Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 PC Minutes 01-23-06 7:00 p.m. Given All present Staff present Approved Adopted Resolution No. 4013 ITEM #1 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 23, 2006 CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Jason Retterer, Deputy City Attorney Dana Ogdon, Assistant Community Development Director Terry Lutz, Principal Engineer Justina Willkom, Senior Planner Minoo Ashabi, Associate Planner Matt West, Associate Planner Eloise Harris, Recording Secretary CONSENT CALENDAR 1 ; APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 9, 2006, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. It was moved by Pontious, seconded by Floyd, to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2005-224 REQUESTING TO COMBINE TWO (2) EXISTING PARCELS INTO A 2.98- ACRE PARCEL TO ACCOMMODATE A 73,250 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, AND WAREHOUSE CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT WITHIN AN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 1372 AND 1382 VALENCIA, ALSO KNOWN AS LOTS 8 AND 9 OF TRACT 7721. THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN THE PLANNED COMMUNITY INDUSTRIAL (PC-IND) ZONING DISTRICT. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4013 recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 2005-224. Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 1 7:04 p.m. West Pontious West Pontious West The Public Hearing opened. Presented the staff report. Asked for clarification as to whether or not the condominium use is the reason for combining the two lots. Pointed to a slide which shows a line running midway through the building which is the property line with a partition wall that runs the length of the building; there are two addresses but it functions as one building; the parcel map accommodates the applicant's desire to sell the individual units to individual tenants. Asked for verification that it is the condominium use that requires this Parcel Map approval. Responded in the affirmative. Keith Yang, applicant Stated he was available for any questions the Commission might have. 7:10 p.m. Adopted Resolution No. 4014, with date correction noted by staff 7:13 p.m. Ashabi Nielsen The Public Hearing closed. It was moved by Pontious, seconded by Menard, to adopt Resolution No. 4013. Motion carried 5-0. 3. DESIGN REVIEW 05-019, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 05-037, REQUESTING: 1) SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 240 SENIOR HOUSING RESIDENTIAL UNITS; AND 2) NEW PARKING STANDARDS FOR SENIOR HOUSING WITHIN MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING AREAS 4 AND 5 LOCATED ON PARCEL 265 OF TRACT 16851, NORTHWEST CORNER OF EDINGER AVENUE AND THE WEST CONNECTOR (MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN). RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4014 approving Design Review 05-019 and Conditional Use Permit 05-037. The Public Hearing opened. Presented the staff report Asked if the parking reduction will become an issue for other areas of the City with senior facilities. Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 2 Pontious Suggested the same ratio was offered to the facility just off Newport Avenue. Director Indicated there was a demand analysis for the facility on Newport; the recollection is that number was 1 .54; these are considered on a case-by-case basis; this may establish a precedent; the Commission needs to be somewhat cautious about approving such things to ensure that the findings are intact; in some areas 1.7 may be a good standard, whereas 1.5 may be in others; the City standard may be more appropriate; that would depend upon what the units look like, what the bedroom counts look like, and what the surrounding uses are; on-street availability can also be a factor; staff does not count those but is aware people use them; staff would always like to see the standard followed; for senior housing, something less may be acceptable; staff feels comfortable with the recommendation in this application. Floyd Asked that might happen if 1.7 is not enough. Director Stated staff would not be able to go back and create a situation where more parking infrastructure; this master planned community will encourage pedestrian benefits. Floyd Noted his concern was with potential street parking. Pontious Suggested that senior developments often provide transportation; asked if there is anything in the standards that would allow the CC&Rs to address the shuttle service or other transportation to encourage residents to eliminate one automobile in the event parking problems arise; and, noted that parking is never a problem at the facility on Walnut. Floyd Asked what the minimum age requirement will be for residents. Director Stated that this facility will be 55 and older. Lee Asked where the General Plan designates supermarket uses in proximity to this development. Pontious Noted there was supposed to be a small commercial area nearby. Director Answered there will be a commercial center fairly close proximity. Lee Asked how close. Director Suggested perhaps a quarter of a mile; this senior facility with 63 percent affordable housing; the more the project is conditioned, the more difficult it is for the applicant to provide affordability. Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 3 Nielsen Mike Balsamo, Lennar Properties Floyd Mr. Balsamo Floyd Mr. Balsamo Floyd Mr. Balsamo Floyd Nielsen Mr. Balsamo Lee Mr. Chelwick Nielsen Pat Pittis Director Invited the applicant to the lectern. Thanked for their work; restated the developer's intention for this project; and, introduced Jeff Chelwick who presented an additional PowerPoint show highlighting the design concepts for the project. Asked for the age of the planned residents. Answered the ages will be 55 and up. Asked how the facility will be wired for computers. Indicated the project is still in the preliminary drawing stage, but the facility will have all the basic cable communications and whatever services are available at other community in Columbus Square. Asked about the plans for a computer center. Indicated that the flexible floor plan for the recreation center will also provide computer opportunities for seniors who may not have their own computers. Noted he had seen centers in Palm Springs and was very impressed with what was available regarding computer hook-ups and a break room was a large television screen. Asked for more information regarding the transportation issues for seniors in this project. Stated the developer focused on this as an active adult community and not as a care facility; the parking is evenly distributed throughout the community; each home will have a dedicated parking space; Edinger will provide bus stops within walking distance; the pedestrian connectivity will exist within this site and extend to the central green park across the street. Asked why the composite roofing rather than tile or wood. Indicated that the composite is more refined and complements the Regency style. Asked if there were other parties who wished to speak on this item. Asked what the difference is between low income and moderate income. Indicated staff could provide the general guidelines but not the actual dollar amount; 30 percent of the 80 percent of the median Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 4 Nielsen Director Pontious Director Ms. Pittis Pontious Director 7:46 p.m. Commissioners Director income for the area; there are three levels: very low, low, and moderate income; these units will be providing 63 percent of the overall 240 units. Suggested that perhaps Ms. Pittis was referring to the average income that would qualify. Answered 30 percent. Suggested that would mean 30 percent of whatever is established as the median income at the time the project is finished. Clarified that the percentage is based on the County median. Asked if the 30 percent figure referred to the low income. Answered that reference would be to the very low income. Indicated that staff can provide further information to Ms. Pittis. The Public Hearing closed. It was the general consensus that all the Commissioners view this as an exciting, welcome, attractive project. It was moved by Floyd, seconded by Menard, to adopt Resolution No. 4014. Motion carried 5-0. REGULAR BUSINESS SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: 4. At the meeting of January 9, 2006, staff provided an overview of a number of Specific Plan Amendments to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Amendments are based on a policy direction provided by the City Council at a workshop on November 1, 2004. The purpose of the workshop was to transmit the associated Specific Plan Amendment documents to the Planning Commissioners and to provide the Planning Commission with an adequate amount of time in which to review the proposed Amendments. At the workshop, staff indicated the item would be agendized for the January 23, 2006, meeting to allow further questions from the Planning Commissioners. Noted the above item can be included on future agendas if the Commission desires. Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 5 Pontious Thanked staff for providing the Commissioners with plenty of time to review the Amendments and asked if the timeframe is known for bringing the Amendments forward. Director Indicated the timeframe is not yet known; stated that staff is still working on the environmental documentation; suggested that the Commissioners e-mail to staff any questions they might have in order for staff the prepare appropriate responses; and, added that the PowerPoint document with the exhibits prepared by Scott Reekstin is helpful in understanding the larger document. Floyd Asked if the Education Village was changed due to the Learning Village issue a few years ago. Director Answered in the affirmative. STAFF CONCERNS 3. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN AT THE JANUARY 16, 2006, CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. Director Indicated Lot Line Adjustment No. 05-001 accommodated staff's approval of a design review and demolition permit for the Beacon Bay Carwash; the carwash will be demolished and the Home Depot Garden Center expanded. COMMISSION CONCERNS Lee Thanked staff for tonight's reports. Stated his appreciation for the removal of the Jack-in-the Box sign. Menard Asked if there might be a way for lot consolidations such as this evening's item to be accomplished through administrative approval as opposed to coming before the Planning Commission. Director Indicated that subdivisions such as the one before the Commission this evening would require Commission approval because it is a condominium and subdivision; other kinds of adjustments, such as the Lot Line Adjustment that went to the City Council, are Consent Calendar items that never come before the Planning Commission; the Public Works and Planning staff signs off on those; lot mergers are different because the City's Subdivision Ordinance may be more restrictive than the State Subdivision Map Act; the City's Subdivision Code can be modified to make that process easier, but cannot make the process go away altogether. Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 6 Menard Asked if the applicant for tonight's item could have been offered a Lot Line Adjustment on the consolidation portion. Director Answered that would not have been possible for the condominium aspect of the request; lot line adjustments are not supposed to result in fewer parcels than there were at the start. Menard Stated it would be good to have something in place that would not burden the applicant. Referred to the photograph he sent of the auto auction sign he sees every Sunday. Noted that Federal Disposal, in trying to meet the requirements for recycling, has been adding additional commercial-sized bins for some of the office buildings; however, the bins do not fit inside the existing trash enclosures; and, asked if the City could offer incentives to landlords to upgrade the enclosures to meet the current regulations. Director Answered that might be feasible if the site or building improvements were significant; on existing sites, the City does not require retrofit improvements. Menard Suggested that the situation is a bit of a Catch-22; while the City needs to meet recycling requirements, the trash areas should not be unsightly. Director Agreed with that assessment. Lee Noted that enlarging the enclosures would create a loss of parking. Asked if the City could approach Federal Disposal about using bins that fit the trash enclosures. Pontious Director Indicated that would be difficult. Menard Added that staff needs to be cognizant of the situation for future developments. Thanked staff for this evening's reports. Floyd Thanked staff for their reports and for working with the developer to create a great project. Pontious Asked why the recycling unit that was part of the Albertsons approval is still not there. Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 7 Director Indicated that staff will need to check into that and report back to the Planning Commission. Nielsen Thanked staff for the response to the Red HilVEdinger street- narrowing issue. Asked if there is an official answer to the human arrow question; more and more seem to be appearing on the weekends. Retterer Indicated he has been doing research; some signs are allowed, such as political signs, and are covered by standard regulations; the Code provides some mechanisms for potentially prohibiting human arrows; he will need to do further research to determine whether or not the regulations will allow banning of human arrows. Nielsen Asked if there have been code enforcement issues relating to the human arrows. Retterer Answered that he was not aware of any; and, added that he can ask his colleagues if they know of other cities that prohibit the use. Floyd Noted a primary area seems to be Tustin Ranch, advertising the Irvine apartment complexes; the Liberty Tax Service will probably also be on the corner of Newport and Irvine through the tax season; potential traffic hazards mount with the proliferation of these human signs. Nielsen Asked that staff check to see if there have been any code enforcement issues. Thanked staff for their hard work with the applicant on the senior housing project, one of the best projects he has seen during his time on the Planning Commission. 8:10 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Monday, February 13, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. Minutes - Planning Commission 1-23-06 - Page 8