HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUPPLEMENTAL - ITEM #1 REVISIONS TO THE JULY 9, 2019 MINUTES ITEM #1
SPELLED OUT ABBREVIATIONS OF "TCC" [ "F 'Fl
TO THE JULY 1 MINUTES
LOCATION: 525 ,. 'EST SECOND STREET
TUSTI N, CA 92780
REQUEST-
Re mov a I o f co rre(.,,t io n s an d cc n d- itions related to en 111 eg a I co n ve rsio n of
a two-ca rga rage into a living unit and unpermitted addition to an existing
sIngle family dvellkig.
ENVIRONMENTAL
ThIs project is categorica-Ily exernpt pursuant to Section 15301(E) of the
California Gere of Regulation s (Guidelines for California Environniental
QUality Act).
RECOMMENDATION-
That the Planning Commission uphold the Community Development
Director's corrections and conditions associ ated with Code Case No . CE-
2018-0243 and Permit No. CO BR-2018-00299 by adopting Resolution
No. 4387 as frollow
s-
1) Uphold the Commuriity Development Departs-rient poiicyto record the
Deed Restriction as shown without ri-iodifications in Attachn-ient A of
the agenda report, prior to perwit issuance.
2.) Uphold the, TL, tin City Code (TC(;) requirements regarding:
a. The interior dimens'lorns of 20 feet by 20 feet of the detacheld two-
vehicles garage-, and
b. Screening of the. roof-mounted air clonditioning (/VC) unit.
REGULAR BUSINESS-
Approved the 3. TUSTIN HISTORIC REGISTER N0,1V11NATION: TOLIN HOUSE - 165
tiorn,ination of NORTH A STREET (ITE&I #4 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
165
of A AGENDA)
Str-pet to t/7e
City s Historic
Register Plaque
Prograrn.
RECOIMMENIDAST ION�
That the Planning Gom -)ission ap (.-r,,e the noniina*'Ior� of 165 North A
Street to the City's H'Istoric Register Plaque Program and select :-Tolltl
House - 1928" as the most appropriate historical name and date. of
construction of the property.
Presentation given.
Minutes- Planning Commission July 9, 2019- Page 2 of L(
asks.-'KJ out thNo-v(-iit t11,11P ("S1.ri-i'llar to Disneyland") being added to tl�t
man�igen,ient .)Ian.
re s,
:m ow In response to Thom,pso n's ClUestion regarding the number of a(.
Demkowicz stated that the overall Project area is less than three (3) acl-es.
The warehouse building 1,s not pail of the sub n-ijtted applicat'lo[T
Nishl'ka��va In response to Thompson's q-�Jestion, Nishikawa referred to ca section of the
Tom Brohard and Assoc,-Ir,,-ites letter where they insinuated that there was
Substantial evidence that the) proposed project would have adverse-, 'I 1C
and transoortation impacts th,-: t were not properly disclosed, analyd, and
mitigated. Nishika;.%Ya did not concur With those statennents. In terms o'
items mentic-Aied within the Tom Brohard and AssociateS letter', h e
responded as follows: credit on the traffic volurne from the Goodyear Tire
Center that no longer exists, is irrellevant as the applicant looked at the
center being fully operational; with the project. the intersection still shov"Os the
LOS A or B, and that is what they are todaythe, TCC allows a LOS D and
still would riot require traffic mitigation-, with the proJect, there will be
additional traffic, but as far as the analysis and the LOS that one can expect,
it is still right ak--mg the same capacity that we see today: in order to get to
LOS D, for instance, 400 left turn trips frorii El Can-ilno Real onto Tustin
Ranch Road would need to be added than what is shown to ay-. an additional
1,000 thmUgh trips from ElCami,no Real crossing Tustin Ranch Road irl
order to get to LOS D Cat the intersection: Nishikawa again referred to the
letter that a weekend analysis, during peak hOLKS, was not conducted (Table
6 of the traffic anallysis): City staff analyzed the traffic volume (on streets and
it-itersections) in the traffic report, which is heavier on weekdays, especially
during rL1,9h hour(7:00 to 9-00 a,m. or 4-00,to 6:00 p.m.)-. the qUeuing analysis
is a different subject, which is why Costco analyzed we,ek,11:_Z,)nd hours because
that s when traf k,. is heaviest for them: right ght turn pockets that Costco is
providing on El Camino Real, -ire not a re(':iul�ed item by the City- the prolElCt
will include Costco right turn pockets to facilits t,el through traffic; there not
being enough room for the extra twelve (12) foot lrne that tine City wants, is
not the case, the site has no physical improver- encs need I n g to be made out
and it can all be accommod ater.-I with striping on El Camino Real; the angled
parking spaces neer the fuel stations are for employee parking only, double
stacking north of the., fueling stations are also for employee parking only; if
Management Plan .9 has to lue--� implernented, it would uInly affect employee
par4 king- Pop-up ballards arc: not going to be an issue but there is an
alternative (mcanual ball�1 Fds), per the feel delivery trucks comment fron'i
Veronica Barker email, the delivery trucks will deliver to the east side of the
property, which is away from the fueling station and outside of the qUeUE,
area: and in response to Thompson's comment on the wait time sign.
Nishikawa mentioned the Frequency Operated Button (FOB) reader helping
to speed up the process (and new technology).
7.,5 0 p. Opened up the Public Cor r-nents Section.
Minutes- Planning Commission July 9. 2019- P,ige 4 of 12