BUSINESS NONE CLOSED SESSION - None . 7:57 P.M. ADJOURNMENT - The next regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency is scheduled for Monday, June 7, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the.Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. 4 Action Agenda-Redevelopment Agency May 17,1999—Page 1.