The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01 PC DRAFT MINUTES 12-8-2020 MINUTES ITEM #1 VIDEO CONFERENCING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 8, 2020 Mason "During the Statewide COVID-19 Emergency, the public is not permitted to convene in person for this public meeting. However, the public may still view and comment on the meeting as follows.": Mason To watch the meeting, the public may observe the meeting via the City's Granicus service at,lieu,,.p.a:// w.tu st,li �a.o� /282/Meaea�ii�gs A ,� I�, , or on local Cox Channel 851. Mason To comment on one or more items, you may send your comments to I1::::11 it ir�iii.ngCo�rnr�rnii iipi „ u unca.a° Ir or by accessing the City's "SpeakUp" comment system as follows: 6:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m. Given. INVOCATION: Jha All present. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Chu, Jha, Kozak, Mason None. PUBLIC CONCERNS: CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — NOVEMBER 24, 2020 Minutes of the November 24, 2020 Planning Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the November 24, 2020 Planning Commission meeting, as provided. Motion: It was moved by Chu, seconded by Jha, to approve the Minutes of the November 24, 2020 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 4-0. Minutes—Planning Commission December 8,2020—Page 1 of 5 PUBLIC HEARING: Adopted 2. DESIGN REVIEW (DR) 2020-0005, SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2020- Reso. Nos. 002/TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TPM) 2020-149 4411 & 4412. APPLICANT: B8 Myford Industrial Owner LLC A Delaware Limited Liability Company 938 Azalea Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LOCATION: 14451 Myford Road ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Article 6 of California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3. REQUEST: To demolish an existing industrial building and adjacent parking lot and the construction of a 220,331 square-foot industrial warehouse facility and to merge two (2) adjacent lots into one (1) parcel to accommodate the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission- 1. ommission:1. Adopt Resolution No. 4411 recommending that the Planning Commission find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is adequate for DR 2020-0005 and SUB 2020-0002/TPM 2020-149 for the proposed project. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 4412 recommending that the Planning Commission approve DR 2020-0005 and SUB 2020-0002/TPM 2020- 149 to demolish the existing industrial building and adjacent parking lot and construct a 220,331-square-foot industrial warehouse facility and merge two (2) adjacent lots into one (1) parcel. Aguilar Presentation given. Chu Chu asked about the supplemental items provided earlier that day, specifically, the changes related to traffic and parking. Minutes—Planning Commission December 8,2020—Page 2 of 5 Aguilar In response to Chu's question, Aguilar stated that the City of Irvine had questions concerning traffic. Originally, there were measures in place to consider traffic at a later time in addition to queuing, however, staff felt that through the traffic impact analysis, provided by the applicant and the City's review, the parking and noise sections were not necessary for this project, and it was ultimately decided to remove them from the resolutions. Willkom Willkom further explained that the project complies with all of the development standards (traffic, queuing. and noise) therefore the traffic and noise analysis language was removed, per the revised Condition No. 1.7 since the applicant had conducted all of the studies related to traffic in the MND Analysis. As per the noise issue, there is a condition of approval that requires the applicant to comply with the noise standard, which is why staff felt that these two (2) categories were not necessary to be included in the Condition No. 1.7. Per the parking, the applicant has complied with the development standard by providing the required number of spaces. There is also an alternate site plan which the applicant also provided, as part of the project. City staff felt that the building now is a spec building with no tenants in mind and that the alternate site plan would help the City in case the future tenant(s) may require additional parking. Per Willkom, this would be an assurance the City would like to have included in the condition of approval to avoid parking issues in the future. Chu Chu asked Willkom what the current status of the two (2)existing buildings were on-site. She also asked if the neighboring businesses and residents were notified of the project. Willkom In response to Chu's additional question, Willkom stated that the building on- site was being utilized by AT&T, but it is now currently vacant. Aguilar Per Aguilar, all property owners, within a 300-foot radius, were notified of the MND and the public hearing via public noticing. Kozak Kozak expressed his support of the project. Mason Mason wanted staff to further clarify some of the "unknowns" in the infrastructure of the spec building, referring to the supplemental items. She asked about businesses going in to the project site, based on their operations, if they would address the Commission (i.e. request for CUP's) based on their business. Mason wanted to ensure the Commission had full visibility of what was going on as far as hours of operation, etc. She also asked, per the supplementals presented to the Commission, if there are any noise or parking issues, would the Commission be made aware of them. Willkom In response to Mason's questions, Willkom stated some businesses are permitted by rights and in those cases, typically, those businesses would submit a tenant improvement plan for the City's review of their operation. At Minutes—Planning Commission December 8,2020—Page 3 of 5 Willkom that time, additional requirements or restrictions of conditions, will be handled with the prospective tenant. Willkom added that other uses will require a CUP, and in that case, the Commission would have the ability to consider the CUP request. She confirmed that "yes" the Commission would be made aware if there were any noise or parking issues. Motion: It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Jha, to adopt Resolution Nos. 4411 and 4412. Motion carried 4-0. Adopted 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP)2020-0019& DESIGN REVIEW(DR) Reso. No. 2020-0019 4413. PROPERTY OWNER/ Steelwave LLC APPLICANT: Attn: Jonathan Hastanan 3335 Susan Street, #250 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LOCATION: 15771 Red Hill Avenue ENVIRONMENTAL: This project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15311 (Class 11) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). REQUEST: A request to enhance the exterior fagade with painted murals and applied graphics for the existing building. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4413, approving CUP 2020-0019 and DR 2020-2019, a request to enhance the exterior facade with painted murals and applied graphics for the existing building. Beier Presentation given. Jha Jha asked Beier which tenant would be occupying the building. Beier Per Beier, tenant improvements are underway for Tricon American Homes a Real Estate and Property Management Company. The proposed project is to enhance the building before opening up their doors. Chu Chu made favorable comments with regards to the contemporary design of the building. Minutes—Planning Commission December 8,2020—Page 4 of 5 Kozak Kozak also made favorable comments with regards to the facade update which adds to the appearance of the existing building. Mason Mason concurred with her fellow Commissioners as far as Tustin's heritage being used to enhance the existing building. Motion: It was moved by Mason, seconded by Jha, to adopt Resolution No. 4413. Motion carried 4-0. None. REGULAR BUSINESS. STAFF CONCERNS: Willkom Willkom had no concerns or comments. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Chu None. Jha Jha wished everyone Happy Holidays and to stay safe during the Kozak Kozak thanked outgoing Council Members Bernstein and Puckett for their years of service to the City of Tustin and the community. He participated • 12/1 Swearing in Ceremony of the new Tustin Mayor, Letitia Clark and Mayor Pro Tem, Austin Lumbard • 12/5 City of Tustin's Annual Christmas Tree Lighting • 12/7 Pearl Harbor Memorial Service Kozak also thanked staff for their hard work with the reports and presentations. Mason Mason concurred with Kozak's comments on Bernstein and Puckett's years of service and commitment to Tustin and she congratulated Mayor Clark, Mayor Pro Tem Lumbard, Council Members Gallagher and Gomez. She thanked City staff for their hard work on preparing for the Commission meeting. Happy Holidays in the event there is no meeting on December 22, 2020. 6:38 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, December 22, 2020. Minutes—Planning Commission December 8,2020—Page 5 of 5